Hmmm....let's see. I've been called

Quack
Fraud
Nutjob
Cult Leader
Delusional
Self Impressed
Control Freak

For good stuff....

Well, if I took the time to write down all the superlatives it would crash your computers to just open this post, so I won't bore you with them ;-)

The best stuff is being called

Partner.

Trudi:
As for the bad stuff, ditto. But it's mostly come from wannabe writers who weren't good enough to be published or from jealous colleagues.
As for the good stuff: I don't like gloating. It isn't polite.

Eddie:
Any praise you've gotten is well deserved. You have mastered an easily readable style with just the right touch of humor. Now push some editor off his/her butt and get it into circulation.

This is a little off topic but it must always be remembered that the writer doesn't always have the final say over the printed word. There are 'good' editors and 'terrible' editors. I've learned, since being published, not to be overly critical of a published piece as a reflection of the author's talent. Some editors (by no means most) take the soul out of a piece of writing. I'd reserve an opinion on a writer's style until I've read at least two works that have been edited by different individuals. Newspapers, for example, are notorious for cutting off the final paragraph of an article...a paragraph that might have made an otherwise incoherent piece suddenly come together as a coherent gem of witty writing.

When it comes to garden writing one way to avoid content criticism is to use qualifying adjectives and adverbs. Don't write in absolutes. Use words such as 'usually', 'better' 'often', etc. and avoid words such as 'can't' and 'never'. Some folks get great pleasure in tripping up a writer and if you write that a certain plant can never be grown in your zone then some reader or critic will crow at how their great aunt 'so and so' grew one for years behind the shed.

The bottom line is to listen to criticism and accept the praise or fault in perspective. Is it sctually your writing in print or the writing of an over zealous editor? Or the reverse...are you getting praise for a finished work that was made ship shape and entertaining by an editor?

I've learned to turn as 'clean' a copy as possible in to the editor. I pay close attention to the word count, voice, etc. If I get some negative feedback then I want to make sure it is deserved.

A note: I've even noted on this forum that my message doesn't always appear as I wrote it in the text box. Paragraphs sometimes end up running together, etc. Even he little electronic editor in the magic box likes to have a part in the final writing.

A reviewer once said of one of my books that the writing was not up to the standard of my previous book, which was one of his all-time favorites.
An editor once forwarded to me two reviews of a journal article. One of the reviewers said it was totally unbelievable and should not be published. The other suggested one change: use "it" instead of "he" in a passing reference to a bird.

There are pedants in every profession -- even among reviewers.

(A reviewer of my first book said I shouldn't have been allowed to write it because I'd lived in the area for only eight years.)

Oh, Eddie:
Don't you think it's time to wake up your Blog? Every time I check it's still dozing away.

Thanks, I needed that.
You are absolutely correct, I do need to add something new to the blog, else why have one?

Thanks for the nudge John D. I have added one new blog, such as it is, titled "Yesterday" Just go to my website and click on Eddie's Blog.

Here is a link that might be useful: Home Page

That sounds like my sort of day in the garden,

I'm glad you kick-started your blog again since it does make for interesting reading.