I think it's brilliant that you reached out to him. I enjoyed his response except for the first line. I know I shouldn't read emotions in text, but "absolutely not" seems so abrupt and prickish. If it wasn't for the rest of his remarks and your qualifications of him as a "Nice guy" I would have thought he was a bit big for his britches.
I can see where you are coming from regarding the absolutely not, but because it was preceded by Thanks so much and followed by his stated gratification that it has provoked thought here, I found the response well balanced and reasoned. Also, his second email was quite nice. I'd also point out that only about 1/2 of those I reach out to respond back and they're generally enthusiastic about participating. This is only the second person that has responded but didn't wish to partake. The other was Steve Pavlina who basically said, "no I wrote that 6 years ago and I'm not interested in talking about it". Here is the post. He then sent me another article of his and said "people may find this of interest though". So, he said "no" but then wanted me to post more of his work for him. If you read the comments in the post I link to, you'll likely not blame him for not engaging.
1. It was interesting and illuminating to read that Krieder's piece "got cut way down from its original length." I'm wondering how many people reading that sentence assumed that "got cut" meant not by him. Note though, the wording doesn't necessarily mean it was cut by someone else. After originally submitting it, they might have said "Lose 1500 words" - and he went about ruthlessly editing his own piece. I think that's why he is letting the piece stand on his own. 2. I did not take the "absolutely not" to be hostile or arrogant. Sometimes we know where we stand and we want to make that clear. 3. Steven, I think it's great the way you reach out to writers. Writers often work in something of a vacuum. It can be wonderful to hear from someone about one's work. Asking someone to participate in a discussion requires a little extra research and thought. It's amazing that 1/2 respond back and are willing to engage. If I read a very moving letter in the newspaper (which we still get), or find a fabulous but mostly unknown poem by a still-living author, I often locate the author and send a quick email of thx or agreement. Most of the time, they write me back by noon saying something appreciative. We've connected and shared some humanity. It's not hard to see why all the networking technology has been so compelling and so addictive to so many people. A kind of "connection" is possible without the dizzying demands of the agora.
Yah - like I said - after reading the rest of his reply it became much more clear - but at first it just seemed so jarring. You know - if you had asked me the same, my answer would have been "Thanks very much for the invitation, but no." But I tend to err on the side of polite.