Ace -

Just got to listen to the show for the first time. Not bad. Surprised by some of the feedback, but I hardly think there's anything to be ashamed about.

Thanks again, hope you had fun, and take care --

Jeff

Eh. I don't think it was a good show to be honest, and I'm not blaming you. I just never felt like I got into a rhythm or was ready to start riffing on a subject.

Also... I used to be a motormouth. Thousand words a minute. I kept getting knocked for that, being told to slow... down...

I guess I have overcompensated on that front, because people are telling me I just talk too damn slow.

Again, the two beers probably did not help. I didn't need them, as it turned out... I was just worried I'd get stagefright (well, internet "radio" fright) which I didn't.

Anyway, thanks for having me on. I'm not sure why this has become such a imbroglio.

Well, I think the part with Val is beautiful. As for your stint, we had Schiavo and Churchill stuff planned, but we just never got to it. Fateful decision at the first break to keep on with the "Get To Know Ace" thing. We flipped a coin -- did people want to hear more about you or more about Schiavo? Tails we lose, I guess.

Well, yeah... not your fault. It's just that I'm not going to give anything interesting up, so it's sort of futile.

'Sides, I'm not particularly interesting. I mean, in the details of my life.

We have ways of making you talk.... I could get the super secret identity if I wanted. I'm good that way. But...nah.

I finally heard the show and I thought it was good. Jeff acting like he doesn't know stuff makes me laugh.

You and Jeff definitly sounded sexy and that is really what's important.

Trust me. Everyone was SICK of the Schavio thing anyway. Seriously.

Oh no Ace, you're a very interesting person, they just didn't bring it out for us.
They didn't even ask you the good questions, like
"How does Hoke take it?"
and "is Johnny Coldcuts a three-input kinda girl/sandwhich?"
"When was the first time you met Bob Dole's Cock?"
"When was the last time Hoke treated you to Guiliani time?"
"Was Blossom really all that?" and so on.

All due respect, Iblis, Ace asked us not to talk about the inside jokes on the site. And we respected that.

Yeah, I laid down that rule.

Next interview: No personal questions, either.

Ultimately, I'll have like three things I can talk about. D&D, porn, and Bob Dole's cock.

Which will suit me just fine. Just fine. And. Dandy.

And yet you claim to be uninteresting! You know all about Bob Dole's thingy. What could be more interesting than that?

I understand you not wanting to give your number to someone who dial it online, if I was so inclined I could run the tones I heard through a program I have and have his number. Glenn might as well have his number posted on his page.

RWS,

Well my stars, for a respectable southern lady you sure are in-corrigible!

Bullwinkle,

It is my understanding that was pre-produced and so that probably wasn't the tones for Insty's number.

I just relistened to the show and really, it was pretty good. There were slow moments, sure, but none of you are professionals and that's to be expected (and I'm sure it would get better). Don't be so hard on yourself, Ace, and the rest of you shouldn't be so hard on Jeff and Bill.

Hey! Great comment! I really like the part where you said Ace was "pretty good"!

If he ever gets really good, he can stop taking Pure Discount Viagro and get that internal pump he's always dreamed of!

I thought it was fine, especially given that you are only 3 shows in. Ace on the other hand is still a virgin, and he's never been on the radio either.

I'm not sure why I think there is such a brouhaha over it all. I think Ace is underestimating how well he did and people loyal to Ace (both of them, under different names) are sticking up for him.

I'd rather listen to that than the local shit they put on here at the weekends.

I think the issue of the moderate split in the GOP would have been a good issue, and damn, I nearly posted that question today, but realized it was nearly time for the show.

I sorta prepped that question.

Umm, Ace has too been on the radio before. You guys are just trying to forget.

The Reynolds' tones are fake. Though if you really wanted his office number, you could probably save yourself the Lone Gunmen shit and just call the UTENN directory.

Lone gunman? Isn't you referring to what I said kinda like your pathetic attempt to shoot me down? What a joke.

I just listened to the show. Ace, you did well. Jeff, I didn't grok all the fascination with Ace's commentors. I kept wondering who gives a rat's ass. I missed the big Schiavo argument or whatever was going on a while back so maybe that's part of it. Regardless of however interesting or funny that may have been, blog comments are pretty much not interesting--or, at least, less interesting than the blogger or his/her political interests.

OTOH, if you really like that stuff and want to do another show about blog commentors, give me a ring! Fuck the bloggers. Bring on the commentors. Yeah, baby! I require only a brown painted greenroom, Perrier water, and a platter of assorted fresh sandwiches.

You guys are entertaining and the show has a lot of potential, but you have to decide whether you're doing your own schtick or a talk/interview show. IOW, are you highlighting guests or are the guests merely a vehicle for highlighting your own views and humor? And maybe it could be both, but that would mean letting the guest complete a full sentence or two... and then responding as if you're paying attention to what was said. Otherwise, you're not talking at the guest.

Remember the Chevy Chase show? He never understood his great comedic talent would come out naturally while focusing outward on the guests. He thought he had to carry it. He didn't.

Jeff G, Id like to appologize for not giving you the credit to be smart enough not to have actually dialed the number on the air but the only thing I had to go on was what little I had listened to of the recording and you sure didn't give me thew
impression that you're involved in any think tank work. I also didn't have any idea that you were the protien wisdom blogger, at the time I replied, and on consideration still am not sure that you came up with the idea of not doing it. Hope that's clears up any misunderstandings.

I sorta prepped that question.

Speaking of which, all talk shows prep widely with pre-interview Q and A usually conducted by the producer. These are typically general questions that elicit general answers for the purpose of narrowing topics and allowing both guest and host to prepare specific riffs and retorts.

I also didn't have any idea that you were the protien wisdom blogger, at the time I replied . . .

He needs to sign everything "Jeff at Protein Ridge."

I posted a version of this at Protein Wisdom, and I just wanted to be clear that the comments were directed at both of you:

Ace, are you planning on writing a blog or running a club?

In recent days, your blog has become more of a running conversation with your commenters and buddy blogs than a freestanding publication that anyone can just stop by and read.

You've had three extended posts on your interview, which probably took more time to write than the interview itself. Who other than the groupies would find your comments remotely interesting? Are they the only ones you're writing for?

I used to think that you had a highly successful blog with a huge readership. I still think you've got a much bigger readership than FFFT does (and probably ever will) but I'm starting to wonder how much of that traffic volume comes from the comments of a few dozen readers/groupies who are using your weblogs as their own stomping ground.

You know what forums are like--and you know that I think you should start a forum. But I find it hard to believe that this ongoing circle jerk between you and a few dozen commenters is what you had in mind for your blog.

Nothing wrong with the occasional injoke. Nothing wrong with responding to commenters. But when your blog is an ongoing conversation between you and your commenters and a few other blogs, with the occasional news link, I have to wonder whether you're trying to grow your audience or hang on desperately to the one you have.

This sort of crap is why I don't read blogs to begin with--too many bloggers assume that everyone who stops by is actively fascinated with the blogger's buddies.

You really seem to be tailoring our style and even substance to please your loudest commenters, which I wouldn't have even thought possible before seeing it.

The short version: More content, fewer comments and interblog conversations.

"This sort of crap is why I don't read blogs to begin with"

Clarification--obviously, I do read blogs occasionally and even when I'm disgusted I check yours every few days. But I was checking yours more frequently during the Schiavo situation--first to correct yours (and your commenters') errors, but then I got into the habit.

Still, I read very few blogs because I only tolerate this sort of shit from friends. I really wish more of them would open discussion forums if all they want to do is talk over stuff with their friends and make a few links.

I'm not sure why this has become such a imbroglio.

By way of contrast: At Andrea Harris' site, I brought up my lack of interest in listening to The Diner project James Lileks has been doing lately.

This was extremely embarrassing for me when Lileks himself showed up in that thread in defense of The Diner.

Here's what the man didn't do: Call anyone an "internet hag," accuse anyone of toadying up to Andrea, or, why, say, copy and paste the entire comment thread at his site in order to stoke the minions.

You'd think it'd be obvious, but when it comes to entertainment, opinions vary. And the relative anonymity of the internet encourages people to express their various opinions with an absolute minimum of tact or decorum.

How people trying to build an audience for a particular project deal with those negative opinions says a lot about them. In this case, it hasn't said anything good.

I don't dislike Jeff, I don't dislike Bill, I think they're both hardworking, talented guys.

But that first thread would've petered out quick if neither of them had shown up to throw more fuel on the fire. There would have BEEN no imbroglio--just a few dissatisfied listeners blowing off steam. A few dissatisfied listeners, I should add, who were complaining about free entertainment.

If you can't let the pissant criticisms of people who're basically bitching about free ice cream roll right off you, I've got to wonder what other minutiae haunts your days.

And I don't dislike you, Ilyka, but I do notice that you are consistently showing up in the comment threads of various blogs and lecturing people on how they should and should not react to criticism. That you do so in so haughty a tone from your cherished perch atop Mount Sanctimony says much about you.

Really, what was the purpose of your comment if not to stroke yourself for being above the fray -- even as you dive headlong, unprovoked, into it?

Incidentally, I copied and pasted the comments from the original thread hear to give my readers who didn't get a chance to listen to the show live some idea of how others thought it went. Remember, Rightalk wasn't replaying it, and I didn't have access to a feed. Now that I do, I've moved those copied and pasted comments below the fold.

bullwinkle --

I used the phrase "Lone Gunman shit" to suggest that no extraordinary measures or fancy tracing equipment would be necessary to find Glenn's office number. This was not a swat at you. Though you may proceed apace with your swats at me if such a thing makes you feel better about yourself.

Ace. I would like to apologize. I was wrong, and inadvertantly, yanked your chain. I just relistened to the show, and, indeed ya'll were much further into the show. Perhaps I should be a bit more certain of which I speak, before doing such speaking. Again I'm sorry, was just trying to let you know you did in fact drop the accursed F-bomp.

Ace,

Its obvious there is a lot of professionaly jealousy being directed at you lateley. Hang it there. Its laughable that a guy who gets 1/10th your traffic is going to tell you how to blog!

I wonder if cal is as much an asshole in person as he comes across in his comments here.

What the fuck was that about?

it = in

Bad fingers!

Ilkya -

I've got to say, I am sick and tired of your haughty internet scold act. What you just considered decorous criticism on your part was actually passive-aggressive catty-bitchy-speak. And to me that's not admirable, it's repellent. For example:

If you can't let the pissant criticisms of people who're basically bitching about free ice cream roll right off you, I've got to wonder what other minutiae haunts your days.

See? When you really pay attention, that's sort of a nasty comment of the highest order, yet you don't fully commit to it, trying neatly sidestep the resulting spatter of blood. In my world, that's not worth much respect.

Furthermore, when you cricized Lileks' effort, did you say that it "sucked donkey balls?" That he was a "talentless dickweed that couldn't write his way out of a paper bag?" Did you swear and spit and curse, all over the ANGER you felt because of the poor quality of Lileks' writing? I doubt it. But if Lileks decided to enter the Octagon and call you a crappy hack with a third rate blog, who also roams the internet as a scolding harpy version of Ms. Manners for the Blog Set, could you really blame him?

As I mentioned on a previous thread, 99.9% of Ace's commenters did not bother me, mostly because my intention was distinctly different from giving them what THEY wanted and hoped for. The resulting tangle with Ace's commenters was me getting down in the mud with a slect few of the commenters, giving them back some shit for their casual, eviscerative swipes at our effort on the show. It was fun.

To sit above it all, stroking your thigh and tsk the natural brutality of comment flame wars on blogs is akin to cursing fish for swimming, dogs for barking and bears for shitting in the woods.

And extrapolating the internet exchanges (and the human instinct to respond in kind to criticism) to some sort of larger personal flaw just demonstrates what a jerk you are. It certainly doesn't assert your superiority to anyone.

See that? See how I committed?

"As I mentioned on a previous thread, 99.9% of Ace's commenters did not bother me"

Here's a little sampling of how Bill reacts to the 0.1%

1. I haven't seen you do a funny post in your entire blogging career
2. Take a moment to spit. And breathe. You are the exact type of person that we wanted to piss off with the show
3. BTW - is it unsavory carrying Ace's jock strap Disappointing
4. Just been splashing cold contrarian water on your ideological group hug and you're mad The thing is, I don't much care if
5. you say that we sucked, it's just the hostility and obsequiousness that's a bit odd. Though that also adds something to the circus ...

All of this because some of Ace's commenters had the audacity to criticize him. Your ego may or may not be large Bill but it certainly seems fragile.

Cal,

I really don't have time to give a full answer.

Here's a quick one:

Lower the hostility level. What I do with my blog, even if it includes f'ing it up, is really not your concern.

The blog has been comedy-oriented for a month. I didn't plan this. It just happened. I got sick of the news at about the same time I felt funny again. I've gone through other phases where I had no funny in me and so I just linked a lot of news stories and offered off-the-cuff opinions.

This will probably change; I'm trying to be more newsie again.

As for the blog/club thing -- can't it be both? No one is required to read the comments, after all. But sure-- I do have fun with the commenters, and they seem to have fun with each other. Who cares? You have this definitional thing that that's supposed to be what a "Forum" is for, but, whatever, then this is a blog-slash- de facto forum.

And as for all the posts yesterday about the interview-- well, had the interview gone well, there wouldn't have been multiple posts about it. It went bad -- and for a time I thought disasterously bad -- and I had my reasons for worrying about that. You don't know these reasons; you probably will soon enough.

But try not to make the mistake of thinking you know everything. You don't. No one does.

I appreciate your efforts, which I consider well-meaning, to get this blog back on what you consider "on-track," and while I share some of your concerns (getting back to news, etc.), I think your criticisms could have been phrased in a less hostile and less, um, presumptuous manner.

But we're still friends and all. And of course I appreciate your offer to make me the sort of forum you think this nonsense should occur in. And I'm probably interested in that... I just have a little bit too much on my plate right now.

But if you're serious about the forum idea, let me know if you want to actually do it, and when you can do it, how long it would take to get up and running, etc. I'm not against the idea; I think it's a good one.

No, no Brewfan -

You misunderstood my comment:

"As I mentioned on a previous thread, 99.9% of Ace's commenters did not bother me"

Here's a little sampling of how Bill reacts to the 0.1%

0.1% of the comments actually got to me, namely Rhiel's, for reasons that predate this flame war. As far as my reactions, those were CERTAINLY geared towards a higher percentage than 0.1%, no doubt. But the definition of "bother" escapes you.

This dynamic of human interaction is interesting:

Person A calls Person B a "dick" and tells them to "f off."

Person B responds by telling Person A that they are a jackass.

Suddenly, Person B is excoriated by the initial critic as being too "thin-skinned." Like this:

"HEY WHOA! WHERE DID THAT COME FROM?! I ONLY CALLED YOU A FUCKING DICK! WHAT ARE YOU, CRAZY SENSITIVE GUY OR SOMETHING?!! HOW DARE YOU CALL ME AN ASS?!!"

Person B: "No asshole, you just told me to 'f off.' What do you expect? Pardon me if I don't sit up here like Jesus on the cross."

Is this easy for you to comprehend? Or is your head so far up Ace's rear (not opining that he wants it there) that you can't hear so good?

Shall I break out Ace's anger management puppets to do a demo?

Come on, come on. Enough from all concerned. This is just dumb at this point.

The show wasn't that bad at all upon second listening. They didn't try to douche me. It just wasn't great.

Let's have enough of the squabbling.

If anyone wants to squabble, take it to the Spambot FlameWar thread. But you have to post as "Low Interest Morgage Loans" or something like that.

Seriously... everyone, please do your buddy Ace a favor and lay off JeffG and Bill.

JeffG and Bill, just do me a favor and let whatever's been said previously go.

Let's all just be cool, like little Fonzies. Correctamundo?

BTW, I realize this is not all about me. Well, for Megan it is (bless her heart). I understand that what began as an argument about the show has spiralled into personal spats having little to do with me at all.

Still-- I'm all about the love.

Let's do it. Let's have some fun. Let's have sex.

I don't take marching orders from anonymous D&D dorks, Ace. Sorry, I just don't.

Nor will I just "let it go." No, I will carry with me the scars of this experience until the day I am able to avenge them with a warm and glorious bloodletting the likes of which is seldom seen in these days of precision weaponry and Swiffer wets.

Like Inigo Montoya, I shall be -- only without the silly costume.

FEAR THE PORTENT.

Hostility? Please. If you don't like being criticized, just say so, but don't pretend that criticism is hostility.

I didn't post in an earnest attempt to help you to improve. I'm not von Kreedon. As for you abandoning the funny, don't be absurd. I'm certainly not suggesting you give up comedy.

You say that people "shouldn't read the comments". Indeed. And if you didn't commonly make posts that referred without reference to the comments section, they wouldn't even know they were supposed to. But as it is, you are now writing a blog that often assumes people read the comments and worse, care about them.

To the extent I had a larger point, it was that this far too many bloggers get caught up in the joy of having groupies. I think more bloggers should look at their front page and ask themselves what it would look like to someone who came to it for the first time. Would they be drawn in or leave thinking the blogger was an idiot because they showed up when he was in the middle of playing to his adoring fans?

But that's not the well-meaning advice of someone who knows better. You built this blog up from scratch; if you really think it works to play to the fans, then by all means. Like I said in the first place, it's not like I'm some expert giving tips to the little people.

I was telling you both that it made you look stupid--not as an honest attempt to help you to improve, but because I've never seen the need to refrain from criticism.

Again, criticism, not hostility. I wasn't aware that all comments had to be admiring, but let me know if it's a new policy.

Now, I'm checking out of this discussion. Feel free to scourge me a few times at the forum--oh, wait. You've done that a few hundred times already. (g)

Lime's new software is coming out soon. You should take a look at it. V2 thread in Meta.

"Nobody's gonna hurt anybody. We're gonna be like three little Fonzies here. And what's Fonzie like? Come ON hobgoblin, what's Fonzie LIKE?!?!"

c-c-c-cool?

You say that people "shouldn't read the comments". Indeed. And if you didn't commonly make posts that referred without reference to the comments section, they wouldn't even know they were supposed to. But as it is, you are now writing a blog that often assumes people read the comments and worse, care about them.

Uhhhh... citation? The only time I reference comments is when someone says something funny or interesting and I pull it out of the comment and put it in a post.

And yeah, once in a while I'll reference the fact that bbeck is a dork, or that JeffB has a vagina.

This has happened, oh, about... it's so hard to count... twice.

I really have no fuckin' idea what you're on, Cal. I think you wrote that jag to PW and then just sent it to me without checking to see if it was wholly applicable.

But I know you, so now I know your heels are dug in, and so I'm not really going to discuss it any further. I'll just say we'll have to agree to disagree.

"And yeah, once in a while I'll reference the fact that bbeck is a dork..."

And, really, THANK YOU for that.

:)

Later,
bbeck

To the extent I had a larger point, it was that this far too many bloggers get caught up in the joy of having groupies. I think more bloggers should look at their front page and ask themselves what it would look like to someone who came to it for the first time. Would they be drawn in or leave thinking the blogger was an idiot because they showed up when he was in the middle of playing to his adoring fans?

"The adoring Fans" = "my actual audience" = "precisely who I should be playing to."

I'm not playing to people who don't read me. And I'm not really playing to hypothetical people who might read me.

The audience is the audience. Do I wish the audience were bigger? Of course! But I'm going to just have to assume that doing what I'm doing now might attract similar sorts of new readers. I can't change my style. Well, I could, I suppose. But the style is working, if not quite as well as I might like. I can't easily abandon it to chase a hypothetical bigger audience.

Ace, are you caught up in the joy of having 'groupies?' If so, please reconcile this emotion with the results of your recent T-shirt sales.

"...if you really think it works to play to the fans, then by all means. "

Is it just me? Anybody? Bueller?

--but enough of this 24/7 Ace-love circle jerk.

I have work to do.

"The adoring Fans" = "my actual audience" = "precisely who I should be playing to."

Okay, and I swear I won't bug you any more, but on this particular issue there's quite a bit of forum research that says you're wrong.

Your "actual audience" is probably 10-20 times bigger than the number of commenters you have. Research demonstrates that readers/lurkers outnumber commenters by at least 10 to 1, often far more.

You confuse the "regulars" (who I slur with the groupie tag) with your audience. It's very easy to do, and it's a terrible idea. Never forget that the most vocal aren't the best, the most loyal, or the most desirable. They're just the most vocal. (And I count myself in that remark.)

Other than that, I disagree with your responses but like I said, I'm done. If you want to think I'm on some sort of hostility kick, go ahead.

I'll retract the hostility thing, okay? It was just a little aggressively worded, I thought. But okay, no hostility, no presumptuous.

Like I said, we're buds.

And OF COURSE my audience is bigger than my commenters. I know that.

Still, I find the comments interesting (sometimes), so I have to imagine others do too.

And I do not, as you say, assume people are reading the comments. My pieces are free-standing. I don't know what you mean by the idea that I assume people read the comments; quite frankly, I don't read them much. I give them a skim here and there, see if anything interesting or funny's being said.

"Your actual audience is probably 10-20 times bigger than the number of commentors you have"---Cal.

No shit, Shirlock! Your grasp of the amazingly obvious aspects of the INTERNETS amazes me. Thank you for revealing the man behind the curtain to all us morons, Dorothy.

You really think Ace doesn't occasionally check his site meter stats and notice that he may get 5,000 hits on a day when he only generates 500 comments throughout the same days threads?

Geez you are a pretentious twat. From now on, do us all a favor and post your "forum evangelicism" in the spambot thread. I bet you feel right at home surrounded by male enhancement products anyway.

Whoa, whoa, whoa! Simmer down, Francis. Cal is well-meaning, and a friend.

As I said-- everyone who blogs is at least slightly socially retarded.

Well meaning? Perhaps.

Pretentious twat? Absolutely.

In the vein of damming with faint praise, it wasn't COMPLETELY bad... I did enjoy putting a voice with the man. uh... awww hell.. Train.Wreck.

I like things just the way they are here.

I discovered Ace of Spades at the height of the CBS phoney memo blogswarm. At the time I was reading drier, more analytical blogs like Powerline.

But, to paraphrase Allah, political outrage gets pretty fuckin' boring after awhile. I'm right with him, which is why I appreciate a haiku flame thread thrown in with the politics once in awhile.

Better still, though, is the community Ace has built on this blog. As consistently funny as he is, sometimes the one liners in the comments are the best material of the day. I love it when he jumps in with the unwashed masses and riffs along with their game. Its indicative of a humble and fun-loving nature.

And where else can you go from cock jokes to debating constitutional law without even missing a beat?

So keep it up and keep it all, Ace - the profanity, the snark, the politics, the inside jokes, and the interaction with the commenters. The rest of the bloggers are looking for the party, but man, you are the party.

Gawd, you ass-licking, fawning groupies disgust me.
I don't even know why I come here.

I came for the hostility. I stayed for the latent homosexuality.

I think Ace should be the next Pope.

Say, can you be Pope and President at the same time? 'Cause if you can, Ace is my man!!!!!!!

Hey Ace, what's your favorite color? Is it black, like the logo? Cause that's one of my favorite colors, too!

I bet we'd be a great team. We should be friends.

You keep working on Ace, Warden.

Me...I'm LauraW's biggest fan!

After all, no one writes better haiku's than LauraW! And no one is better at "packing ships" (we all know what that means) than LauraW!

Why LauraW is the coolest, greatest, prettiest, smartest, bestest, little ray of sunshine EVAR!

And if anyone says differently, I'm delinking you.

FWIW, Ace, I agree with Cal to the extent that the self/intra-referential stuff can be overdone. Whatever the angle was over the last month, I found it less interesting than what went before. It was less incisive--or something like that, less worthwhile. I missed a few days and didn't get a lot of the sarcastic/absurd ranking humor that was going on. I guess you had to be there at the beginining--which, in part, I think was what Cal was getting at.

Jeff and Bill, I think Ikea was trying to say you guys seem to personalize a bit much. That's exactly what I thought when you started reading comments on the show. But, then again, I can't tell if the ranking is/was going on, so I'm not sure. Anyway, as you get mo pub, mo gonna luv ya and mo gonna hatecha. Goes with the territory. Deal with it--you know, if you're not really ranking just for laughs... which I can't tell... at this... juncture... cuz I'm not in on the joke... if there is one. Unless it resembles slander per se, I'd say, Rise Above. ... that is, if there's not some joke going on that I'm completely unaware of. Love Ikea for her fine furnituire.

Anyway, I don't mean to pile on. This appears solved. You guys are having a good start. Tango on.

Warning: Rant

First I want to say this is NOT directed at any individual.

WTF is up with coming to somebody's blog and saying you don't like it or it should be done a different way or whatever? I just don't get it. If you visit a blog, and you don't like it why not just STFU and go to another blog? Its that easy. Or start your own blog and do it the way you want to. But please, spare us from having to witness your anal retentive personalities. If you are somehow unable to control yourself and are absolutely compelled to make your opinion known why not put it into an email? I'm sure nobody minds a few suggestions but some of the stuff being spouted around here lately is really unecessary, IMHO.

I agree: it was a train wreck. But it was great to be able to put a voice and personality not only to you, but to Bill at INDC and Jeff at Protein Wisdom and Val at Babalublog. I read all of you guys - Ace and Jeff daily, Bill and Val occasionally.

One thing that bothered me: I thought Bill and Jeff were flippant after Val from Babalublog read his piece. It was moving when I read it, and it was moving when I heard it, and Bill and Jeff went right into 'ha-ha' mode. Really struck me as insensitive.

Val knew what was coming and enjoyed both the idea and the final segment.

Here's the thing: in a 9 minute segment, after intro and the chit chat going into breaks, you're left with maybe 7 minutes. Because Val's piece took another 2-3 to read, we recognized that we weren't going to be able to do an in-depth examination of the Cuban experience in 4 minutes; so we decided on the NPR-ish fawning piece that serves to highlight the implicit bigotry of the overly earnest interviewers.

There was really not much more to it than that. And for what it's worth, I thought it came out great.