I just sent her a comment - focused entirely on her hostility - I wonder if she will post it. I questioned whether she used to experiment on live animals when she was little. I think she's got a real problem. I would never hire anyone like that.
To be effective on that particular blog, comments have to be purely science-based and avoid getting dragged into discussions of the offensive comments; discussion of the latter seems to be highly counter-productive there from what I've seen, most of the posters are interested only in the science
I'm not so sure about that, tried posting science comments once or twice and no interest from her or anyone. Btw her science knowledge leaves a lot to be desired. Either that or she was deliberately lying (pretending to be ignorant) to get her mean points across. Meaning that trying to debate her on anything scientific would in all probability turn out to be a waste of time.
To clarify my point: I'm not saying that actually debating the science with her is going anywhere (the other readers/posters/cohort of imaginary friends seem to know nothing and contribute nothing on the science, presumably because they know nothing about it by definition, given that they're there in the first place). I'm just saying that one or two highly selective and high quality science-based rebuttals go a long way to making the whole page more helpful to us in the eyes of anyone who stumbles across it. Arguments, insults and complaining about her unpleasant nature does us no favours because she just thrives on that and ends up painting us in a bad light. It's important that a good quality scientific counter position is presented on threads like these (there normally is at least one, from what I've seen), for the neutrals and uninformed who stumble across these pages; her google ratings do seem to be pretty high...
Their little write up about how they pick their bloggers:
We believe in providing our bloggers with the freedom to exercise their own editorial and creative instincts. We do not edit their work and we do not tell them what to write about.
We have selected our 80+ bloggers based on their originality, insight, talent, and dedication and how we think they would contribute to the discussion at ScienceBlogs. Our role, as we see it, is to create and continue to improve this forum for discussion, and to ensure that the rich dialogue that takes place at ScienceBlogs resonates outside the blogosphere.
At a time when public interest in science is high but public understanding of science remains weak, we have set out to create innovative media ventures to improve science literacy and to advance global science culture.