The story continues. I just received this reply from the writer:
Sounds right to me, Rob.Therefore, in the future, I will continue to rely upon your system of publishing rules, judgments, etc.,It seems to be working just fine.I submit, then you either accept or reject.Sounds like a winner to me.Again, it's a mistake for folks to take this stuff personally - I don't.Keep up the good work - even though I personally don't approve of your policy, it is after all, your policy, not mine.A note to the editor who rejected my piece:I write what I want because it contains the message I want to say. Simple.If I wanted to write a love note to Hillary, I would have whispered sweet nothings to her. I didn't.If I wanted to operate within the bounds of what I perceive to be OpedNews' policy - I would have - but I didn't.I sought to be fairly offensive to the Clinton's and their supporters: Mission accomplished.Probative value? Of course the article possesses informational value.That's the beautiful thing about America, I have the right to submit and you have the right to reject.Lovely.
I copied the editor with the comment, "another reason to like (this writer,) in spite of (this writer's) rough edges."
A nice, satisfying wrap to an email exchange that could have gone in a very different direction.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
