I've been asked by a journal to consider writing a rejoinder to a paper they've just accepted that's a criticism of my views. I was enthusiastic about this, especially since the paper makes what seem to me a several glaring errors. But then I noticed that the author of the paper I'd be responding to is untenured. What's the right thing to do here?
I suppose having a more senior person respond in print to one's work is a good thing for a junior person's CV and tenure file. But if the content of that response is largely negative, it could hurt a tenure file, right? I suppose I could try to respond in a way that is philosophically forceful, but does not make the author look amateurish; yet, given the character of the criticisms, this will be difficult to achieve. I suppose I could simply decline, but that's unsatisfying in its own way. Part of me thinks that writing the gloves-off, I-drink-your-milkshake rejoinder would be a sign of respect. But would a T&P committee see it this way? Perhaps I have an inflated sense of how much damage I can do? Suggestions? Thoughts?