f/k/a . . . the archives

August 26, 2005

scarecrow: yes, strawman: no

Filed under: pre-06-2006 — David Giacalone @ 11:27 pm

After spending too much time today shooting at strawmen,

I thought I’d enjoy a bit of scarecrow gazing.  Here are another

pair from The Scare Crow: A Collection of Haiku & Senryu (Leroy

Kanterman, Ed., Hiroake Sato, translator, Red Moon Press,

1999).  Click here for three more by some of f/k/a‘s Honored Guests.

Below, you’ll also find a few from Issa and one from dagosan.

 

 

scare crow cover 

 








ginko–

our hostess leads us

toward a scarecrow

 

            John Stevenson

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

crows leaving

as quickly as they land

    — I am the scarecrow

 

             Tom Clausen

 



 

 

 

 

crow sm

 

 

like people
an upright scarecrow
can’t be found

 

 

 

 

 

 

 






burning rubbish–
a scarecrow too
goes up in smoke

 

 

 

 

 

wind-bent in moonlight
the scarecrow leans
on a cane

 

 

 


by Kobayashi Issa - click for 50 more scarecrow haiku

translated by David G. Lanoue

 

 







 

 

crow smf

 










scratching my back –

one more job

for the scarecrow

 

 

         dagosan   [Aug. 26, 2005]  

potluck



tiny check  Have you noticed how often the Editor of Blawg Review  graphClimbN

kisses the InstaButt?    I wonder what Prof. Reynolds thinks of all 

this fawning.   Meanwhile, no matter how many times my buddies

at Blawg Review tell me about other Weblog Carnivals that boost

visits, I have never had a Blawg Review listing that registered more

than a dozen total hits over a week.  [in contrast, a jd2b link can bring

hundreds of visitors, and Overlawyered many scores of them].   Hmm. 

Maybe somebody better start kissing the InstaButt a lot more.


“tinyredcheck” One more thought: Blawg Review says that it is

a peer-reviewed carnival for law weblogs, and its

tagline suggests editorial input.  Also,  the BR 

Submission Guidelines point out that “The host

shall be at liberty to present the submission, or not.”

Nonetheless, the Hosting Guidelines say “It is the

concept of Blawg Review, within reason, to be inclusive

of all posts submitted for review in the week prior to

each issue.”  Would you be more likely to click through

a Blawg Review listing if you felt there were some

quality control being exercised by the Host?  Can any

collection of links be considered the best recent posts

if there is no filter between the ego of the submitting

weblogger and placement on the list?   There I go again,

being an elitist — and sticking my nose uninvited under

someone else’s carnival tent.  Sue me. What do you think?

 

update:  The Editor of Blawg Review has responded with

a very helpful Comment, which gives a good explanation

of how postings are chosen for inclusion in each weekly

edition. 

sumoS  While I was fretting over contingency fees all afternoon, Mr.

Google was (inadvertently) sending me traffic.  Here are two queries

that seem noteworthy:



lawyer appreciation“>  Just don’t know why, but there were only

119 results for this Google search.  We’re pleased to say that the

first result was our post describing an unsuccessful search for

holidays and events that honor lawyers, and the second result

was this post, wherein skepticalEsq was a bit credulous about a

“grassroots” rally in support of plaintiffs’ lawyers in Madison County,

Illinois.

 

typical diet of a sumo wrestler>  We inadvertently garnered the #2

slot in this Google search — out of nearly 6000 results — thanks to a post

about the “typical diet” of billable hours for young associates and an

Issa poem mentioning a sumo wrestler.   Our link was sandwiched in

between a USAToday article about the health woes of retired, less-active 

sumo wrestlers (e.g., Haiwaiian-born sumo legend Konishiki used to wrestle

at 665 pounds, but now wants to get down to 400 pounds), and a more

scholarly piece that mentions retired sumo wrestlers and the fight to control

diabetes — as “an example of fit and fat becomes fat and sick”.












scarecrowHaikuN

 

 

6 Comments

  1. Professor Yabut,

    David Giacalone has agreed to host Blawg Review sometime next April, at which time he will gain a better appreciation for the project, I’m sure.

    In the meantime, it behoves me to correct the several misperceptions about the project that are evident in the post above.

    Unlike most other blog carnivals, which rely only on submissions, Blawg Review collects the best of the law blogs each week from various peer-reviewed sources.

    Blawg Review is the only carnival I know that has Contributing Editors, namely Evan Schaeffer, Kevin Heller and Mike Cernovich, in additon to myself, who each submit every week recommendations of at least 5 posts, which collectively accounts for at least 20 “peer-reviewed” post recommendations each week. The host decides if any or all of these recommended posts are suitable for inclusion, along with about 10 posts which the host is encouraged to source personally.

    The host’s personal selections usually include several that reflect the character and subject interests of the host blawg, recognizing that the regular readership of the blog should find some of the usual content, and new readers of the blog via Blawg Review ought to get some sense of the unique perspective and subject specialties of the host.

    To these recommendations and selections are added most of those posts submitted by law bloggers on their own behalf. It’s the essence of a blog carnival that it provides a forum for bloggers to submit their own posts that they think meet the standards and subject interests of that carnvial, and the character and interests of the anticipated host, so we encourage hosts to err on the side of accepting those submissions, and to discuss any controversial submissions with the the Editor if there is any question. In the end, the host has the final cut, as it is the host’s blog publication.

    Typically, there is some overlap of the recommendations and submissions. Ironically, the post submitted for next week from f/k/a had already been recommended by one of the Contributing Editors, and another law blogger’s submission was also recommended by a different Contributing Editor. That’s to be expected, of course, as we are all looking for the best posts that will make up an eclectic mix for the upcoming Blawg Review, and very often great minds think alike.

    The unique role of the Contributing Editors is to ensure that excellent recommendations are drawn from a wide range of law blogs, and not just from a cadre of regular participants. In closing, if I might quote from my own email to you early in June:

    From: Editor at Blawg Review
    To: ethicsjd

    Again, we appreciate your “deep thoughts” as you are wont to have from time to time, and thank you again for the kind mention of Blawg Review
    and the generous link love.

    David, please consider our standing invitation to you to join the honorable ranks of our Contributing Editors should your time and
    attention span permit. ;-) At the very least, might you be up for hosting sometime? The project would surely benefit from a touch of class.

    Best regards,

    Ed.

    P.S. Professor Reynolds has kindly linked to Blawg Review twice in the first twenty issues, and we hope he finds future issues worth linking more often than not. We’d like to think that, as a law professor who blogs, he’s at least aware of the damn thing, and hopefully, is reading it with interest every week.

    Comment by Editor 'n' Chef — August 28, 2005 @ 2:43 am

  2. Professor Yabut,

    David Giacalone has agreed to host Blawg Review sometime next April, at which time he will gain a better appreciation for the project, I’m sure.

    In the meantime, it behoves me to correct the several misperceptions about the project that are evident in the post above.

    Unlike most other blog carnivals, which rely only on submissions, Blawg Review collects the best of the law blogs each week from various peer-reviewed sources.

    Blawg Review is the only carnival I know that has Contributing Editors, namely Evan Schaeffer, Kevin Heller and Mike Cernovich, in additon to myself, who each submit every week recommendations of at least 5 posts, which collectively accounts for at least 20 “peer-reviewed” post recommendations each week. The host decides if any or all of these recommended posts are suitable for inclusion, along with about 10 posts which the host is encouraged to source personally.

    The host’s personal selections usually include several that reflect the character and subject interests of the host blawg, recognizing that the regular readership of the blog should find some of the usual content, and new readers of the blog via Blawg Review ought to get some sense of the unique perspective and subject specialties of the host.

    To these recommendations and selections are added most of those posts submitted by law bloggers on their own behalf. It’s the essence of a blog carnival that it provides a forum for bloggers to submit their own posts that they think meet the standards and subject interests of that carnvial, and the character and interests of the anticipated host, so we encourage hosts to err on the side of accepting those submissions, and to discuss any controversial submissions with the the Editor if there is any question. In the end, the host has the final cut, as it is the host’s blog publication.

    Typically, there is some overlap of the recommendations and submissions. Ironically, the post submitted for next week from f/k/a had already been recommended by one of the Contributing Editors, and another law blogger’s submission was also recommended by a different Contributing Editor. That’s to be expected, of course, as we are all looking for the best posts that will make up an eclectic mix for the upcoming Blawg Review, and very often great minds think alike.

    The unique role of the Contributing Editors is to ensure that excellent recommendations are drawn from a wide range of law blogs, and not just from a cadre of regular participants. In closing, if I might quote from my own email to you early in June:

    From: Editor at Blawg Review
    To: ethicsjd

    Again, we appreciate your “deep thoughts” as you are wont to have from time to time, and thank you again for the kind mention of Blawg Review
    and the generous link love.

    David, please consider our standing invitation to you to join the honorable ranks of our Contributing Editors should your time and
    attention span permit. ;-) At the very least, might you be up for hosting sometime? The project would surely benefit from a touch of class.

    Best regards,

    Ed.

    P.S. Professor Reynolds has kindly linked to Blawg Review twice in the first twenty issues, and we hope he finds future issues worth linking more often than not. We’d like to think that, as a law professor who blogs, he’s at least aware of the damn thing, and hopefully, is reading it with interest every week.

    Comment by Editor 'n' Chef — August 28, 2005 @ 2:43 am

  3. Dear Ed-nonymous One:  Thank you for a very helpful overview of Blawg Review.  Prof. Yabut and all the alter egos around here like to learn new things — especially when they help us shed our publically-proffered misconceptions.  So, your Comments are much appreciated.  To the extent that this information has not yet appeared at the BR website, I hope you’ll consider putting some version of it on the site.
    I always wondered what your Contributing Editors contributed and am pleased to hear that they’re out looking for worthwhile materials for the week’s BR edition. 
    I’m looking forward to hosting Blawg Review #53 next April 10th.  But, I must admit that the constantly-increasing production and entertainment values of each presentation makes the task rather daunting.
    thanks again for taking your time to Comment rather than taking umbrage,
    david et al.

    Comment by David Giacalone — August 28, 2005 @ 3:13 pm

  4. Dear Ed-nonymous One:  Thank you for a very helpful overview of Blawg Review.  Prof. Yabut and all the alter egos around here like to learn new things — especially when they help us shed our publically-proffered misconceptions.  So, your Comments are much appreciated.  To the extent that this information has not yet appeared at the BR website, I hope you’ll consider putting some version of it on the site.
    I always wondered what your Contributing Editors contributed and am pleased to hear that they’re out looking for worthwhile materials for the week’s BR edition. 
    I’m looking forward to hosting Blawg Review #53 next April 10th.  But, I must admit that the constantly-increasing production and entertainment values of each presentation makes the task rather daunting.
    thanks again for taking your time to Comment rather than taking umbrage,
    david et al.

    Comment by David Giacalone — August 28, 2005 @ 3:13 pm

  5. Thanks for the feedback, David. This information has been added to the Blawg Review website as an update to the Hosting Guidelines, as you suggested.

    Comment by Editor 'n' Chef — August 28, 2005 @ 7:22 pm

  6. Thanks for the feedback, David. This information has been added to the Blawg Review website as an update to the Hosting Guidelines, as you suggested.

    Comment by Editor 'n' Chef — August 28, 2005 @ 7:22 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress