You know, after all my frothing at the mouth last week, I have to give the Googleholes guy a lot of credit for being pretty good and open-minded about answering critics on his own weblog, where he looks a lot better than he did at Slate. I think he and the people who were most critical (like, um, me) did eventually come to a better understanding of what ticked people off about that article to begin with. I remain unconvinced that it was MSN-based corporate hoohah, I just don't agree with him about the significance of his findings. But as I said, he's been pretty good about listening to critics.