It's sad that these sorts of responses are necessary. You'd think journalists would avoid such behavior, but you only start to notice it if you've been in the press.
Typically, resorting to misquoting and misconstruing only happens if a good counterargument to one's actual views can't be found. So I take it as an indicator of good (and possibly controversial) thinking if someone feels forced to respond in this manner.
Sam Harris has become quite experienced at handling this sort of attack, although he's had to spend significant time doing so.[1][2] Any victims of misconstruing might want to follow his style.
Typically, resorting to misquoting and misconstruing only happens if a good counterargument to one's actual views can't be found. So I take it as an indicator of good (and possibly controversial) thinking if someone feels forced to respond in this manner.
Sam Harris has become quite experienced at handling this sort of attack, although he's had to spend significant time doing so.[1][2] Any victims of misconstruing might want to follow his style.
1. http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/on-the-mechanics-of-defam...
2. http://www.samharris.org/site/full_text/response-to-controve...
Note: I made a similar comment on the flagkilled version of this article, but I figured I'd respond here since it seems to be the canonical thread.