I didn't read the About page, I read this article. If I'd known that, would I have not been "quite so much of a jerk," to quote myself? Probably. But "that this

I didn't read the About page, I read this article. If I'd known that, would I have not been "quite so much of a jerk," to quote myself? Probably. But "that this ends with a suggestion that people pay for this writing" is still something of a sticking point: if I was writing in a language I wasn't fluent in, I would be very hesitant to ask people to give me money based on the strength of my writing. If you decide that such a standard is unreasonable of me and that I'm still an English imperialist or whatever, I'll take the L, I guess. However, when you rather archly tell me > Make arguments against what they wrote, not who they are. I will respond: I did. The vast majority of my arguments were against what they wrote. I took a couple pot shots at how they wrote it. I don't know who they are, and certainly didn't argue against that either way. > A little kindness also goes a long way. Does that apply only to critics of the article and not the article itself? Because I don't think you can call the author's tone "kind" by any measure.