I'm sure a little time away probably gave you some perspective about the hurt feelings. First, it's probable the Times simply missed your blog (there are a lot of them out there, and I doubt anyone there is really assigned with keeping tabs), and the publication meant no offense. I don't know how these things work, but I suspect they would have gladly added you to the blogroll if you had requested. I don't check that page very often, but it looks like there have been some additions to the list.
With respect to the Post story, lots of blogs weren't mentioned and lots of bloggers weren't interviewed. Federal Baseball wasn't mentioned, and Svrluga never interviewed me. That's just the way it goes, and it's no real slight. He never even hinted the article was meant to be comprehensive. Svrluga is writing for a broader audience, and he made a wise move to frame the story the way he did. It was much more readable than giving a laundry list of blogs and asking guys like me about the latest in statsy goodness.
When it comes down to it, we're fans who like to write. That's a great thing. But it's a dangerous thing is the activity becomes too all-encompassing in any direction. I'm in the process of giving up my blog; I just can't do it anymore. Things come, and things go. Circle of life.
Washington Times sucks anyway. It's a terrible paper.
I am really glad that you're enjoying better health and have returned to blogging. I certainly missed your commentary, and I'm sure that other of your regular readers did, as well.
I admire your candor in expressing how you dealt with having your feelings hurt. I'm sure that it was not an easy thing to admit so publicly.
I disagree with "king" about the quality of The Washington Times, as it's my favorite newspaper, but I certainly share the feelings that he expressed about The Beltway Boys having been his favorite blog prior to your prolonged absence. I'm definitely looking forward to more of what you have to say from now on.
Links to this post: