Ok, lets try and keep this simple.
As far as I'm aware nobody "is needing back up for a perspective they voiced"
You and Pete Smith exchanged views on Dave Godin. Pete suggested that you start a thread about Dave's writing style which appeared to be the main crux of your annoyance.
A thread was not forthcoming, so I started one.
I said "discuss" and offered my opinion that I found his writing style impenetrable at times.
With me so far?
Other people have passed comment - that's what happens on threads. It just doesn't come down to a yes or no. People express opinions, people offer counter opinions and so it goes.
I haven't read everthing that Dave Godin wrote, but what I did read and can remember was often unnecessarily wordy in the context of what was being written about.
But you know that's just my opinion, a bit like yours but different.
You seem to be angry that anybody should level any form of criticism at Dave Godin because he was a wonderful human being etc, but why should I not have the right to agree with Pete Smith's initial comments about his writing style? He was a journalist was he not? Does that make him beyond reproach, journalistic wise?
You want a deeper debate and maybe others will take you up on that.
Me, I haven't got much more to say because it seems that you don't want any alternative views on anything.