I'm not the one who called it ugly.

I'm just pointing out that you either forgot your own comment, or were using a weird rhetorical trick where you pretend that the other commenter was calling the blog ugly, instead of the article.

> were using a weird rhetorical trick where you pretend that the other commenter was calling the blog ugly, instead of the article.

There's an irony of seeing this behavior mixed in with comments about how Scott's language "uses associations" in a harmful way.

I was making the point and deleted it because of the kind of misrepresentation that you just made. I was making a point about vague and emotionally charged language and you took it in a negative direction. So I deleted the message to prevent further associations and misrepresentations of what I said.

> I was making the point and deleted it because of the kind of misrepresentation that you just made.

Convenient, rather than modify it to clarify the vagueness you instead deleted it. Now no one can see for themselves what the evidence was, only take your word for it.