This site is about compiling information, and I'm willing to reference a wide range of sources as long as they've got something useful. I might not link to them directly, but I'm never going to hide things from my readers just because I don't like the source for one reason or other.

Dan Riehl isn't like that. He recently deleted a comment I left at his site that provided background information that his readers would probably find useful. That comment, and a previous one that was silently edited, is below. And, the first comment - while anti-Riehl - was also generally supportive of his position. In my case, if someone left a comment here along the same lines, I'd swallow my pride and put getting you information (far) ahead of trying to save face.

In Dan Riehl's case, his ego is apparently more important to him than getting information to his readers. And, because he's willing to delete comments that provide additional information, you can't trust anything he writes. He could post something false or incomplete, and then simply delete comments pointing out how he's wrong or not providing the full picture. He has, in effect, disabled fact-checking on his posts. That means that you'll need to fact-check every single thing he writes yourself, and you'll also need to research the topics about which he writes to make sure that he's giving you the full picture.

Here's the first comment. Yes, it's aggressive. Yes, it's designed to make Dan Reel, Glenn Reynolds (who linked to him at pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/94909), and other rightwing bloggers look bad. Yes, it's self-promotional and self-aggrandizing. But, it has additional information that serves the general goal of discrediting the Coffee Party. To Dan Riel, other concerns have a higher priority:

From riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2010/03/
annabel-park-from-netroots-nation-to-coffee-parties.html

-----BEGIN------------------
OK, so she's a political activist/filmmaker who's friendly with an actor (who now works at the WH) and who has some sort of link to DailyKos.

So?

Meanwhile, I've been aware of her since November 2007; in April 2008 I discussed how one of her videos failed to disclose that the person featured in the video worked for a company that had a financial interest in what he promoted. I also discussed their new effort on February 13:

https://24ahead.com/s/9500-liberty

P.S. The person whose link she didn't disclose is - like some teaparty leaders - part of the general Kochtopus. He, the partiers, the Koctopus, and Park are all basically on the same side on that one very vital and fundamental issue. The two "parties" have at least one thing in common, and many will agree that's not a good thing when they find out what the issue is.
-----END------------------

Whatever fault anyone wants to raise with that comment, it provides information that Riehl is not providing. And, instead of encouraging the free flow of information to serve a higher goal, Riehl shuts it off.

Here's an earlier comment that Riehl silently edited, followed by another comment I left discussing what Riehl did to this comment, followed by the latter comment as edited (again) by Riehl. All are from:
riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2010/02/
never-marry-a-cambridge-ma-shrink-and-go-to-a-tea-party-event.html

-----BEGIN------------------
How "mentally disturbed" is he, in the tea party sense? For instance, they keep calling themselves "patriots", implying - as he does - that those on the other side are traitors. Some of the rest is stock tea party/glenn beck frothing. If you think he's "mentally disturbed", are you saying that the many obvious nutcases in the tea parties are OK?

And, some of the things he wrote are just a couple small steps up from past tea party activities, such as swarming and physically intimidating politicians. The last was promoted by Glenn Reynolds and someone from RedState (Jim Geraghty of NR promoted something similar):

https://24ahead.com/n/9269

The attempt to claim that he's not near the mainstream of the tea party movement? Fail.
-----END------------------

After Riehl edited that comment, I left this:
-----BEGIN------------------
Dan Riehl silently edited my comment to delete the link before the last line. I have a whole category just for people who do such things, and I guess I'll have to add him to it if it doesn't stick the second time. Here's the link about Reynolds supporting swarming politicians:

https://24ahead.com/n/9269
-----END------------------

Here's how Dan Reihl edited the second comment
-----BEGIN------------------
Dan Riehl silently edited my comment to delete the link before the last line. I have a whole category just for people who do such things, and I guess I'll have to add him to it if it doesn't stick the second time. Here's the link about Reynolds supporting swarming politicians:

(Ed note) And I have a category for people who only come here and link particular links on their own sites - which is all you ever do. I left your comment up - your url is clickable via your name. So deal with it. Or I'll just delete the entire comment next time. - DR.
-----END------------------

At least he's a man of his word, even if what he says isn't true. Another recent comment at riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2010/02/
the-war-against-okeefe-breitbart-et-al.html contains no link other than the standard identifier and doesn't direct the reader to any page at this site.

And, the bottom line is that he's keeping information from his readers. You can disagree with my methods and my style, but you can't disagree with the basic fact that Riehl puts other concerns ahead of making sure that his readers get all the information he knows about.

As a glance at any of the thousands of entries here will show, that's not how I do things.