{"id":4384,"date":"2006-02-16T22:16:22","date_gmt":"2006-02-17T02:16:22","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/formerlyknownas\/2006\/02\/16\/bene-ben-is-back\/"},"modified":"2011-08-05T14:54:09","modified_gmt":"2011-08-05T18:54:09","slug":"bene-ben-is-back","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/2006\/02\/16\/bene-ben-is-back\/","title":{"rendered":"bene! ben is back!"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

The f\/k\/a<\/EM> gang isn’t going to take all<\/EM> the credit, but we’d like to <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
thing we helped bring about a major improvement in legal ethics <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
weblogging that occurred today: the return of Ben Cowgill<\/A> to active <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
status, at his renamed ‘<\/STRONG>Ben Cowgill on Legal Ethics<\/EM><\/A>‘ website. <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
When Ben launched his Legal Ethics Blog<\/EM> last March, we said<\/FONT><\/A>:<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n

\n
“The weblog itself shows a love of writing and reflection, <\/EM><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
along with legal <\/FONT>ethics, that will bring me back frequently.”<\/FONT><\/EM><\/DIV><\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
When the (knuckleheads at the) Kentucky Lawyer Advertising <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
Commission virtually closed Ben’s weblog down, by asserting that <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
every blawg post is an ad<\/FONT><\/A> (June 20, 2005), we led the charge rallying <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
to his support.  <\/FONT>But, that investigation apparently kept Ben from any<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
substantive posting for more than half of a year.<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
“lost!G”<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
 <\/DIV>
\n
We’ve missed Ben’s updates and insights.  Today, however, Ben Cowgill’s <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
weblog came roaring back to life, <\/FONT>with five posts, including: <\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n

\n

\n
\"tiny One praising <\/FONT>Will Hornsby<\/FONT><\/A>‘s “<\/FONT> ‘Will Hornsby on the Boundaries of Legal Marketing'”>exceptional ethics site<\/FONT><\/A> on legal marketing;” <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
\"tiny One explaining that the Colorado Consumer Protection Act<\/FONT><\/A> applies to lawyers, <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
under a recent opinion by its highest court. <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
\"tiny   Another showing the common concerns of disciplinary lawyers<\/A> on both sides <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
of the aisle (examples: applying the rules to under-staffed public defender offices<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
and to overzealous prosecutors)<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
\"tiny thought-provoking comments on case citations, competence and computers<\/FONT><\/A><\/FONT><\/DIV><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
What did f\/k\/a<\/EM> do to assist this auspicious event?  Three weeks ago, <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
in a post called <\/FONT>speak bocce?<\/FONT><\/A>, we set out <\/FONT>English-to-Bocce<\/FONT><\/A> transla-<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
tions that we thought might be particularly useful for several of our <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
weblogging colleagues. Here’s one of them:<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n

\n
for Ben Cowgill at <\/FONT>BC’s Legal Ethics<\/FONT><\/EM><\/A>    <\/DIV>
\n

\n
Can you send a pilot to guide me in?<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

Mil weez joto ne dimiix?<\/I> <\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
That’s about as close to a prayer we get around here, and it seems <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
to have worked.  Ben’s back and we’re happy.  Get over there and see <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
why.<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n