How I Blow Off Blowhards
On a regular basis, I get emails from people who tell me that they do not agree with something that I wrote in an article. Sometimes, the article was published five years ago or more. They just happened to come across it.
In some cases, they include a detailed critique of my article. They probably spent an hour or more writing it. I never read these critiques.
Sometimes I just blip the emails. Gone! This is probably the best thing to do. But, every once in a while, I want to have a little fun. So, I send this response:
Please post this critique on your blog. Then send me a link to your article. I occasionally respond to public articles.
I know that this person has no blog. The reason I know is that people with blogs are always after topics. Replying to another author's article is a quick way to get something good enough to post. If it's not that good, the author doesn't post it. So, if it's not posted, its not worth reading.
Email criticisms are always sent by people who are too lazy or too fearful to post articles on a regular basis. So, no one pays any attention to them. Why should I?
I often get a response from the person saying that he doesn't have a blog. Then I respond as follows.
I cannot afford the time to respond to people in private. As I said before, I occasionally respond to published articles.
If the person has an IQ above 90, he recognizes that I have just blown him off. This upsets some of them. They write back outraged emails about how I have to respond to their cogent arguments. I took care of this back in 2002. I wrote an article for Lew Rockwell, "The Tar Baby Factor: When to Keep Quiet." I wrote it specifically to handle these cases. I send the critic the link: https://archive.lewrockwell.com/north/north49.html.
Some of them then go ballistic. They rant. They rage. They tell me what they think of me.
At this point, I reply to tell them that I have placed them on "block sender," and they can send any criticisms they want in any number that they want.
My recommendation is that if you come across an article you don't like, you would be unwise to send the author a letter telling him that you don't agree with his points. He really doesn't care if you agree with his points. You are a stranger. He did not write the article for you. He has limits on his time. He doesn't want another pen pal.
On the other hand, if you have a blog site, write your criticism on your blog site. If you have a website, even better. Then send him the link.
On the rare occasions that somebody sends me a link to a critical article, I go to Alexa.com, and I see what ranking the site has. If it is not at least 250,000, I don't bother to respond. It takes time to respond. My time is valuable. If I decide I want to make an example of the fellow's arguments, I may write a detailed response and post it. But usually I don't.
Your time is valuable. There may be a good reason to respond to somebody's criticism, but probably not. That is another reason for not offering criticism to authors. They're not interested in hearing your criticism unless they think you can inflict pain on them.
If you do send a letter telling someone you don't like what he has written, include three or four links to articles that respond to his ideas negatively. That may get his attention. He may have missed some of these articles. Otherwise, he will not take you seriously. There is really no reason why he should take you seriously. If you are not willing to put your criticism in print for others to see and respond to, you are not a serious critic.