I guess I'm a little late to the Cizmar party. This is the first I've heard of the guy. He writes like a douche, looks like a douche, and likely smells like a douche (like a fresh spring morning). All signs point to DOUCHE!
I don't let this crap bother me. Put it this way- the guy is taking his time and column space to talk about Weiland. I'd take that as a compliment, even if the remarks are unflattering. If Weiland was such a waste and a no-talent-assclown like Cizmar claims, why does he even bother writing about Scott? Oh yeah, because Weiland actually is someone of significance! Cizmar may hate Scott, but negative press is still press. Despite Cizmar's comments about Scott, he apparently finds Scott relevant enough to dedicate multple posts about him... go figure.