1. Oh, Vox Nova – haven’t seen a link to them in a long while. I think the last time I went was in 2012 when I got called a murderer for trying to explain the theological and legal reasonings behind burning heretics. Then I sort of realized I wasn’t welcome.

  2. No way I could argue with even juice-box theologians. They are way smarter than me.

    The difference between blogging and column writing is in column writing there’s an editor. Editors are a blessing.

    Lastly, totally serious about the land rush. And I’d love to be a cheese maker.

    1. Mr. Ruse,

      I am not sure this reply does much credit to your “cause.” Having gladly written for Crisis before, I can certainly say that I appreciate having a second set of talented eyes to skim my pieces for grammatical errors and poor sentence construction; I am not so sure those same talented, but busy, eyes are capable of catching every factual mistake or erroneous argument. Blogs may have a lower threshold of review before they “publish,” but it’s not so outrageously low compared to other online media publishing that one can rest self-assured that their pieces shine with integrity just because they happen to wind up somewhere other than a web-log.

      Anyway, the rest of this strikes me as senselessly sarcastic, so I’ll just stop here.

      1. I see you’ve had two columns at Crisis. I am sure John Vella will be pleased to hear that his editing is no better than a blog.

        1. Mr. Ruse,

          If you re-read what I wrote, or were capable of reading carefully the first time through, you would see that is not what I said at all. You would do yourself, and your readers, a considerable favor if you could demonstrate a reasonable capacity to digest what you claim to disagree with before popping off with more childish one-liners.

            1. Moi? You’re the one who keeps coming back to this combox throwing more spit balls, begging for attention.

  3. Huge difference between a blog where someone simply unloads whatever’s on their mind, and columns that face an editorial process.

    1. Mr. Ruse,

      Given that your columns are typically little more than you unloading what happens to be on your mind, I am not sure what that says for the integrity of the editorial process. Perhaps you might dedicate a future column to that.

      1. Well, that is kind of what columnists do. We write about what is on our mind, what we are thinking about.

        Bill Buckley, who for years wrote three columns a week, said it was a matter of finding three things that make you made every week. So, you are correct, that roughly is column writing. But the difference is the editorial process.

        The other difference is a columnist usually has a slot, a day of the week. You can’t just pop off when your pissed off. You have to wait. Waiting is also a good thing.

        These two things, having to wait, and having an editor are two huge advantages that column writing has over blogging.

        1. “when your pissed off.”

          It’s “you’re,” dumbass. Those of us who read the threads on this blog have some fucking standards. Obviously an innate tendency toward correct grammar is not one of the huge advantages of writing a column.

          And what the hell is “said it was a matter of finding three things that make you made every week” supposed to mean? My opinion of the editors of Crisis just went up. They apparently undergo a considerable task each week.

          1. There is a column about Pope Francis and Hanes still to be written. Perhaps the one to do it has just revealed himself.

Comments are closed.