Reply #44: fallacy of the excluded middle?

[OnTheOtherHand]

I think finding out whether elections were stolen and Karl Rove murdered, or whether an elaborate hoax has built to the point in the blogosphere that at least 80 Google pages are about it, are far more important than who I am or what my motivations are.

The writer you quoted doesn't challenge the existence of a Connally anomaly, which I think is wrong enough to qualify as a "hoax" if it had been intended to deceive. But I have no reason to think that it was. As far as I can tell, it's just one among many bad ideas that won't go away. If Stephen Spoonamore weren't convinced that he saw weird number changes, would we even be talking about Mike Connell?

ETA: But I agree with your broader point: to me it would seem more progressive-like if folks stopped speculating about your motives and focused on figuring out what really happened.