I find that your posts contain the seeds of a thoughtful critique of scornful, exploitative films which put naïfs and weirdoes in the spotlight in order to let the intelligentsia feel enlightened and/or amused (often at the expense of the subjects that the film maker purports to feel curiousity and affection towards). The worst one I can think of is an extremely condescending documentary about two strange awkward men who were amateur film-makers attempting to make a horror film - maybe Andrew remembers the name. It made me sick.

On the other hand, maybe I'm reading too much into what you've posted, and it really is just a mass of supercilious vitriol.

Hey hey my fine feathered neanderthals, whassup? Can't get you're hate-fix off of Broadsheet trolling anymore, and decided to jump ship for the soapy waters of the television column?

The Hav's worst column is so far superior to your best vitriol-filled poison keyboard missive.

Nobody cares what you think. We care about what Heather Havrilesky has to say about what's new and good on television. Havrilesky's spent plenty of key-strokes on The Wire, The Sopranos, and The Shield - as you'd know if you were actual readers of this column. But you're not are you? You are embittered, bored (and boring) supercilious wannabes who feel the insecure need to advertise the fact that you don't watch bad television. We get it, you're fabulous. Now frak off back from wence you came.

What world do you live in? Do you read the papers? Polygamy is still very much a part of Mormonism. Here in Canada the RCMP have been dancing around the issue of prosecutions for some time, but are apparently getting ready to make arrests in Bountiful British Columbia, one of the larger polygamist Mormon compounds. The US (Arizona, Texas and Utah) community was led by Warren Jeffs, who is now incarcerated for aiding and abetting statutory rape. The Canadian (aka British Columbian) polygamist Mormon community is led by Winston Blackmore.

Mormon polygamy only runs one way (there are 'celestial wives', but no celestial husbands), and one of the key problems is that it seems to be par for the course for girls as young as 13 to become celestial wives.

I work in corporate law. I got into the game late - starting law school in my early 30s after a liberal arts degree and years of working in labour and government (and going to film festivals, and travelling, and listening to emo music and reading comic books and attending political protests...). When I started working at Biglaw, I'd never used a blackberry, owned a cel phone, or had a facebook account. Now I have all three.

But I still really miss conversation. Partly its just that everyone I work with (12 hours a day) is (a) very busy, (b) unwilling or unable to say anything provacative, intellectual or possibly offensive, (c) busy staring at their blackberry or cel phone. (b) and (c) are probably the biggest social buzz-kill for me. What to do when someone sits at a table accross from you, pulls out a hand-held device, stares down and begins thumb-typing? Someone with a private school education and an advanced degree that only wants to talk about low-carbing and Grey's Anatomy?

At first I felt like I was working with a bunch of raised-by-wolves cretins. Well, I still feel that way a bit...but that's another story. If nothing else forces me out of this field (I actually find the work stimulating, if not the people), it will be pure starvation for a bit of witty chit-chat.

Oh, and John Anderson, I guess it's all a matter of taste. Sex is overrated if you're comparing it to the movies. A good converstation can get a person thinking (and even laughing quietly in darkened boardrooms) for days afterwards.

Somebody's been into ye olde (and I mean olde!) wikipedia. The meanings you ascribe to the word decimated are antiquated, and don't reflect current usage:

verb (used with object), -mat⋅ed, -mat⋅ing.

1. to destroy a great number or proportion of: The population was decimated by a plague.

2. to select by lot and kill every tenth person of.

3. Obsolete. to take a tenth of or from.

...have likely never been through a truly devestating breakup. And I include our letter writer in this.

Bottom line is that family should have your back. A terrible breakup leaves scars and anger that lasts years, and the last thing you want is to be hearing about one of your nearest and dearest blithely disregarding your pain and traipsing off to Europe with the cause of it. Of course, sometimes your friends just happen to like your ex better than they like you. Sometimes this means that you become ex-friends...

But family? Really? Our kith and kin are generally the last bastion of accept-me-even-when-I'm-being-unreasonble-ness. It should be a sacred given that they respect your post-divorce grief. Bottom line, blood is thicker than water, and the feelings one harbours after a breakup may not be reasonable, but they are real.

What really gets me is that our letter writer seems to imply that she's not really close to her cousin's ex, which begs the question, if it'd be no big loss to let this minor friendship go, why are you putting your cousin through this? Cold.

Lighten up!

So Heather stated the obvious; that the show is getting a bit too convoluted (pointing to writers who have no idea what's going to happen in the next episode before they start writing it). It's a realization that came to me after season II, but I understand those who are more invested are still loving it, and that's cool. But Salon doesn't owe it to you to provide a television critic that feels the same way you do. Plus, your comments are so mean and personal. Are you secretly writers for the show, miffed at being spurned?