Since starting @ArcDigi, one of the hardest tightropes I& #39;ve had to walk has had to do with the fact that I& #39;m (a) extremely opinionated and at times very confrontational in the realm of ideas, and I& #39;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& #39;s not like, after a disagreement, I suddenly stop wanting to platform a particular perspective. But it complicates things by making *others* think I& #39;m inhospitable to their views.

It& #39;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& #39;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& #39;t say anything even in the neighborhood of edgy! Don& #39;t signal anything that is too spicy!

There& #39;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& #39;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">https://twitter.com/bernybelv...

And here is Arc publishing an article that very much agrees with Hammer& #39;s perspective in the tweet I criticized. And not only that, but retweeting Hammer& #39;s endorsement of it. https://twitter.com/josh_hammer/status/1247316430183415812?s=20">https://twitter.com/josh_hamm...