Most of you who read this site know me well in real life. The other percentage of you; not so much. Well, last night I spent most of the evening working on a web site for someone, which isn't the point of this letter. All that's important is that you understand this was a controversial web site. On a completely non-parallel subject, my searches on the topic about which I was coding delivered me to the door of a fellow blog author who had written on the subject, and whom quite honestly did so with more aplomb than I've shown lately.
Somewhere in the middle of trying to inform you about his well thought-out post, my mind crossed back over to the site I've been working on. As tends to happen to me sometimes, my thoughts crossed paths mid-composition and in the end it looked like I was trying to put words in his mouth, word which he never said or intended. I didn't think that when I was writing it, but when he brought it to my attention and I looked at it again, it DID definitely come across that way.
I try to be conscious of this sort of thing, and since my blog has such a small circulation it's probably never been noticed by someone if I had ever misrepresented them because in all likelihood they never read my blog anyway. Well, this gentlemen took the time to write me and politely ask that I use his blog post to promote my ideas because.. well his word was "it's unethical."
He's right. It wasn't intended to portray the information in the manner it did, but I was just too tired of coding all week, and well into the wee hours of last night as well to have the proper objectiveness I should have. Normally I would have never done such a thing. So, I owe "a modern guy" an apology. I'm sorry for representing your blog post in the manner in which I did. Upon reflection and after reading my own post, I completely understand your objection to having your post used in the context in which it was portrayed.
In fairness to the author, I have broken my own rule; I've removed my first post from this blog. I hope I never have to do it again because I prefer to maintain the stream-of-consciousness format I have always employed. However, this time my post reflected poorly (though not by intention) on another person, so it deserved to be removed.
So as not to deprive the rest of you from being able to read his post, I will simply provide a link to it here.
Again, my sincerest apology for the method in which your post was portrayed in my previous article.