That's fine.
As I said, my only real beef is with the perpetuation of the idea that "
these books are mostly more crap than the crappiest of
these books" contributes much of anything to any discussion. Nobody reads for the crap, and very, very few choose blindly. So why bring it up at all? We all have filters, and pointing the size of the crap pile would only be relevant to someone who doesn't. *shrug*
EDIT: ...and for the record, I don't consider myself pro-self-publishing. There's only a handful of self-published titles I've read--and even fewer that I've liked. But I do consider myself staunchly anti-anti-self-publishing. Mostly because I always prefer to leave myself completely open to being pleasantly surprised. I find it ... pleasant.
