I find it utterly hilarious the protestations from the paid and formerly paid partisans that their affiliation with Brown has had absolutely no influence on their opinions.

Let's put it this way, if Jake from the Sheets were posting on this or any other board would you cut him the same slack you are asking your readers to cut HP, Mandown and God knows who else saddles up in the morning wearing their Thorograph silks?

But let's take HP and Mandown at your word. You still had an obligation to disclose your relationship to TG so that others could make their own decisions about your credibility. If you ever read a story on a web site or watch a piece of news where there is an ownership overlap -- say MSNBC when it covered the Microsoft anti-trust trial -- there is always a disclaimer posted, just so people know. Even investment bankers, the most amoral group of individuals ever to exist, now have to disclose investment banking relationships in their analyst reports. Why? Because you need to avoid an 'appearance of impropriety'.

If you worked for the guy, then a reasonable reader could conclude that you either had a stake in the outcome of the argument, an inherent bias, or both. And you do not get to decide whether it's relevant or not, Jerry. That's for us to decide.