Neal asks: Why delete James Shott's comment? I'll tell you why. This is my blog. I make no claim to objectivity. It exists entirely -- without equivocation or apology -- for my own selfish pleasure. When I deem that controversy, arguments, even personal insults in comments serve my ultimate interest, such comments remain (99%, so far; at least). If not: delete button. I always (at least I know of no time when I haven't) give commenters one free shot at me. I shoot back, and unless the repartee is a tone-down, getting down to the argument, I dump it. Unless the conversatation is intersting, I don't want a 50+ comment flame war that wastes a lot of my time. Shott's follow-on comment was 80% insult, some of it of a clearly dishonest and manipulative nature. It was long. To answer it was simply: not worth my time. So I deleted it. No apology whatsoever. My blog. My rules. I'll tell you what. If you were to look at the record of comments, there's lots of insults, even in the 2nd and 3rd round and beyond. That's because the person was at least making some argument worthy of being addressed. Shott...