You need not do that in the article if you'd prefer to expound on that here?  There are a couple of possible answers, and I'd prefer not to assume the reason.

Not a problem.  I certainly didn't think you'd do something like that on purpose.

Brayton's quote was a good quote, and I agreed with it in my response, actually, I believe.  I just didn't see it when I looked at my comments only.

Also, I'll add to the quote since I have more information now.  Both Griffin and Wiginton harbor views that are repugnant – where in the original quote I suggested that it just appeared as if Wiginton did.

You are correct, the comment was Ed Brayton's not yours. I have edited the piece to make sure your quote is in there. it came off the comments section, and is public consumption information. Thanks for pointing it out. The commentary stuff gets a bit confusing for we computer neophytes.

Cheers

Heywood

While I think I agree with the attributed quote mostly, you never interviewed me and I don't recall writing that (I did write that the protesters were wrong, and I agree that Griffin's views are repulsive, but that doesn't ring my memory as what I wrote).  Then again, I write alot of stuff and may be forgetting an entry.  If its an error on your part, I'm sure its unintentional.

While I think I agree with the attributed quote mostly, you never interviewed me and I don’t recall writing that (I did write that the protesters were wrong, and I agree that Griffin’s views are repulsive, but that doesn’t ring my memory as what I wrote).  Then again, I write alot of stuff and may be forgetting an entry.  If its an error on your part, I’m sure its unintentional.

You are correct, the comment was Ed Brayton’s not yours. I have edited the piece to make sure your quote is in there. it came off the comments section, and is public consumption information. Thanks for pointing it out. The commentary stuff gets a bit confusing for we computer neophytes.

Cheers

Heywood

Not a problem.  I certainly didn’t think you’d do something like that on purpose.

Brayton’s quote was a good quote, and I agreed with it in my response, actually, I believe.  I just didn’t see it when I looked at my comments only.

Also, I’ll add to the quote since I have more information now.  Both Griffin and Wiginton harbor views that are repugnant – where in the original quote I suggested that it just appeared as if Wiginton did.

You need not do that in the article if you’d prefer to expound on that here?  There are a couple of possible answers, and I’d prefer not to assume the reason.