You are viewing a read-only archive of the Blogs.Harvard network. Learn more.

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

May 24, 2005

unclear option? “never mind”

Filed under: pre-06-2006 — David Giacalone @ 8:43 pm

No matter what the Senate filibuster compromise today may mean, one thing is very

nu-clear to me: “nuclear option” belongs on the Banished Words List.  So, join

Ellen Goodman and myself by nominating it for the LSSU 2006 List.  But, please,

let’s not wait for January 1st.  Let’s stop using the silly phrase outside of the strategic

war context right now (that means you, too). 


deleteKey n  Unclear option?  Unclear analogies?  As Emily and Essie Litella would

say, “Never mind.”





between Pompey

and Caesar

I place my bookmark


May morning

the door opens

before I knock


on top of everything






 John Stevenson from Some of the Silence  (Red Moon Press,1999)  umbrella vert

free speech in the Blawg Republic?

Filed under: pre-06-2006 — David Giacalone @ 5:23 pm

None of my favorite fictional detectives believes much in coincidence as

an explanation when one event looks suspiciously related to another.  But,

I’ll let you decide whether my Comments here on Feb. 14, 2005 are related  

to what happened there on Feb. 15, 2005.


Details:  On February 14th, Bob Ambrogi wrote that he had just discovered

Blawg Republic.   In response, my alter ego Prof. Yabut left this Comment:

“A lot of us had positive things to say about Blawg Republic

when Denise Howell first pointed us to it on Sept. 30th. However,

Blawg Republic stopped being useful after only a couple weeks in

existence, when it switched from listing the latest posts from the

most popular law weblogs to having its very limited Top Blawg Posts.

Now, you can get on their top-20 list by merely linking to one of your

own past posts (a trick used by many weblawggers, who garner much

of the page at a time). The Top 20 list neither tells you who did the

linking (so you can’t readily check whether the pointer was pro or con)

nor when the listed post originated. Now, there’s really no reason to

check this page very often.”


don't forget tack neg Agreeing with Prof. Yabut on the “past post problem,” Evan Schaeffer opined

that Blawg Review drove him “batty,” and noted “It seems like the fix would

be simple, but so far, no fix.”


In response, Merrick Lozano, Co-founder of Blawg Republic, did a little self-

censoring that day, removing his first comment at LawSites (would love to know

what it said).  Merrick then left a Response that concluded:

“Thank you for the feedback in this comments section. We are

looking into the past post link problem described by prof yabut

and evan ( as soon as we resolve it.”

I can’t tell whether the “past post link” problem has been solved. [I had, in fact,

mentioned it at this weblog in mid-Nov. 2004.]  However, something was “fixed”

for sure:  The freshest post listed on the Blawg Republic page for Legal Ethics News 

(which has only tracked one site in that category — f/k/a) is the following:

f/k/a . . . – February 15, 2005

. . . but, maybe we’re not both covered.  The fight over

f/k/a: Frozen in time as of Feb. 15, 2005.  Must be a coincidence.


update (June 17, 2005): Yesterday, I followed a Referral link to this website from

BR and discovered that only the name f/k/a and our former tagline now exist

on the BR Legal Ethics Page.  Them coincidences keep buildin’ up, don’t they?


most end up
stuck in mud…
cherry blossoms


ISSA , D.L. Lanoue, translator


tiny check After first praising unequivocally Scheherazade’s list of “Legal Lies” that purportedly

lure lambs into the Law, and then reading my Response, Yeoman did quite a bit of soul-searching

and has an important discussion on Mistaking Personal Unsuitability for Systemic Problems

in the legal profession.  


tiny check  If you’re going to impose an immense fine on a judge for election misconduct, why not  “noyabutsS”

remove him or her from office?  That’s what Justice Lewis asked again in a Florida Supreme Court 

case thatwas decided May 12, 2005.   Inquiry Concerning a Judge, re:  Ana Marie Pando, ___

So.2d ___ (Fla., No. SC04-1636).  Justice Lewis had a full — and, I believe persuasive — discussion 

on this topic in In re Kinsey, 842 So.2d 77 (from p. 38, Fla. 2003) (via sunEthics, May 23, 2005)


tiny check Paul Horwitz gives a litany of reasons “why he writes” at Prawfs Blog.  Compare it

with your own reasons. (via Is That Legal?)   On a related topic, the Berkman Blog group is holding

a seminar on June 2 on Why Do You Blog?, moderated Michael Feldman of Dowbrigade News.  If

you’re gonna be in Cambridge, Mass., you might want to stop by.



untoasted today —

slowly chewing

whole wheat bread


                              [May 23, 2005]

Powered by WordPress