There is a disturbance in the force.
Putting aside Wells pompous characterization of my blog, I'd like to highlight what amounts to a contradiction in LOGIC, which ultimately says more about the messenger and HIS MEDIUM than any review of my lowly opinion:
(read the comments)
This shit writes itself.
Update: It seems Paul Wells has responded to liblogger Far and Wide with a deft kick to the rhetorical nuts. For an encore he slags Dipper Accidental Deliberations.
I love cat fights.
Upperdate: Somebody claiming to be inkless has posted this on the Macleans thread:
A note on prominence, for the small number of readers who may be curious.
Wordpress blog stats tell me that on Sunday the Maclean's website sent 1,600 readers to the Far and Wide blog, which sent 27 readers to the Maclean's website in return.
I was surprised that my use of the term "not terribly prominent" would seem more important than the argument I was trying to endorse by linking to it, to the author of the very blog in question. But I nonetheless apologize for using the term. I do not like it when I choose words that become an obstacle to my intended meaning. What I was trying to do was make that blog more prominent because I thought its author had made an important point well. I'm sorry I didn't make that clear.
Choosing words can be a real bitch, especially for the unwordy.