Long Distance (Hit and) Runner

I won’t lie – posting on Hit and Run is fun. It’s also producing the first negative feedback I’ve received for blog posts since the Mark Levin trolls attacked DW-i. A (I thought) fun post about immigration protests produced this comment:

I don’t think much of Weigel’s commentary here. It’s not evidentiary; it’s tendentious.

I think my policy on constructive criticism like this (it is constructive; he’s saying I offered more opinion than proof) will be to email and follow up with the commenters. I don’t want to foist those arguments on the comment threads.

5 thoughts on “Long Distance (Hit and) Runner

  1. Question, possibly rhetorical: Is it possible to post something on any site, anywhere, anymore without touching off a maelstrom posts and crossfire? Do we have nothing better to do?

  2. Normally I’d suggest putting your own reply back in the post you started, but in this case a private email would be better, just because your commenter is being unreasonable. I’m not sure what he means by ‘here’: the particular post or all of yours. But ‘tendentious’? He thinks you’re just being argumentative? It’s a blog called “Hit & Run” on a site called “Reason”, fer chrissakes. It’s not “Ponderous Essays” on “Epistemological Reports”. (Or Positive Liberty.) Besides, your posts have had at least as high an evidence-to-hypothesis ratio as any other posters, and the post in question was a particularly good analysis. You tend to avoid the pithy snark that others like to write. (“The lion was beheaded, however, after someone noticed the Virgin Mary lurking in his mane.”? Geez.)

    Don’t take this “constructive criticism” too personally. You’re doing fine.

  3. “Question, possibly rhetorical: Is it possible to post something on any site, anywhere, anymore without touching off a maelstrom posts and crossfire? Do we have nothing better to do?”

    I have a theory that on the internet, everything can be controversial.

Leave a Reply