Fully agree on paragraph two. On paragraph one, I do think certain past conduct could justify dismissal of a critic without engagement on the merits, such as a bad enough history of unfair and arguably dishonest quotations/citations.
Once you can’t trust the other dialogue partner not to do that, the conversation is over. And I dont think anyone should feel an obligation to cite-check bad work. If one has reached that point—I express no opinion as one who has generally kept a distance from Torres drama—it would be reasonable to respond only to work that had been vetted by reputable publications, or that had other legible indicia of trustworthiness.
Fully agree on paragraph two. On paragraph one, I do think certain past conduct could justify dismissal of a critic without engagement on the merits, such as a bad enough history of unfair and arguably dishonest quotations/citations.
Once you can’t trust the other dialogue partner not to do that, the conversation is over. And I dont think anyone should feel an obligation to cite-check bad work. If one has reached that point—I express no opinion as one who has generally kept a distance from Torres drama—it would be reasonable to respond only to work that had been vetted by reputable publications, or that had other legible indicia of trustworthiness.