Salon shitlibs laughing.
On the one hand, excessive feuding is not good. On the other hand, this blog (as well as "Richard Lynn's Pseudoscience") does critique certain individuals, and thus could be seen as part of the problem. On the other hand as well, a degree of healthy disagreement is useful; one would not want the "movement" to prematurely coalesce around wrong memes.
A balance needs to be found. Nietzsche wrote that his critiques of individuals were not personal (*), but that he intended to use the person in question as a lens of sort, to focus attention on that individual's ideas, which is what Nietzsche really wanted to attack.
So, there are memes I see as worthy of criticism, including but not limited to: HBD cognitive elitism, mainstreaming, "game" as an end and not as a means, ethnonationalism and subracialism elevated to the top of the activist priority list, economics over race, affirmative action in the "movement," esoteric traditionalism, pseudoscience, cocksure incompetence, anti-White trolling, hypocrisy and mendacity, data cherry picking, invented racial histories, straw man attacks on Salterism, proximate interests elevated over ultimate interests, non-Whites (including Jews) and race-mixers infiltrating the "movement" and distorting it.
Individuals promoting those destructive memes I see as fair game for criticism, as long as the criticism is motivated by those ideas, and not by personal animus. "Personal" critiques are either tongue-in-cheek and not meant to be taken seriously (**), or merely quoting the person in question (***). Or, for example, the Sen-Vallone question is directly relevant to motivations in dividing Europeans against each other.
Purely personal criticisms should be avoided. Whether one person is (actually, not jokingly) homosexual (as long as that doesn't significantly influence their ideology in a negative fashion), or ugly, or sickly, or merely with a personality that you may like or dislike - that should not be a relevant issue. Public feuding over personal, private disagreements accomplishes nothing except giving the Salonites grist for their mill.
*He may have been deluded about that, re: Wagner, but let us take him at his word for the moment.
**For example, obviously the heterosexual womanizer Roissy does not have a "homoerotic fixation" on Trump; that's a joke meant to illustrate a point about the "man on white horse" syndrome.
***Derbyshire himself admitted that his relationship with his wife is characterized by his "measured groveling." That is a self-admission that illustrates his - in my opinion - attitudes toward White-Asian relations.