A Questionnaire for Readers

Thanks for visiting this blog. I think I speak for my co-blogger, Mylan Engel, when I say that we enjoy writing in it. I have some questions for you. First, who are you? You don't have to give your name, obviously, although you may. Are you a professor? If so, of what, and where? Are you a student? If so, studying what, and where? Second, how did you get to this blog? How often do you visit? Third, what would you like to see in the blog? Interviews with people involved in the animal-rights movement? Philosophical commentary on current events? Short essays? Links to news items that deal with animals? Book (or article) reviews? Recipes? Any feedback that you can provide us is appreciated. We aim to please (within limits, of course)! As for how to provide such feedback, I prefer the comment section. I have to moderate the comments in order to keep the nuts and creeps away. Believe me, if I didn't, it would be ugly. It's quick and easy to register and post a comment, so please do. Other readers may find your answers interesting.

Addendum: There are many types of blog, but I think the original idea of blogs ("weblogs") was to encourage interaction between those who write them and those who read them. Some bloggers don't allow comments. Some allow comments without moderation. Some allow only moderated comments. This is one of the latter. It's unfortunate that I have to put up any barriers to readers, but if I didn't, there would be abusive posts. I know this from experience. I promise to approve all comments that are civil. By "civil," I mean not just respectful in tone, but addressed to the substance of people's claims rather than to the people who make those claims. Suppose I make an argument. I'm doing two things. First, I'm making one or more claims (my premises). Second, I'm claiming that some further claim (my conclusion) follows from those claims. If you think my premises are false, say so and cite your evidence. If you think my conclusion doesn't follow from my premises, say so and explain why. Leave me out of it. Think of the argument as a free-floating entity. That I (Keith) made the argument is irrelevant.