Reply #246: yawn

[OnTheOtherHand]

I have no idea what von Spakovsky thought, nor do I care, nor is it pertinent. The distinction between a law review article and a bulletin board post is not very subtle. But even that isn't the right standard of comparison. I don't know what, if any, identifying information "Publius" included in his article, but I'm sure it was less than I've included in my DU profile.

As far as I can tell, the only reason for mentioning von Spakovsky is... so you can mention him. Repeatedly. There are names for that tactic, but we all know them, so I won't bother to use any.

In fact, you seem fundamentally confused about the difference between professional work and DU posts. In a nutshell, most professional work is named; most DU (and DKos) posts are pseudonymous, even when the writers' identities are widely known.

There's nothing slimy about what you've quoted. I don't apologize for being puzzled that you contrive an "interest" on my part -- an interest in asserting or defending opinions some of which aren't even mine -- while ignoring the tangible interests of others. The part that seems beyond your imagination is that I haven't attacked people on the basis of those interests. I think your whole "interest" argument here is bogus. I did hope to startle you into awareness of how bogus it is. But you can't even get past the notion that "other people" doesn't equal "Brad" -- even when I included something that couldn't possibly refer to you! That's weird.