You know, I never noticed names of authors on AI until Dilger came along. Then I noticed there were lots of posts that, surprise, sounded like that RoughlyDrafted guy. Guess what?
I don't really read AI like I would, say, The New Yorker. But you know, touche to you or whatever. ;)
What's painful is watching you show the world how clueless you are. His name is in the byline of the original article:
Oh, touche for you too, I guess. See, here's the deal: I don't really care who the author is unless the stuff is operatively different from what I expect. You don't have to read the byline. It's called tmesis.
Guess I should have been more clear (and I'll facepalm myself if either of you meant what you wrote literally): It's obviously not like figuring out the author's penname takes any sleuthing. Rather, I usually skip the author's name, since I generally don't really care who it is, as long as it's up to AI's usual standards. I'm just reading this stuff quickly during lunch or after work or whatever. If I notice a clear break from genre, I'll occasionally bother to go back and check for a name. It's like the Sesame Street chestnut, "Which one of these things is not like the other?" In Dilger's case, imo, ianal, ymmv, the break from expectations is for the worse. /shrug You can disagree. No big deal. Just thought I'd let the other guy know I, too, believe this is RoughlyDrafted style material.
As the OP to this thread of posts said, Dilger's composition here is better suited to RoughlyDrafted than what I usually see at AI. I'd rather see the source change than have to notice the byline.
Got it? ;^D
Edited by rufwork - 9/27/12 at 8:57am