In fairness, I live to rail against the behemoth. I've got a rich streak of idealism, and I can see the value in iconoclasm. At the same time, controversy over

In fairness, I live to rail against the behemoth. I've got a rich streak of idealism, and I can see the value in iconoclasm. At the same time, controversy over substance feels like the cheap way to have a conversation. It feels exploitative, instead of virtuous. I find more enjoyment in, say, Paul Graham's measured, thoughtful approach to a subject. It feels like I'm reading someone who respects me and respects the conversation he is joining. It's entirely possible to voice powerful disagreement without being inflammatory. If 37signals wants to be the Howard Stern of tech blogging, that's an entirely reasonable position. It can be entertaining to watch and I'm sure it's fun to write. It's just not for me.