From this piece by Glenn Greenwald, we learn the following (all emphasis added):
Furthering his justifications for publishing the home addresses of the Enemy de jour, ["Instapundit" Glenn] Reynolds added an Update to his original post and said this:
As usual, Glenn Greenwald is clueless . . . . why is your publishing of my email different, exactly, from the "thuggish" tactics you condemn? Grow up.
Reynolds is referring here to two posts I have written in the past regarding blatant falsehoods or hypocricies contained in posts of his which he refused to address, and I therefore encouraged readers to e-mail him asking him to respond. The reason I know his e-mail address is because he publishes it prominently on his blog. The last time I did this was to point out that Reynolds' post on the Virginia Democratic Senate primary contained multiple factual errors, and by encouraging readers to e-mail him, he was finally forced to respond, and did so by retracting two separate false statements he made in his posts.
So make sure you understand Instawanker's position: encouraging others to e-mail a publicly-available figure to ask simply for clarification is nothing more than the act of a thug and a bully. Hang on ... what's this?
Joel Johannesen says:
Also: I don’t answer for Barbara Kay —and she doesn’t spend her vacation time reading your comments at PTBC. So as I already suggested, write to her through the National Post in order to get the much needed answers to your inquiries.
I believe the appropriate expression here would be "friendly fire."
AMUSING AFTERSNARK: I am moderately amused by the sentiment recently expressed in comment 39 at that comments section:
Please black list CC, he is a moonbat.
Note well that my entire contribution to that comments section (indeed, my sum total of comments to that web site overall) was exactly two comments:
 Since I’ve apparently been blacklisted from this site without ever having posted a comment here previously, I’ll take a shot at posting a link to my response to this article using a tiny URL.
 And in all this excitement, I notice that neither Joel nor Barbara addressed the points made by myself and another commenter early on—that at least two of Kay’s quotes seem to be grossly distorted and misleading.
Anyone planning on dealing with that? Joel?
In short, based on a total of three sentences that contained absolutely no vulgarity, no profanity, no name-calling and which clearly and cogently set out my position, the recommendation is that I be barred from any further participation.
The word "whiny" doesn't even begin to do this justice, does it?