[scoot]

> calling it 'fluff' is surely the mildest of sassy descriptions, no?

On the contrary, "fluff" suggests that the piece has nothing to offer outside of the source material.

[plaguepilled]

Nah, it just suggests that some of the article is superfluous, which I stand by.

Like I said a comment or two up, its a good article, but doesn't contain enough of the meat.