If you're looking for entertainment and can't find the latest episode of Ultimate Fighting Championship on your cable menu, you might consider hopping over to The Iron Rod to read Lou Midgley's response to Roasted Tomatoes' rebuttal to Lou Midgley's FARMS Review review of Grant Palmer's book An Insider's View of Mormon History. Midgley's post is actually fairly restrained; the punching and kicking doesn't really pick up until the commenters enter the cage. Allow me to give a blow-by-blow commentary on the match.
Midgley's response pegs out at just under 11,000 words. That is longer than some short novels. Only a professional can produce such an outpouring. Mere bloggers can't generally manage more than a few paragraphs (and those who do generally shouldn't). Even RT's post, mind-numbingly long by blog standards, only managed about 2500 words.
Anyway, the dispute centers around Palmer's earlier use of "Paul Pry" as a pseudonym and what impact that has on his analysis of ETA Hoffman's The Golden Pot as a possible source for some features of the story of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon. I think Midgley scores some points showing the choice of "Paul Pry" was not likely as innocent as Palmer elsewhere maintains. But he could have used John Doe and the substance of Insider's View wouldn't have been any different. Ideally, the book stands or falls on its merits, not the credibility of the author. Credibility counts for something, of course. I'm just not sure how it should factor in when evaluating an author's book.
It's too bad RT's post and the Midgley response revolved around the Hoffman tale. It seemed like the weakest part of Palmer's book.