f/k/a archives . . . real opinions & real haiku

“Ed” the mysterious Editor of Blawg Review and Kevin O’ Keefe, founder
of LexBlog, are having a public Blog Fight. The tiff started when Ed asked
Kev how The Law List (which O’Keefe edits) works, but Kev wanted to know
who Ed was and wrote a piece decrying anonymous lawyer webloggers and
objecting to the word “blawg.” Ed then posted about their Fight [and got
some moral support from his BR co-editor Kevin J. Heller], Kev O. wrote
again, and Ed both defended using “blawg” and announced that several
weblogging personalities [including yours truly] are not Ed.

As we enter the era of 39-cent stamps, today, I’d like to put in
my two cents on each issue. First, I should mention that Ed
and I have had a congenial correspondence over the past half-
year, and he’s never been disagreeable, even when we disagree.
It’s been quite a while since Kevin O’Keefe and I have correspon-
ded; we have often disagreed, and it was not always pleasant.

update: In an Open Letter to Giacalone, this morning, Ed
says “There was never a fight in my mind.,” and that Giacalone
got the timeline and background facts wrong. The Open Letter
left me unclear of the circumstances, facts and motives. How-
ever, I’m pretty sure that — whether there is a fight or just a debate
or a misunderstanding — the primary issues (weblog anonymity
and use of the word “blawg”) still separate Kevin and Ed and
are appropriate for my commentary. They both used the words
“Blog Fight” in their headlines but, as I conclude below, they
aren’t really all that far apart. Unless, of course, they are.
5 PM update: “Ed” has helped clarify the tone of his Open Letter,
by adding an appropriately lighthearted emoticon, with a link to
“tongue-in-cheek“. Thanks, Ednonymous One.

Let’s start with the easy point: Ed is absolutely correct: he is not
David Giacalone. I shall add for emphasis, that he is not David’s twin,
Arthur, nor any of his f/k/a alter egoes (Prof. Yabut, ethical Esq, dagosan,
haikuEsq, Joe Cliente, etc.). David Giacalone barely has the energy to
keep this site going; you would not for a moment find him taking on a
job like Editor of Blawg Review — and, certainly, not without getting the
glory that comes with it.

Next, I do agree with Kevin O’Keefe that there often are times when
knowing the identity of the human being behind a weblog is very important
for the weblog’s integrity and the value of its information and opinion (see, e.g.,
Selling the Perception of Expertise & Ghosts Will Kill the Weblog Community).

“MirrorG” However, I do not find it disconcerting that Ed wishes to stay anonymous —
especially after being reassured that he is not a cover for Evan, Mike or Kevin H.,
the Blawg Review co-editors. It’s not very difficult to imagine perfectly good
business, professional or personal reasons that the Editor of Blawg Review
might want to remain anonymous.

Each reader has every right to discount the value
of Blawg Review, or its Awards, in the content of
Ed‘s anonymity. I’m sure he’s taken that reaction
into account in choosing to remain unnamed.

On the next issue, count me among those who has no idea how to use
the “information” available at PubSub’s The Law List. I learned about The Law
List from “Ed” — who apparently recommend it to many fellow law webloggers.
Therefore, it’s ironic that an attempt by Ed to find out more information about the
service, after people such as myself told him it was confusing, annoyed Kevin so
much. Makes me wonder (as in some of our prior dealings) why Kevin is so darn
defensive.

Except for his tone of derision, Kevin and I are rather compatible on the
final topic — use of the word “blawg.” Despite its origin from the punning and
cunning mind of Denise Howell, I have long believed that we all would have been
better off without the creation and spread of this confusing, odd-sounding mutation
on the ugly little word “blog”. This is a topic that deserves its own post, but I want
to make two quick points: First, I wish I had lived up to my public promise, made
Sept. 30, 2003, in a piece for BloggerCon2003, called “Jargon Builds Walls Not
Bridges:”

“Blawg” is, as of today, purged from my dictionary,
glossary and ken.

“BoxerSignN” Second, lawyer weblog owners and editors who are using the term “weblawg”
shouldn’t take personally Kevin’s statement that it is “just plain stupid” to do so (Real
Lawyers Have Blogs, Oct. 25, 2005). You see, on January, 5, 2004, at the very start
of his Real Lawyers Have Blogs weblog, Kevin placed this description of himself in his
template, at the foot of each page:

“Kevin has now founded a company providing a turnkey
blawgs solution, by LexBlog, Inc., the leading provider of
law blogs, blawgs or weblogs for lawyers and attorneys
desiring to use a legal blog, blawg or weblog for effective
lawyer and attorney Internet Web site marketing and started
a new Real Lawyers :: Have Blogs blog.” [emphases added]

If Kevin can come this far, there’s clearly hope for all of us. The mediator in me wants
to point out that Ed and Kev aren’t really very far apart — if they truly want to end their
feudin’ and get back to respective productive lives.

 

dinner bell

the boy keeps on

shadow boxing

ed markowski

 

 

 

after hours gym –
a heavy bag sways slowly
in the window

Barry George – Haiku Harvest (Jan-Feb 2003)

p.s. Speaking of Blawg Review, this week’s version (#39) is ably
presented at Bruce MacEwan’s AdamSmithEsq, where Bruce
has given a very nice introduction to my post on judge Murtha’s
lenient sentencing. Oh, yeah, and he blurbs about a lot of other
excellent weblog pieces by lawyers, law students and the entire
“bl**g” community.

“MirrorN”