...but then you had to resort to this pile of cliches to finish off your underwhelming stint as Salon's Olympic grump.

This was a particularly telling admission:

...in which venues have been built on a massive scale for great show, and not for the convenience of those poor souls who actually dare to get in and out...

I went to the Spain vs. USA basketball final on Sunday. Caught a cab there from the other side of town, which took 20 minutes in light traffic. Walked a block. Breezed through the security checks in 3 minutes flat. Found my seat in a similar amount of time. At the end, walked half a block to the subway, and got directly on to a train -- no waiting. Got off after three stops and caught a cab home.

I went to the closing ceremony on Sunday night. Caught a cab to the "cab drop-off zone" about a block from the stadium. Security lines took less than 10 minutes. Found my seat in about half that. Waited 3 minutes in line to buy water. Hung around after the "end" for three or four minutes texting some of the photos I'd taken to friends around the world. Walked out without any delays -- and walked three blocks to Line 5 for a smooth subway ride home.

Your racism strawman was also wonderfully inept:

Nor is it some sort of "racism," a charge that would sure have surprised my first wife (a Beijing native), to point out that not enough post-event buses were provided

You're right, it's not. But that's not why your earlier articles were, indeed, racist. Good that you're checking the letters section; bad that you don't seem to have understood what was written there.

And pulling in your "first wife" as some kind of automatic deflection shield? About as convincing as the homophobe who is keen to blurt that "A lot of my friends are gay!"

So back to one of my first questions to one of your first piles of bile: where are you Krich?! Because you sure as hell weren't in Beijing for the Olympics.

Now, that's not to say you weren't physically present, and faxing in your pre-written articles clearly enabled a lot of time at Happy Endings Massage, but I'm afraid you score a 9 for over-used China cliches, a 3 for journalistic integrity (making up "facts" about Beijing's subway system remains a personal fave), and a one for insightful reportage on these Olympic Games.

A final quote from the article, just for fun:

...the first clear view below that I'd ever had in hundreds of takeoffs and landings...

I've flown in and out of Beijing at least once a month for the past 6 years. That, of course, makes slightly less than a hundred "takeoffs and landings". I've seen Beijing on clear days from the air dozens of times. You've had "hundreds" of cycles and this is your first clear view?

So is that one more Krich lie to the tally, or three? Or don't you even bother counting anymore?

...I'm not sure exactly what goes through the mind of somebody who decides to tear the author a new one...

I can't answer for "the author" but I can answer for this one:

Krich is a blatant, exposed liar who writes almost entirely source-free "articles" that repeat, imply, and encourage offensive, obsolete, and frankly racist views of China and the Chinese.

Any more questions?

As for your "hiding behind anonymity" accusation (although you didn't make it specifically to me), any trivial perusal of my letters history will give any interested person enough information to find me, should they wish to.

You'll also find my "China credentials" there, as well as at least one link to a web version of a printed article under my real name from my time as a writer in China.

As for John Krich "contacting" me I don't know why he'd want to, as his articles paint a clear picture of someone terminally uninterested in factual discussion on China or any other issue, but it would be easy to do so as we almost certainly know some of the same people. Regardless of any "contact", my views on what he's written here would remain the same in person.

...but that the fans were not as well catered to for mobility and ease of access to stadia...

Please understand that I am not, for a moment, saying "best Olympics EVAR!" or anything equally inane. There were, without question, things that could have been done better (like completing the original "Bird's Nest" design so the place wasn't such a hotbox; like better instructions to Beijing's fleet of cabs; etc).

But why is it that ALL of the Beijing blogs that I have seen, ALL of the Beijing expats I regularly drink with, and ALL of my personal experiences with venues and access are saying the exact opposite of some of the commentariat? I encourage you to do a web search of your own.

Is it because journalists expected pampering above and beyond the massive blocks of almost invariably vacant seating allocated for them at each and every venue?