Accepting seems like correct thing to do, since there are always things to improve in code base or the original design assumptions may not be true anymore etc.
However, practically I see that it is taken as admission of incorrectness and then it quickly starts to pile up. The code becomes a blame arena for all future problems too.
What is the best way to handle the situation?
Here's the pattern that I've found useful: 1/ Rephrase the feedback "What I heard you say...". This buys you a bit of time and putting feedback in your words takes the personal sting out 2/ Turn it into a non-hostile discovery discussion by saying something like "I'm interested in understanding why you think x, y, z...". Layer in any relevant context in your question phrasing... e.g. if the feedback is contradicting the project objectives then you may want to add that in your question 3/ Rephrase what you heard in your own words 4/ Repeat steps 2-3 until you have sufficient clarity 5/ Decide the appropriate next steps and articulate that. A feasible next step might be to take no action because you either resolved the issue through discussion or identified it's not a priority