astouned. Longtime premium subscribers are in a frenzy complaining about (1) the tone and content of Broadsheet; and (2) the tone and (lack of) content of your responses to the complaints. And you decide that NOW is the time to make a cute reference in Broadsheet to Harriet Meiers as "Harry" and to suggest that Rove and Libby stand up, own up to their conduct, and voluntarily remove themselves from the administration to blunt the coming firestorm. Honorable conduct that you praise as "acting like a man."

Don't be a martyr. There are a few notes that defend Broadsheet and those folks' opinions are welcome. You did not post an opinion about Broadsheet. You attacked those who have criticized the blog, unnecessarily belittled them, questioned their intelligence, hinted at hysteria, and made ad hominem arguments. Absent from your first post is a single statement explaining why you believe the Broadsheet is interesting, enjoyable, or otherwise acceptable to you. In your second post you attempt to turn the debate away from Broadsheet and toward some kind of judgment as to who is the most intolerant.

Argue your point like a grown-up. You were called to task for failing to add to the discussion on the topic at hand. Feel free to defend Broadsheet (no one at Salon seems willing to do so), but do so by talking about Broadsheet, not by attacking those with whom you disagree. If you disagree with the criticism of Broadsheet, say so and explain why the critiques are wrong or off-point. But do not try to pretend that your right to express your opinion has been violated simply by virtue of the fact that you hold the minority opinion.