User of Avoidance Technique Describes Avoidance Technique
I couldn’t care less about the subject matter of Glenn Greenwald’s latest post, but I was interested in his description of a technique that “some” use to respond to arguments (note the bold passage):
Kevin Drum passive-aggressively mounted the same defense of Klein in response to my criticism (Drum did so without acknowledging that he was responding to my post, let alone linking to it, opting instead for the “some argue” formulation that “some” people use as a way of purportedly responding to an argument without having their readers see the argument in question).
You mean like this?
A new accusation is that I’ve been engaging in so-called “sock puppetry” by leaving comments in response to posts that attack me under other names., i.e., that I use multiple names to comment and the same comment was left at several blogs by the same IP address under different names.
Not frequently, I leave comments at blogs which criticize or respond to something I have written. I always, in every single instance, use my own name when doing so. I have never left a single comment at any other blog using any name other than my own, at least not since I began blogging. IP addresses signify the Internet account one uses, not any one individual. Those in the same household have the same IP address. In response to the personal attacks that have been oozing forth these last couple of weeks, others have left comments responding to them and correcting the factual inaccuracies, as have I. In each case when I did, I have used my own name.
No links there. Just a statement that there is a disembodied “new accusation” out there somewhere.
I guess Mr. Greenwald used that as a way of purportedly responding to the accusation of sock-puppetry, without having his readers see the argument in question.
It’s nice to see the man himself describing the very technique he used himself to address the sock-puppetry accusations.
In case any of you missed the evidence on that, it’s here.
Rick Ellensburg, duplicitous? You don’t say!
Pablo (99243e) — 6/3/2007 @ 2:23 pmHow many different times has Greenwald so effectively demonstrated the meaning of hypocrisy? I’ve lost count.
BTW, this is one of my favorite blog posts of all time.
aunursa (759df9) — 6/3/2007 @ 3:38 pmYou’re just jealous because Glenn Greenwald is the author of a New York Times bestseller whose posts have inspired articles in major newspapers and have been read on the Seante floor.
GOOD DAY, SIR!
Sean M. (588113) — 6/3/2007 @ 10:47 pmNot to defend GG, but I’ve been accused of being some one else, or rather, some one else whose comments I didn’t agree with was accused of being me, by pointing back to my blog, since this other person apparently uses the same MWR network from Baghdad that I occasionally do.
The wonders of a NAT address…
thebastidge (5109f0) — 6/4/2007 @ 1:17 amHe says that Kevin Drum uses this technique. He doesn’t say that it’s a horrible thing to do, merely that this is what happened. There’s no hypocrisy involved, so what’s the point?
Nikolay (c209a6) — 6/4/2007 @ 6:24 amHe decries the technique by his description of it.
Patterico (eeb415) — 6/4/2007 @ 6:36 amI haven’t been following along with this story because it’s completely unimportant, but – in defense of Greenwald – isn’t there the possibility that he lives in some sort of hippie commune or perhaps a treatment center our group home of some kind? Shouldn’t he be given the benefit of the doubt?
TLB (cc42f6) — 6/4/2007 @ 10:24 amIf you read the linked post I think you’ll see that things seem pretty bullet-proof. Silly Glenn Greenwald.
David N. Scott (71e316) — 6/4/2007 @ 11:31 amI once wrote about a reactionary poster on another blog, “Someday the passive voice is going to turn on you, gut you like a trout and then eat your liver with sove fava beans and a nice chianti.”
The same applies to Glenn(s).
N. O'Brain (9056e2) — 6/4/2007 @ 5:57 pmWhen do we get aour own cloaking device?
krazy kagu (91408b) — 6/5/2007 @ 6:44 am