I'm getting weary of your Style section's flip attitude toward features of the paper that turn up missing. When the Style Invitational went on a six-month hiatus (as if no substitute editor could be found to run the column in the absence of the regulars), you announced in "nyah-nyah" fashion that there "isn't anything [readers] can do about it." When Tony Kornheiser went on vacation, you ran a box that said he'd be back "whenever he felt like it" (or some such nonsense). This past Sunday's Style Invitational column once again reminded us that there wasn't "anything you can do about" the absence of the column for six months.

All this may strike the editors as hilarious stuff, but the fact is, it's irritating. I drive 14 miles to pick up the Sunday paper, and I pay $4 for it, and my two favorite features (noted above) may or may not be in it one week to the next.

That's bad enough, but your attempts at wise-guy remarks on the subject are aggravating and expose a smugness and arrogance that are unbecoming.

Kornheiser gets paid pretty well, and he could cook up a few vacation-time columns in advance. It isn't rocket science. The Style Invitational could be kept afloat easily enough, with one or more clever (but not too clever) lower-level staffers. After all, most of the intelligence displayed in the Invitational comes from the readers, not the editors.

-- Grady Norris