A commenter going by the name Scott recently complimented Andy Post on the recent improvement in the quality of reporting on Minnesota Democrats Exposed:
I’m not sure if that was meant as a shot at Ryan Lyk or Luke Hellier, but either way there was one glaring problem with that compliment; it was misplaced. I left a comment for Scott to help Scott be a better informed Minnesota Democrats Exposed reader:
And, as you can probably imagine, my attempt to inform Scott about his misplaced compliment did not go unnoticed. My comment was deleted.
Which makes me wonder:
Does this mean that Andy Post welcomes misdirected compliments? He didn’t do anything to correct Scott’s misconception. He let it ride AND deleted my comment where I attempted to help Scott be a better informed MDE reader.
Does this mean that Andy Post is embarrassed enough by his copyright infringement to delete my comment, but not enough to actually correct his post? Is he better off living a lie than addressing the issue? He is the same guy who held firm on his Getty Images copyright infringement within a previous post. In this case, he deleted a comment pointing out that he stole an entire article from the St. Cloud Times AND took credit for the “reporting” (it’s actually a “Your Turn” reader editorial, which MDE commenter, Scott, also missed).
Does this mean that Andy Post would prefer that his readers be misinformed rather than have access to accurate information on Minnesota Democrats Exposed?
Personally, I think Andy Post would be a better blogger if he stopped stealing content, relied upon facts, and made strong arguments to support his political positions. Is that too high of a bar for Post?