Thanks. I posted a link from my blog. Not sure why you think I wouldn't know what's happening with my own blog...Who do you think does it? Also, why don't you sign your e-mail or your blog?He's got me there. The truth is I haven't "signed" my blog (until now) because I'm a career criminal, okay? (Just kidding. I forget that newspapers have not only sources but resources.)
As for my post, Temple avoids discussing any of the problems I mention, including why it looks like he's not all that connected to his own blog. Instead he just throws my criticism out there for comment. That's perfectly legitimate, but I wish he'd also bothered to reply specifically to my points. In particular I'd really like to know, where is Jim Sheeler?
Update: Another note from Temple: "I had noticed [that initial paragraphs in archived posts are repeated]. I was taught that it's important to do it that way because people may arrive at the blog item in different ways. some will come directly and need the context the intro provides. others will come after scanning the tops of a number of items. doesn't that make sense?"
Well, sort of. But if one looks around one will see not a single blogger whose archives are set up like that. It's just not necessary.
In any case, Temple wins on one point: judging from his replies, he is definitely involved in his blog. Good deal.
Update 5:02 pm MDT: The Search for Jim Sheeler: Day Two. Still no update on his blog. I've been to those Bath baths, man. A body--dead or alive--could stay down there a long time and nobody'd know a thing.
Update II: Do you think the Rocky has an obit ready to run on the guy?