"I'm genuinely sorry about the stir I've inadvertently caused, but it's primarily the result of a lot of things I've said or done being taken out of context, being liberally interpreted, with motives applied to me that never existed. People responding to my posts have picked and chosen what to believe—they believe what confirms their suspicions, ignore what doesn't, and continue to ascribe weird motives to the fictional version of how I do my job. Setting stories pre-Season One just to get Spike out of the book? You've got to admit that's a bizarre leap for someone to have made, right?"

The thing is after looking at what went on on those Slay alive threads just now, I have to say that I find it odd that a professional editor finds it necessary to come onto (of all places) a fan forum and try and readdress what he thinks in an unbalanced view of his approach to certain characters. Because when a person does that, are they not going to leave themselves open to criticism about their beliefs that they may not want to hear? In an environment where heated debate can often end up being the norm?

After reading his reply to you I'm sure he had perfectly good intentions, and I applaud him for replying to you so quickly (many people wouldn't have of done that's for sure), but as a damage limitation exercise I don't believe it worked as well as it could have really.