The fact that some other people on the Internet may afford Dave Winer more respect than you think he deserves is not a problem that needs to be solved. Even if it were a problem that needed to be solved, the "I'm gonna take him down a peg" approach creates an entirely new, bigger problem.
While that vanity gets tiring, it's not a crime.
What's maddening is your lack of intellectually honest engagement of critique on that or any other matter. And your position, implied by your comments, that others cannot disagree unless their accomplishments somehow match yours is frankly stomach-turning from the perspective of a hacker culture that's all about upsetting the status quo.
I went on at great length here if that's interesting to you:
You accuse him of refusing to engage with criticism, which is quite a serious claim in a community that prides itself on rational discourse. Other commenters have also alluded to this, though I've not seen evidence for it. There's a fine line between critical responses that you should engage with and personal attacks that can be ignored. Your comment here doesn't read like constructive criticism to me.
I've written in other contexts where it's a different tone. But that's how blogs are.
That's what blogs are about. One person's view of things.
It's not intended to be objective.
Now, you don't engage in "intellectually honest critiques."
If you think that's what you're doing, try getting a second opinion on that. You're a flamer. I don't engage with people who do that. Sorry.
I don't like your style -- I don't imagine you care about that, just as I don't care whether you like the way I write.