January 3, 2005
snowy day
she paints the poppies
a deeper red
midday sun
the silence of swimming
under water
“midday sun” – from A Piece of Egg Shell (Magpie Haiku Press, 2004)
new year
same old
back [Jan. 3, 2005]
one-breath pundit
For some reason that escapes me, Evan Schaeffer — who is busy enough, it seems — 
has taken it upon himself to dissect Judge Posner’s (purported) definition of “weblog” and
suggest that he might try his hand at coming up with a better definition. It makes for
interesting lexicography (plus anthropology, with a hint of psychology). We add our two cents+.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
David: I took it upon myself because I had a couple of three-day weekends with nothing better to do. As for your list of words ending in “y”–lexicography, anthropology, psychology–you seem to have left out parody. Did you miss it?? If so, I take the blame!
Comment by Evan — January 3, 2005 @ 4:59 pm
David: I took it upon myself because I had a couple of three-day weekends with nothing better to do. As for your list of words ending in “y”–lexicography, anthropology, psychology–you seem to have left out parody. Did you miss it?? If so, I take the blame!
Comment by Evan — January 3, 2005 @ 4:59 pm
How exactly does parody come into the picture? I am a little slow at times . . . .
Comment by JR — January 3, 2005 @ 5:19 pm
How exactly does parody come into the picture? I am a little slow at times . . . .
Comment by JR — January 3, 2005 @ 5:19 pm
Evan, I think I’m again with JR on this one. Are you saying that Judge Posner was engaging in lexiconographic parody? Or that you are claiming an ex post facto [and apparently de minimis] parody defense?
Comment by David Giacalone — January 3, 2005 @ 6:14 pm
Evan, I think I’m again with JR on this one. Are you saying that Judge Posner was engaging in lexiconographic parody? Or that you are claiming an ex post facto [and apparently de minimis] parody defense?
Comment by David Giacalone — January 3, 2005 @ 6:14 pm
I was once advised by Rufus of Running With Lawyers not to explain myself to readers. But if you take a look at the comments to my post by Rich and Mike, you might understand what I’m getting at.
Comment by Evan — January 4, 2005 @ 12:00 am
I was once advised by Rufus of Running With Lawyers not to explain myself to readers. But if you take a look at the comments to my post by Rich and Mike, you might understand what I’m getting at.
Comment by Evan — January 4, 2005 @ 12:00 am
Evan: I would not pay too much attention to Rufus – his mind is full of doggies, pretty girls and cake.
Comment by JR — January 4, 2005 @ 1:08 am
Evan: I would not pay too much attention to Rufus – his mind is full of doggies, pretty girls and cake.
Comment by JR — January 4, 2005 @ 1:08 am
Note for future reading: Anything published at Notes from the (Legal)Underground with a title proclaiming that something “extraordinarily serious” will follow is undoubtedly NOT serious. Again, however, for those readers who were confused, I take the blame.
Comment by Evan — January 4, 2005 @ 12:36 pm
Note for future reading: Anything published at Notes from the (Legal)Underground with a title proclaiming that something “extraordinarily serious” will follow is undoubtedly NOT serious. Again, however, for those readers who were confused, I take the blame.
Comment by Evan — January 4, 2005 @ 12:36 pm