Talk:Brian Leiter/Archive 1

message: One commenter said: "deleted link to grad student "response" because no evidence it actually involved Leiter)." 
This is incorrect.  For no reason other than that the grad student in question criticized Brian Leiter's co-bloggers, Brian Leiter himself left a comment on that student's blog reading: "So a rude, reactionary and not very bright Emory grad student will be attending conferences in Madison this weekend. I’ll have to ask my friends to look for you, you are a piece of work."  This is typical behavior on Leiter's part -- indeed, it's just the kind of uncivil behavior that Leiter brags about (see his "On Civility" post).
:—This unsigned comment was added by User:69.151.116.136 (talk • contribs) on March 9th.
Someone said, "no evidence that Brian Leiter actually posted this comment; a comment on a blog is not encyclopedic anyway."
I don't think there's any serious question that Brian Leiter posted that comment threatening the graduate student's career.  Nonetheless, I deleted it.  But no one doubts that Brian Leiter posted those comments on "Right Reason."  To refer to his comments there is every bit as "encyclopedic" as to refer to "no bullshit" blogging on "Insta-Ignorance."  What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, after all.  If this encyclopedic entry is to list a representative blog post wherein Leiter criticizes other people, it is only fair to list a representative blog comment showing how Leiter reacts when his own words are -- for effect -- aimed in his direction (which was the case in that Right Reason post).  In this case, of course, Leiter's reaction doesn't paint him in a good light: His response was to sneer that Steve Burton's gay ex-lover was always the nice one, and to express faux regret that Steve Burton hadn't managed to find employment as a philosopher.  But that's the typical way that Leiter responds to criticism.  
What's the point of this Wiki entry, after all?  Leiter worship?  If you don't like purely factual references to Leiter's online patterns of behavior, then delete the reference to Leiter's own blogging (which is currently described in much more opinionated terms than I have used).
:—This unsigned comment was added by User:70.178.105.208 (talk • contribs) on March 10th.
Reply:  Every time Krazy Keith (http://dadahead.blogspot.com/2005/03/krazy-keith-at-it-again.html)  links to this entry to complain that no one shares his nutty view of Leiter, right-wing weirdos show up here to post attacks on Leiter.  Let me see if I understand this latest one.  Some conservative bloggers attack Leiter and his co-bloggers as idiots and jerks, and Leiter allegedly responds in kind in brief COMMENTS on their blog.  How is this relevant to an encyclopedia entry?  And PLEASE cut the crap about "threatening" a student's career, there was no threat.  (Since Krazy Keith has been the one calling attention to this comment, I'd bet he's the one who posted it in the first place under BL's name, just so he'd have something new to rant about.)  As to the other post, I guess I'd say Steve Burton acts like an asshole.  And the fact that Leiter is pissy in response is no proof at all of "the typical way Leiter responds to criticism."   Wouldn't evidence of typical responses to criticism be things like replies in journals?  The point of a Wiki entry isn't to create a permanent record of all the trivia on the Internet.  And the point also isn't for Krazy Keith and his 2 or 3 "friends" in Cyberspace to attack someone for political reasons (or for reasons of mental imbalance:  http://dadahead.blogspot.com/2005/11/right-wing-crazies.html).   
 
You would think a guy who can't get promoted to full professor after a dozen years as an associate, and who teaches in a state where tenured faculty get reviewed every few years, would have better things to do than make up crap to abuse his more successful colleagues.  Judging from this http://decrapulasedormiendo.blogspot.com/2006/03/and-his-aos-is-political-philosophy.html post tenure review won't go too well for KBJ.
:—This unsigned comment was added by User:128.83.212.66 (talk • contribs) on March 17.
After adding the preceding comment, User:128.83.212.66 (using a computer named lib-lawee003.law.utexas.edu in Austin, Texas) deleted some material from the article:
* His blogging style has been dubbed "the no bullshit" approach, which has won him both fans and detractors, usually lining up along political lines.
* A sample of Leiter's "no bullshit" blogging with attacks on "Insta-Ignorance" (Glenn Reynolds) and other "moral cretins and self-important poseurs".
* A blog post wherein Leiter responds to criticism.
I have reverted the article to the previous version. Leiter is controversial; we should say something about that, and give some examples. Incidentally, Wikipedia's guideline on sourcing material allows blog posts (and, I presume, comments on blog posts) as primary sources but not secondary sources.
Requests/Hints for anonymous contributors: If you wish to edit Wikipedia anonymously, create an account. Wikipedia has a strong privacy policy but most of it only applies to logged-in users. (But see also WP:Vanity.) Even if you continue to edit without logging in, please put  four tildes ("~~~~") after your comments in "talk" pages such as this one; the software will automagically replace them with your username and a timestamp when you "Show preview" or "Save Page".
:—Chris Chittleborough 07:55, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A blogger mocks and criticizes Leiter's hostile style and Leiter strikes back (in the comments).
I'm not real happy with "strikes back". Can someone else do better? (Please discuss your edits here. Also, please use "~~~~" as discussed above.)
— Chris Chittleborough 10:12, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm replacing "strikes back" (which now annoys me) with "argues with him". Feel free to edit me. —Chris Chittleborough 06:51, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: More Discussion of "Other Links"

message: User:70.178.85.72 added a good link to a blog posting by Steve Burton, who got a Ph.D. in Philosophy from Michigan at the same as as BL did.  The post is an over-the-top attack on BL; at the end, Burton reveals that "nearly all of [the attack was] cut and pasted from Leiter's blog, minimally altered to fit the present case", then suggests that BL should tone down his habitual superciliousness.  In the first comment on the post, BL outs Burton.  A vigorous exchange between Burton, BL and other commenters ensues, including a (qualified) apology from BL (timestamped "July 12, 2005 07:35 PM").
Why is this a good link?
# The post itself criticizes BL's writing style, not BL himself.  (I'm sure we could find lots of attacks on Leiter and/or his politics; this is much more relevant to our article.)  Moreover, Burton used BL's own words to make his point.
# BL participated in the discussion, writing several comments.
Now we need to work out how to describe it in the article.  Here's the last few descriptions:
# A conservative blogger attacks Leiter.
# A libertarian blogger mocks and criticizes Leiter's aggressive style; in response, Leiter outs him and declares their friendship over.
# A libertarian blogger attkcs Leiter and Leiter responds.
Discussion:
* Burton is libertarian, not conservative.
* That the linked post attacks BL's writing rather than BL himself is important.
* When replacing #2 (my wording) above with #3, User:70.112.222.175 said "obviously not NPOV to adopt Burton's characterization of Leiter's response". (I had assumed from that apology that BL had accepted that characterization. What do other people think?)
* I see it as important to mention that Leiter participates in the comments.
* I don't see why Burton's political orientation is relevant.
I have therefore changed the description to
:A blogger mocks and criticizes Leiter's hostile style and Leiter strikes back (in the comments).
I'm not real happy with "strikes back". Can someone else do better? (Please discuss your edits here. Also, please use "~~~~" as discussed above.)
— Chris Chittleborough 10:12, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm replacing "strikes back" (which now annoys me) with "argues with him". Feel free to edit me. —Chris Chittleborough 06:51, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Link to Burton/Leiter Blog Item

message: User:71.242.85.232 removed the sentence
:His blogging style has been dubbed "the no bullshit" approach, which has won him both fans and detractors, usually lining up along political lines.
I've replaced it with
:His "no bullshit" blogging style has been controversial.
and added a link to http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2005/06/on_rhetoric_civ.html, in which BL explains the reasons for his approach in some detail. I've also split the "Other Links" section into "Publications Edited" (is that the right wording?) and "Blogs and Blogging".
My interpretation of the 2 BL blog posts linked above is that he accepts (actually, delights in) the description "no bullshit blogging". If anyone has evidence to the contrary, we'll need to do some more editing.
—Chris Chittleborough 07:25, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "no bullshit" blogging style