Neyer said no such thing, and he does read Primer/Repoz.

I have occasionally criticized bloggers for NOT doing what Rob did yesterday.  One of the advantages blogs have over other forms of media is that the writers can engage in friendly debate and disagreements. 

I have felt, perhaps unfairly, that baseball bloggers are happy to take down a print reporter but don’t mention other bloggers or like-minded internet writers except to link to them and agree with them.  I tend not to trust people who agree with anyone (especially me) all the time.

The next (first?) blogger who writes the words “Joe Posnanski was wrong today when he wrote ...” will have my respect.  I say this as a big JoePo fan, which is sort of my point.

Oh no, I am not suggesting anyone should be ripping anyone a new one.  I think the free-form nature of the internet has tended to make people equate “disagreement” with some snarky takedown.  I am not advocating a civil war.  I am just suggesting that there is more value-added if the linker differentiates his opinion from the linked writer, rather than just saying “you go, Joe.”  Something more like, “I disagree with Joe’s views on Fonzie’s relationship with Mrs. Cunningham.  Sure some of it was a longing for the mother he never had, but there was much more too it than that.”

And I only mentioned Posnanski because he is so good.

I do think Rob was a bit too snarky in his critcism.  Another commentor on Rob’s post noted that Rob may have been tongue-in-cheek in his comments, but that stuff is notoriously difficult to communicate in written form.