A Wired blogger wrote what I think is some good analysis of crowdsourcing websites designed to watchdog (and/or influence?) how the superdelegates break in the process to select a party nominee. One of her subjects objected by singling out her nationality, as if it mattered. The Wired blogger punched back, but above the belt.
I believe that superdelegate watchdogging sites provide us an outstanding service. It's too bad they have not been around before and probably will not outlast this close election. Voters should stay informed and seek to influence the political process. But there is no reason to attack bloggers personally who turn a fair, but critical eye on the watchdogs. And if moveon.org is indeed joining forces with these crowdsourcing sites, that's important information that helps us judge whether the watchdogs are neutral, independent and committed to larger democratic (with a "little d") concerns.