I’ve Moved!

November 20, 2008

So I’m sure that most people have noticed that the site has been offline for a few days. There’s a reason for that, which I will get to shortly. But first, let me just say this:

I AM NO LONGER BLOGGING HERE

In fact, I am blogging at a new site I have just finished setting up: kennethhynek.net. A full explanation for the reasons behind the move can be found here.

That said, this is not the end of . My wife has expressed interest in taking over blogging at this domain, and I am working to make sure that she gets set up here as soon as possible.

Also, my profound apologies for the modification to the site face; the move was not as seamless as I would have hoped, and many of the image files for this theme, and in the gallery, were corrupted during the course of their evacuation from my previous web host’s servers. Until such time as I have repaired them, I’ve put a clean-looking template in place of the previous one.

Update: for the purposes of further traffic shaping, new posts from kennethhynek.net will be excerpted below. Full articles can be read at the new blog.

Mark Steyn’s critics

January 9, 2008

It’s most interesting to note how LawIsCool shuts down the ability of people to put in opposing points of view in their comments section. That is their right. How would he feel if a commission ordered LawIsCool to give equal time to opposing points of view after costing them a fortune in defending their right to close their comments section? He wouldn’t like it I am sure. But I guess, to paraphrase , some people are more equal than others and their rights to freedom of speech more equal than others.

I’ve had commentators at the site tell me that the people going after are the ones that have all their facts in line, and that Steyn’s would-be censors have consistently been gracious and non-insulting. We’ll leave aside, perhaps, mention of how — one of the key figures behind — accuses those who disagree with him of being mentally unbalanced, or how he has dismissed comments he disagrees with as ’spam’ (what wonders they have done for spam bots on the ‘Net if they can now respond to discussions on topic and coherently). And we’ll ignore how he has re-written yet other comments he has found fault with.

�s commentary is worth reading in full, and is an excellent analysis of just the sort of people who are pursuing the case against in . In some respects, it’s nice to know that Daniel Simard is as consistent in his denial of people their basic human right (as per the , a document I am sure Simard is otherwise quite fond of) to free speech…but that doesn’t change the fact that he’s being an arsehole who is denying people their basic human right to free speech.

(In Soviet Russia, hat tops you: Kathy Shaidle)