Presents a postscript to the current authors' response to the comments by J. S. Bowers, M. F. Damian, and C. J. Davis on the current authors' original article, "Short-term memory for serial order: A recurrent neural network model,". Here, Botvinick and Plaut address Bowers et al's assertions that neurophysiological studies that have reported conjunctive coding for item and order have also often reported neurons that code for item independent of order and vice versa, and that the primacy model of Page and Norris (1998) uses order-independent item representations. Botvinick and Plaut then consider the two new simulations that Bowers et al presented in their commentary, ultimately concluding that the critique by Bowers et al does little to challenge the viability of the Botvinick and Plaut model.