One of the debates in the response to FV/NPP/AAT is whether critics are ‘interacting’ with the original authors, and whether they are doing so in a Christian-ly way.*
I think the root of the debate is over the definition of ‘interact’. The anti-FV guys, and their writings, claim to ‘interact’ with the FV. Yet, the FV guys will describe how they tried to contact the author, how they were never contacted or allowed to defend themselves, etc…
After seeing being defenders and detractors pollute the blogosphere with comments, it seems apparent that to the FV/pro-FV side, “interact” means “calls, emails, visits, or otherwise contacts the individual/writing being discussed”. To the anti-FV side, it appears that “interact” is limited to mean “properly footnote my claims.”
Understanding this, perhaps FV/pro-FV will have more patience with the anti-FV side when they claim to have ‘interacted’. Perhaps also, it will help the anti-FV crowd understand how they might modify their methods to be more persuasive.
*If you really need sources, google: “Federal Vision” OR FV.