There's another in the pipeline - which you'll probably hate, judging from your take on this piece of writing - and it's already been bought. So, yeah, "books."

More importantly, got a question for you-all: Iain Borden's book on skateboarding is, if anything, denser than mine, and just as prone to theoryspeak. He leans far more heavily than I would dare on names like Lefebvre and Foucault. And perhaps more seriously, he's never been a skater.

Despite this, the book was comparatively well-received by the skater community - I'm not sure if Thrasher or Transworld ever reviewed it, but a reviewer for Sidewalk, the British equivalent, said "There's absolutely no way I can do this book justice here...it's incredibly thought-provoking, especially from the perspective of actually being a skateboarder. I highly recommend it."

Now skaters are, for the most part, no more tolerant of bull**** than bike messengers/riders. So what do you think accounts for the fact that Borden's book seems to have pleased a very tough audience, while what I wrote for the most part just pissed you off? Do you think the fact that my piece was posted on the Web had anything to do with the difference in receptions?