Carolyn Elefant and Mark Sindler have posted Blawg Review #21 over at My Shingle. I’ve been reviewing this week’s theme of Endings, Beginnings and the Transitions and Crossings in Between (while convalescing with my own transitions and typing with one hand).

I especially enjoyed the post by Margaret Marks, who found the The Standard Catchall Universal Disclaimer Notice, over 7000 words long.

We also enjoyed the Wired GC’s update on the legal Sex and the City (of London) over the book Fish Sunday Thinking, allegedly written by a young lawyer at an unnamed Top 50 law firm disclosing all of the sexual secrets of lawyers (that’s gotta be a slow read). It was written pseudonymously by “Alex Gilmore” who has kept his real name secret in order to “protect his lucrative job as a legal beagle and pay his mortgage.”

In a related post, Eh Nonymous has a round-up of what’s been said, pro and con, about anonymous bloggers. While we don’t really care that much, anonymous legal blogs seem like anonymous doctoring — it’s more appropriate for personal web logs where people post long missives about their cat’s toenail fungus that nobody reads anyway.

  Print This Post Print This Post  

One Comment

  1. Notice: Object of class WP_Comment could not be converted to int in /hermes/bosnacweb01/bosnacweb01ad/b2262/ipw.patentba/public_html/wp/wp-content/plugins/polldaddy/rating.php on line 7

    Sorry, I was not trying to be inflammatory. And, let me just say I’m very sorry if my comments came across as an affront to Eh Nonymous. I did not mean to infer that I had anything against him (her?) or anyone else. I just feel a little uneasy about blogging anonymously since it could lack a certain level of accountability. That’s all, it was just a casual musing and not really meant for anything else.

    But, it’s really OK with me. I believe in a free country and everyone can dance to their own beat. I suppose if I really cared I’d delete all anonymous comments. I will, therefore, hereby state that I shall refrain from any more comments on anonymity or lack thereof.

    Also, I looked up snarking and found the definition: “Snark refers to a pejorative style of speech or writing. It could loosely be described as irritable or “snidely derisive”; hence, ‘snarkish’, ‘snarky’, ‘to snark at somebody’. It could less politely be described as ‘bitchy’.”

    I was not snarking (snarkalicious?). Just pondering.

    Again, mea culpa.