From this piece by Glenn Greenwald, we learn the following (all emphasis added):
Furthering his justifications for publishing the home addresses of the Enemy de jour, ["Instapundit" Glenn] Reynolds added an Update to his original post and said this:
As usual, Glenn Greenwald is clueless . . . . why is your publishing of my email different, exactly, from the "thuggish" tactics you condemn? Grow up.
Reynolds is referring here to two posts I have written in the past regarding blatant falsehoods or hypocricies contained in posts of his which he refused to address, and I therefore encouraged readers to e-mail him asking him to respond. The reason I know his e-mail address is because he publishes it prominently on his blog. The last time I did this was to point out that Reynolds' post on the Virginia Democratic Senate primary contained multiple factual errors, and by encouraging readers to e-mail him, he was finally forced to respond, and did so by retracting two separate false statements he made in his posts.
So make sure you understand Instawanker's position: encouraging others to e-mail a publicly-available figure to ask simply for clarification is nothing more than the act of a thug and a bully. Hang on ... what's this?
Joel Johannesen says:
...
Also: I don’t answer for Barbara Kay —and she doesn’t spend her vacation time reading your comments at PTBC. So as I already suggested, write to her through the National Post in order to get the much needed answers to your inquiries.
I believe the appropriate expression here would be "friendly fire."
AMUSING AFTERSNARK: I am moderately amused by the sentiment recently expressed in comment 39 at that comments section:
Please black list CC, he is a moonbat.
Note well that my entire contribution to that comments section (indeed, my sum total of comments to that web site overall) was exactly two comments:
[7] Since I’ve apparently been blacklisted from this site without ever having posted a comment here previously, I’ll take a shot at posting a link to my response to this article using a tiny URL.
and
[24] And in all this excitement, I notice that neither Joel nor Barbara addressed the points made by myself and another commenter early on—that at least two of Kay’s quotes seem to be grossly distorted and misleading.
Anyone planning on dealing with that? Joel?
In short, based on a total of three sentences that contained absolutely no vulgarity, no profanity, no name-calling and which clearly and cogently set out my position, the recommendation is that I be barred from any further participation.
The word "whiny" doesn't even begin to do this justice, does it?
4 comments:
In all fairness to Barbara Kay, she apparently is one of the few columnists at the Post that actually reads every single one of the emails she recieves AND she responds to each and every one of them.
That may be true but, at this point, it shouldn't be necessary to prod her with an actual e-mail.
Given the whirlwind of accusations in the aforementioned comments section, you'd have to be stunningly lazy and/or irresponsible to not realize that you owed readers some kind of explanation, particularly when the accusations of dishonesty are that clearly presented.
In any event, I still maintain that it's Joel's job to resolve this. Kay is one of his columnists -- let him figure out if there's rampant dishonesty here. I've done all of his homework for him so far. It's time for him to get off his lazy ass and do the rest.
It's like common sense has disappeared. Seriously, I can understand nutbags like Joel Johannesen going loony all the time, but...credentialed university professors?
God, I wish Reynolds was among my colleagues. I'd be tearing him a new one, every day...and loving it.
Well, the 'Rules of Engagement' that I received when I registered for comments at PTBC were pretty clear. Any comment that didn't start from a perspective so far to the right that public education is considered evil, was not a welcome comment. By those standards, questioning Kay's integrity is wild moonbattery.
They're looking for "me too" and "hear, hear".
I'm just not sure why Joel was so upset about his "reputation" being impugned by accusations of pre-emptive banning, when anyone who registers gets a pre-emptive "piss off and go away".
Post a Comment