Lott made himself a public person and as such forfieted his right to freedom from satire.
He also made his own research suspect by using the Mary Rosh identity.
Now if we use his books at all in debate we have to add the asterix * that he is a goof.
It doesn't matter now how good his work is (and I think it is) because he has ruined it for himself and us.
I have no pity for the man. Let him fight his own rear guard action.
Buzz
"Freedom from satire" is one thing. A mechanism based on deception to harvest email addresses is quite another. Ask any lawyer.
Yes, the Mary Rosh bit was odd, but Lott's claim to using this ID in order to garner unbiased responses to his work has validity. Sounds like you've bought the media hype comparing Lott to Bellesiles hook, line and sinker.
If you think all of this has "ruined his work", as you put it, that's your perogative. Many of us are not so quick to give up, or worse, turn on our own, as you seem to be.
I don't see Lott asking for pity, and yes, he is certainly grown up enough to fight his own battles. A good thing, too, since depending on support from folks like you is obviously a no-go.
Cheers,
Lott made himself a public person and as such forfieted his right to freedom from satire. This is identity theft, not satire. The Rosh stuff was regrettable, but no one has yet found any fraud in the actual work, something the anti-Constitutionalists want to distract you from with a lot of smoke and mirrors (successfully in your case, it would seem). Even their attempts to smear him based on his claim of a hard drive crash destroying some survey work has come back and bit them in the ass as a) colleagues have verified the crash story and b) others have replicated the results Lott claimed for that survey. Ironically, the libs attempt to smear him resulted in further research that strengthened his claimes.