Recently in From our readers Category

I've been mostly absent from this site in recent weeks, while finishing up some outside writing projects. But I've bantered a bit with one of our regular commenters, Diane, here.

Diane wonders where she may have been "uncivil" in her own discourse, as she seeks to hold the feet of Friendly Fire writers to the proverbial fire. I believe it's usually a matter of perspective. When I criticize someone, I find my candor and bluntness to be refreshing, while others find me to be a jerk.

In that same sense, Diane probably thinks she's being bracingly candid when she responds to some FF writers and their arguments thusly:

you definitely need to take a Valium or something... calling you a "political analyst" is rather overstepping... you are practically foaming at the mouth.. Your mis-statements regarding government healthcare plans are mind-boggling... laughable... and pathetic.... racist ranting... stop being Enablers of Stupid... why don't you just stop your whining until you at least find something worthy to whine about.

If you watch TV "news", you see that it has degenerated into a Theater of Controversy, where boxing gloves are more mandatory than decency or intelligence. But we are a fame-based culture, and those who want to be on TV learn to adjust to politics-by-punching. For their trouble, they get money or at least notoriety.

But we don't get that here. We try to sound out our arguments, we think out loud, we test our ideas, and we occasionally get a response. But if we're told that our ideas are pathetic and laughable, or that we need Valium, please forgive us if we attempt to move on to the next issue without stopping to engage you.

I don't know why I get letters like these, but alas, I do. From today's inbox:

Chris, I am an 88 year old man and I am trying to write a book relating to global warming but I have not been able to find out what the height and position of the pollution belt is. I am very concerned about the effect the pollution is having on the Earth. I need that information because of the two possible solutions I have for eliminating the pollution belt. The first is to fly space ships through the belt with collecter devises that would pick up the pollution. I need that information because I am not sure if the space ships could fly at that elevation. My second idea is to explode an atomic bomb in the pollution and the chain reaction would destroy the pollution. BUT I do not know the height of the belt and do not know if the radiation fall out from the bomb would contaminate the Earth. I would appreciate it if you could help me in any way to find that information.

--Name withheld to protect the well-meaning but frighteningly delusional

It always amazes me when I receive letters -- sometimes including name-calling and innuendo -- that are sent from a reader's work e-mail, sometimes with their official work signature and company's logo at the bottom. Why someone wouldn't use a Yahoo or AOL account to sound off still befuddles me, because you're representing your company by sending mail on the company system. Such as an e-mail I received the other day with a full, colorful, Kaiser Permanente signature on the bottom, from a certain training coordinator out of Oakland.

"Bridget it sounds like you are speaking from personal feelings about OJ and not the facts that were found. I just believe you should keep your personal thoughts to yourself."

First of all, if columnists kept their thoughts to themselves there would be no opinion page. But I bet Kaiser Permanente also appreciates support for O.J. being voiced on their own official letterhead (or letter-bottom, as e-mail signatures and company e-mail accounts go).