The purpose of the author's rebuttal is to provide a sociocultural critique of Wolff-Michael Roth and Michael Cole's arguments and of the current "Mind, Culture, and Activity" ("MCA") policy regarding referencing. In sum, Roth and Cole write that some unnamed "MCA" authors (and some scholars in general) abuse the reference practice by name-dropping and political networking, which reflects "a growing tendency to excessive and inappropriate citation." The current new "MCA" editorial referencing policy, which emerged out of these alleged practices, can be characterized as a procedure of minimizing references. The author's main rebuttal is that the "MCA" editors' reasoning and policy about referencing is based on a positivistic paradigm. (Contains 22 footnotes.)