I misunderstood: I thought you meant I had called someone a name here in the comments. In my linked article I tried to lend some support to Maisel, whom Gruber had obscenely attacked, repeatedly calling him a "dick", by saying "If Maisel is a 'dick,' then John Gruber is a scumbag". You are welcome to characterize this as "calling people names", but I think that's an odd characterization. In the article I supply plenty of supporting evidence for "scumbag", which I nevertheless entomb in a contingent clause.

"presuming that he dug for dirt instead of maybe following conversations": I presumed nothing; he himself linked to the article that I claim he used disingenuously. He told us where he got the "dirt".

I notice that you don't seem to try to defend your other claims, but I'm having some trouble making grammatical sense out of a few of your comments. You seem to be complaining that my writing is "muddled", but I can't be sure, because the very sentence where you are trying to do that is a syntactical trainwreck.

I thought you might have had a point about me not being on topic, but the upvotes on the comments you are complaining about give me some reassurance.