We don't want to take a page from Sherm Frederick's traditional back-and-forth sniping with his competitor Brian Greenspun, but we figured it only appropriate to respond to some of the allegations in the Review-Journal Publisher's blog post about us yesterday.

We really don't like to sink into Sherm's gutter, so we'll only address the two actual issues he raises http://www.lvrj.com/blogs/sherm/Whos_your_daddy.html .

LV Journal Review is beholden alright.

These are the people to whom we listen. They speak truth to powerful interests from Harry Reid and Jim Gibbons to Corporate America and the Obama administration. They do this by signing petitions, calling and writing to their elected officials and sometimes hitting the streets in protest. They have told us they can't trust the Review-Journal to provide accurate and fair news coverage.

We listened and launched this site.

This project, LV Journal Review, received no funding from Reid or any other politician. LV Journal Review is funded entirely through donations from individuals and private foundations.

Reid did make a donation to help ProgressNow Nevada get off the ground. We know this is hard stuff Sherm, but we have two organizations, two budgets, two bank accounts, two boards, two corporate incorporations.

Oh, and the Reid PAC contribution to ProgressNow Nevada accounts for less than 4 percent of the amount we have raised. It's telling, if not sad, that Frederick believes someone he employed for five years to provide his readers political news could be bought and sold for so little.

Frederick only knows about the donation in the first place because we choose to operate in complete sunshine.

Since it seems Frederick is only selectively reading our site, we'll reiterate our purpose.

We seek not to discredit the Review-Journal and find it laughable to think our little start-up operation could do more damage to the paper's reputation than Frederick already has.

We don't want the Review-Journal to go out of business. We haven't asked anyone to cancel a subscription or to stop advertising. We want the RJ to thrive. We believe nothing is more important to our form of government than an unfettered, independent Fourth Estate. And we worry each day that we're far from that goal.

We admit our mistakes and we correct them. Three errors were brought to our attention upon our launch. All were immediately corrected and divulged to our readers.

You can decide whether we're "error filled" because we spelled a word wrong; transposed a Z and Y in a name and failed to fact check NPRI's website. We dare say it's an odd tactic for the publisher of a paper which doesn't correct most of its mistakes to call out someone who corrects everything. Shall we call the RJ "error-filled" because it ran three corrections today?

But we will accept Frederick's assertion in his blog that our reporting on the Bob Brown donation to Jim Blockey for the 2000 House cycle is wrong. We'll take his word that it's not the Bob Brown who works at the Review-Journal. We researched several campaign finance databases for political contributions made by Review-Journal or Stephens Media employees. We then double checked the names against the electronic databases the Federal Election Commission keeps for each of the candidate commitees.

FEC records of the 2000 Blockey campaign committee show the $1,000 donation from Bob Brown of Las Vegas. The occupation was culled from the same online campaign finance database we found Sherm Frederick's donation to Bush and the other conservative campaign donations. The mistake was ours. We have posted a correction.