In the realm of code reviews, the term "nit" is often used to refer to minor, non-blocking comments or stylistic preferences, but its definition is inconsistent, leading to inefficiencies in the review process. The article critiques the broad application of "nits" in code reviews, arguing that many of these comments, which focus on trivial stylistic issues, could be better addressed through automated tools like linters and style guides. An analysis of 25,000 comments labeled as "nits" revealed that these often fall into categories such as language inconsistencies, code organization, type hints, best practices, and functionality, which can be managed by automated systems. The article advocates for reducing reliance on such comments to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of code reviews, thereby accelerating software development by allowing engineers to focus on substantive discussions rather than on resolving trivial issues. By shifting the focus away from nits, teams can improve the signal-to-noise ratio in code reviews, preserving valuable engineering time for more meaningful feedback and collaboration.