Who's on Facebook & Twitter?

I've done a better job staying in touch with my 2nd WIFYR group than my first one. A few of us convinced several in the group to join Twitter. It's been fun and educational for me to keep tabs on their lives, but mostly it's been motivational. Since this group has withered a bit, I was wondering if perhaps you folks have moved on to Facebook and Twitter.

Here's my contact info. Please post yours in a comment. Let's try to stay in touch.

http://www.facebook.com/douglascootey
http://twitter.com/DouglasCootey - My creative stream and the one I recommend you follow. My writing centric stream. Low traffic.
http://twitter.com/SplinteredMind - A blog stream full of all the kinetic links and thoughts of my world. For some reason 820 people follow it. Mental health & politics color this stream considerably.

Pratchett Angry At Shoddy Journalism

Brandon referred to a controversy that involved J.K. Rowling and Terry Pratchett in July '05. What follows is more than you will probably ever want to know about that spat.

In essence, J.K. Rowling said she wasn't aware that she was writing fantasy, and that she wasn't a huge fan of fantasy. The interviewer used J.K. Rowling's comments to launch repeatedly into his own rants, putting down religion, putting down fantasy, elevating secularism, claiming that C. S. Lewis would have been a Death Eater had he been a character in Harry Potter, etc. Terry Pratchett took issue with the article in a letter to the Times, made a cheeky comment about J.K. Rowling's cluelessness, and journalists cherry picked his letter to sensationalize a bloody battle between two top selling English authors.

Original article: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1083935,00.html (Whether you are liberal or conservative, you will probably agree that this was not an interview as much as it was a polemic for the interviewer)

Here is Terry Pratchett's letter to the editor (or the most full excerpt available online):

'WHY IS it felt that the continued elevation of J K Rowling can only be achieved at the expense of other writers (Mistress of magic, News Review, last week)? Now we learn that prior to Harry Potter the world of fantasy was plagued with "knights and ladies morris-dancing to Greensleeves."

In fact the best of it has always been edgy and inventive, with "the dark heart of the real world" being exactly what, underneath the top dressing, it is all about. Ever since The Lord of the Rings revitalised the genre, writers have played with it, reinvented it, subverted it and bent it to the times. It has also contained some of the very best, most accessible writing for children, by writers who seldom get the acknowledgement they deserve.

Rowling says that she didn't realise that the first Potter book was fantasy until after it was published. I'm not the world's greatest expert, but I would have thought that the wizards, witches, trolls, unicorns, hidden worlds, jumping chocolate frogs, owl mail, magic food, ghosts, broomsticks and spells would have given her a clue?'

Here's the BBC article that sensationalized Terry Pratchett's response: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4732385.stm

Here's Neil Gaiman's insightful take on the kerfuffle: http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2005/07/storms-and-teacups.asp

Here is Terry Pratchett's attempt to dowse the fire: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.harry-potter/msg/c4d91c122d8d07f1

Another followup a month later: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.harry-potter/msg/f13be03e7efd5070