I was originally going to title this post “The Attack of the Killer Mice,” but was afraid of stirring up mouse lovers everywhere.  Mind you, I am not one of them.  I don’t know if any mouse lovers even read blawgs on Sundays.  It seems that the rest of the blawgosphere is out drinking lattes, because I feel like the only guy posting anything over the weekend.  Hello, anybody home?  But since I blawg for fun, who cares, right?

In the recent past, a post of mine was subject to careful scrutiny.  One aspect, which provided tangential support to my position, was wrong as written.  I could have, and probably should have, made it clearer and far more precise, but blawging requires a certain degree of brevity (something with which I have occasional problems, as Gideon often notes), and I cut to the chase.  This left me open to some nit-picking, and my nits were indeed picked.

But something else happened that disturbed me about it.  My initial visceral reaction was to reach through the computer screen and grab someone by the scruff of their neck.  I decided not to do this, because it’s a highly ineffective way to convince someone of the error of their ways and it’s really bad for the computer screen.  Instead, I chose to ignore it.  At least for the moment.

When points get lifted from a post, repeated without context, words changed and rearranged, and then passed along to tertiary readers, there’s always a chance that something gets lost in translation.  That happened to me.  But the upshot was the end-reader, lacking the clarity of thought or comprehension to recognize that they had moved the goal post, were using somebody else’s ball and still have no clue what they were talking about, concluded that I was a blithering idiot, utterly lacking in credibility and dressed funny.

They were, in large measure, way off base.  Granted, I sometimes wear mismatching clothing around the house, but that’s really nobody’s business but my own. 

As to the rest of it, I can only suggest that they go back to the source, try to grasp the fundamental point and recognize that this isn’t a law review article, with citations and footnotes for every point.  Yes, we support our positions with some short hand that will not bear up, as written, under intense scrutiny.  So sue me.  If I went on at length on every supporting detail raised, my posts would be ten times as long as even more boring.  Is that what you want?

My son loves to remind me that stupidity is not a handicap.  He uses the phrase to explain why non-disabled people don’t get to park in handicap parking spots just because their easier, they’ll “only be a minute” or available when there are no other spots within 12 feet of the door.  I wonder where he learned that?  He can say this because we don’t park in handicap parking spots.  It’s more difficult to read someone calling me an incredible moron when they are basing in on a total misapprehension of third-hand, butchered information.  But we can’t expect everyone to be a careful reader or have basic clarity of thought.

But I urge readers to be cautious in their jumping to unwarranted conclusions, particularly in attacking people, when they have failed to do their own due diligence and demonstrated a sufficient knowledge to justify their knee-jerk conclusions.  Some people are just too darn critical.  They should be more tolerant and understanding.  Like me.