Globeandmail.com took another stab at live-blogging, this time with the federal budget (I previously blogged about their effort on the St. Andrew's subway shooting).

Your genial hosts were Report on Business columnist Andrew Willis, editorial page editor John Geiger and communities editor Mathew Ingram.

A commenter named cimmetry made a few observations.

At 3:23 p.m., Ingram said the following:

Mathew Ingram:  @Cimmetry: we are looking for commenters from Twitter that we can add as well as the live-blog continues

So Cimmetry got a promotion! He became a contributor to the live blog.

Cimmetry lists the following on his blog:

I am a Canadian, living in Mississauga, Ontario. I was born in Canada and I grew up in cities and provinces across the country. Through my blog, I plan to share my thoughts on current events, politics, finance, culture and identity, as well as a host of other topics.

His blog seemingly began on Dec. 13. His Twitter account is even more recent -- his first tweet started on Jan. 25. That's only two days before the budget. He follows six and has eight followers as I write this.

Seems like an intelligent guy and writes reasonably well, but why is he qualified to be opining on the federal budget on a globeandmail.com live blog? Is it like a karaoke party; anyone can take the mic for a few minutes? :)

Does he know Ingram? Does Ingram know him? The two don't even follow each others' Twitter feeds (as of this writing).

But most importantly, who is Cimmetry? Does he actually know anything? Does he add any expertise? Is he politically aligned?

I don't know the answer to these questions? Does the globeandmail.com team know?

Same could be asked of the mysterious Jetsolver.

It coudl be nothing, but I wonder if globeandmail.com or other news organizations could be setting themselves up for embarrassment if it turns out such contributors aren't who they seem.