Since starting @ArcDigi, one of the hardest tightropes I've had to walk has had to do with the fact that I'm (a) extremely opinionated and at times very confrontational in the realm of ideas, and I'm also (b) running the most genuinely pluralistic commentary site online.

At times, (a) complicates the smooth functioning of (b).

Not in terms of *my* dispositions—it's not like, after a disagreement, I suddenly stop wanting to platform a particular perspective. But it complicates things by making *others* think I'm inhospitable to their views.

It's actually rather frustrating how artificially opposed (a) and (b) are. The two things—an opinionated EIC and a panoramic commentary shop—*can* coexist quite well. Like, they don't *have* to be in tension.

Part of the reason they are is because EICs for sites like mine are expected to exhibit a kind of placid moderation in all things. Don't say anything even in the neighborhood of edgy! Don't signal anything that is too spicy!

There's wisdom there. But may not work for everyone.

I want to give an example, both to my followers and to our readers, of how this doesn't meaningfully affect my ability to carry forward the Arc project.

Here I am the other day rejecting—rather colorfully, I might add—a tweet made by @josh_hammer. https://twitter.com/bernybelvedere/status/1245013245481701377?s=20

And here is Arc publishing an article that very much agrees with Hammer's perspective in the tweet I criticized. And not only that, but retweeting Hammer's endorsement of it. https://twitter.com/josh_hammer/status/1247316430183415812?s=20