I'm reading a very fine article by a friend. His/her thesis is sound and her/his arguments well constructed. But s/he constantly uses the first person. E.g., "Above, I made the case," and so on.
I find that very annoying. There are times when one can use the first person, of course. If someone wrote an article describing my work as "humbug," for example, and I felt it necessary to respond, I probably would use the first person. As in, "my work is not humbug, so there." I might also use the second person, as in "your work is humbug, nanny nanny boo-boo."
Ordinarily, however, I would avoid using the first and second person in scholarship. (Except for the occasional use of the editorial we, of course, a formulation of which I am unduly fond.) Instead, I would stick to the third person.
But perhaps I'm just an old fogey?
Having said that, and recognizing that some scholars of identity argue that the third person is alienating (or some such silliness), I would advise pre-tenure academics to avoid it at all costs. No reviewer is going to give you points for using the third person, while some reviewers are bound to be put off by use of the first person.
Update: A friend sent along this note:
Your use of "nanny-nanny-boo-boo" is especially valuable in this context. That is to be emulated by juniors, regardless of first or third person.
LOL. Obviously, it's not a recommendation I would endorse for folks who still have aspirations.