All for the nookie

Reader “Jim” doesn’t like that I have password-protected posts. Heavens!

What intrigues me is that after you’ve openly discussed having sex at a swinger’s club, what aspects of one’s life might warrant a password protected post. After some thought, I’ve concluded the two go hand in hand. If I wanted to share a private thought with friends, I’d send an email. Heck, I might even pick up a phone. But if I were an exhibitionist, I’d do the blog-equivalent of “I’ve got a secret.”

You got a sweet theory, boy!

I emailed him:

I was going to respond to your rather nebulous post about me on your blog, but since you don’t have comments, I can’t. There’s a lesson in there about glass houses and stones, I think. If I cared enough to bother playing such a game, that is.

Sorry if you don’t like the password protected thing, but oh well, it’s my blog. It’s amusing to me that you think going to a sex club is OMG TEH MOST PRIVATE PERSONAL THING EVAR!!!!1!1! - as if real people’s real lives aren’t actually much more complicated than that. Perhaps for your next trick, you could post your full medical records?

Anyway, kisses, and thanks for being a fan. In the interest of transparency, I’ll be sure to blog this email, as well.

This is now completely recursive.

Speaking of the IRS…

How is this not illegal?

The IRS is quietly moving to loosen the once-inviolable privacy of federal income-tax returns. If it succeeds, accountants and other tax-return preparers will be able to sell information from individual returns - or even entire returns - to marketers and data brokers.

The change is raising alarm among consumer and privacy-rights advocates. It was included in a set of proposed rules that the Treasury Department and the IRS published in the Dec. 8 Federal Register, where the official notice labeled them “not a significant regulatory action.”

What the..???