User talk:80.41.92.62

Lawrence Miles
Hi David:

My difficulty with the Lawrence Miles edits was that it seemed to be whitewashing the controversies that he stirred up with his negative reviews. My apologies for reverting more than that - I see now that there were additional edits. My only defence is that when I see it is an anonymous IP is tend to assume malicious intent. In any case, I have restored your edits and retained the parts about the controversy. Do consider getting yourself a Wikipedia account; it's always easier to trust someone if there's a name attached to the edits, if you know what I mean. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 12:43, 9 July 2006 (UTC) Hi

Not sure how to reply to you ... but I have an account now :)

I wasn't trying to whitewash, but I felt that to define a writer through one piece of controversy was perhaps doing him a disservice ... It also suggests he posts negative things to cause a reaction which I don't think is true. He's also posted a lot more besides this and I know if it were me, then I'd wonder at the veracity of a biography which seemed skewed in this way. But I accept that the controversy was there which is why I described him as controversial. Note that his website has a new addy now - www.beasthouse.co.uk which should be the more-permanent home for his blog and so on for the next few years at least.

Thanks for explaining, appreciated. And I wonder if you might consider revising back the whole 'controversy' paragraph as it was over a year ago now and somehow fades into the background against all the immense praise that his ABOUT TIME series is generating (and there's not a mention of this in there). Balance is good I feel.

All the best

David