The Harvard Bloggership Conference Continues
At the Harvard Bloggership Conference I recently attended, disagreements seemed to be relatively mild (my attempt at a humorous recap is here). For the most part, everybody was in agreement, with some exceptions on the fine points. Even Kate Litvak (the purported anti-blogging perpetual blog commentator) had relatively moderate views about blogging. Despite some small differences of opinion, the conference didn’t rage with the fire of strong disagreement.
However, now in the conference’s post-mortem, some disagreement seems to be flaring up in the blogosphere. There’s a debate raging over whether “mixed” blogs (consisting of law mixed with information about personal hobbies) are a good or bad thing for the legal blogosphere. Dan Filler has comments on the debate here.
For other posts about the issue, see:
For those wanting to read about the conference, 3L Epiphany has collected a comprehensive set of links to posts about the conference. You can read numerous conference recaps, recaps about recaps, and recaps about the recaps of recaps.
I guess that the Harvard Bloggership Conference really hasn’t ended. It rages on in the blogosphere, kind of like aftershocks from an earthquake. But I guess that it is no big surprise that a conference about blogging would generate a lot of blogging . . .
As for my views on this debate, I think that Dan Filler’s post nicely captures what I think about the matter.