By Randazza & DeVoy
Every year, the ABA Journal has a run-off of its top 100 Blawgs, which are selected by reader votes. Others have made their recommendations so far, and now the time has come for us to offer ours. Indeed, it is our hope to use this blog’s status as last year’s winner in the IMHO category to be the Kingmaker deep into this competition. If you haven’t voted yet, you can register here, and then vote in each category (links to the categories are in bold).
Here’s the category-by-category breakdown:
Law Biz: What About Clients? Dan Hull is no pussy. If lawyers laid eggs and hatched their young, Randazza would have been in Hull’s nest. Highly educated and a spirited advocate for his clients, he sees, and has long seen, that the legal marketplace for attorneys old and new is driven by value and versatility, rather than pieces of paper from exclusive schools that don’t teach you anything about legal practice.
News: Above The Law Enough said, and an obvious answer to anyone who reads legal trade news.
Law Prof Plus: This category is the bone that the ABA throws to the academic circle jerk. Most of the blogs in this category, if you waste a little time reading them, make you understand that term. However, Religion Clause, unlike competitors Feminist Law Professors and Brian LeiTTTer’s Law School Reports, is actually useful and insightful. Well, it is useful if you want to learn about the Religion Clause — which we do (and we would assume many of our readers do). It’s much more than useful, it’s great, but when dealing with academics, “utility” is the relevant threshold, and this is one of the rare law professor authored blogs to cross it. Honorable mention, TaxProf Blog, which is useful too. Of course, if the categories were organized properly, Volokh would be in this category, and he would pwn the shit out of it.
Torts: New York Personal Injury Law Blog Well written, prolific, and primarily dealing with one of the major legal markets in the country. However, Turkewitz strays from his yard a lot, bringing insightful commentary to many areas of law that have little to do with personal injury or New York. Don’t let the title scare you away.
IP: TTAB Blog You can actually teach yourself trademark law by reading this blog for 90 days. Insightful, timely, smartly written, and covering a wide range of topics with appropriate context. John Welch, the author, is a hell of a great guy and blushes when told that certain lawyers got their start in IP law by reading his work.
Criminal Justice: Not Guilty Normally the endorsement might have gone to Simple Justice, but Greenfield would be too busy chasing kids off his lawn and eating disgusting, chalk-flavored Necco wafers to make it to the victory party if he won (assuming it was before his bed time). Besides, Greenfield despises the award and does not wish to win it. Nevertheless, Not Guilty is brilliantly written and a welcome addition to the blogosphere.
For Fun: Corporette A First Amendment attorney who tells women lawyers that they don’t have to dress in pantsuits and potato sacks to be successful. Sounds fun to me. She’s a First Amendment attorney. We’ve got her back because she’s got the Constitution’s back.
Legal Tech: Tossup – Technology & Marketing Law Blog / Robert Ambrogi’s LawSites Both are strong blogs and we couldn’t pick a favorite. If you’ve never heard of either of them, be sure to give both a read.
IMHO: Although we are nominated in, and currently leading, in the IMHO category, The Volokh Conspiracy gushes content published daily from leading writers and thinkers, and it is edited by probably the most brilliant legal mind in America and someone who would be a shoo-in for the Supreme Court if we were in charge. Seriously, what the hell are you doing here? Although the reading is sometimes a bit eye-glazing, since it consists of so much academic navel gazing, it is still amazing — think of a law journal without all the worthless parts. Volokh’s blog should be in the Law Prof Plus category, but he’s here with us, and there’s no shame in admitting that he’s better. He has this blog’s collective vote – even over voting for ourselves.
But if our current lead in the competition holds up – and the Legal Satyricon wins again – we will assign the ABA’s award to goatsegirl. Do not look at that website at work unless we are your employer. Really.
Giving the credential to a site so vile and bizarre is the only way to properly thank the ABA for the stewardship it has offered this profession. Between allowing the massive outsourcing of legal work to India, accrediting every toilet law school with a roof, and not even having the stones to categorically refuse accreditation to overseas law schools, goatsegirl seems like a great fit for the ABA, a dysfunctional and self-interested shitbucket of an organization if one ever existed. (more)
That said, we actually love the ABA Blawg directory and the ABA journal, and all the news we can find there. Martha & Debra serve up the only useful functions that the ABA manages to provide.
Blogs that belonged in the list: Popehat, Public Citizen’s CL&P, Citizen Media Law Project, Crime & Federalism, Siouxsie Law, and Spam Notes.
So, if you’ve got the time, register here. And then go vote in each category.
I find your posting disingenuous Mr. DeVoy. It was after all you that went to a ‘shooter’ site and painted one of your competitors, Professor Turley, as anti-gun as well as elitist. You then exhorted them to deny his blog any kind of victory suggesting instead TLS and Volokh (no problem with Volokh) should they choose to help you out. They did, to the tune of a hundred or more votes in a matter of hours for TLS, bringing you from 3rd or 4th place to first.
Now, after trolling for votes among notoriously reactionary special interest blawgers in order to win, TKS has again chosen to mock the very award it seeks to win. No doubt some obtuse political rationale will later be generated as was done last year.
If Mr. Randazza had the strength of conviction espoused by your posting or last years sour-grapes over winning, he would instruct the ABA to remove his blawg from consideration.
Yes, I’m a Turlyblawg fan and knowing your editorial policy, I have no illusions that you will actually allow my reply to be published. You folks take the prize alright, you do indeed.
Link to letter to, and responses at, the ‘shooter’ site. Red meat to the pitbulls:
1) I posted your comment. What is this editorial policy to which you allude? This blog will post all comments that are not spam for Turkish consumer electronics sites.
2) You are creepily obsessed with a blog competition where the ultimate winner likely will be Goatsegirl. Yes, I’ve seen the comments you’ve made about me at numerous other blogs. I’m responding to this post only because it was made in response to something I wrote. If I didn’t enjoy the attention so much, I would be deeply concerned.
3) My e-mail was not sent to the Maryland shooters, but forwarded to them by a personal contact. I am not going into greater detail about this communication. But, my message was within the context of an e-mail to someone I personally know.
4) After reading Jon Turley’s op-ed in USA Today where he likened the Second Amendment to Lord Voldemort (“he who shall not be named” – I never liked Harry Potter and considered its fans juvenile), I don’t know how anyone could have reasonably thought him to be in favor of gun rights before his recent post on the subject. This was a blind spot, and the only information I had to rely on was his public commentary on the subject. Note, too, that in Mr. Turley’s response post to me, while he says he agrees with the analysis in Heller and McDonald, his prior writings on the subject come far short of endorsing gun ownership, using phrases such as “While we can disagree on the meaning of the Second Amendment, we should agree that all citizens — whether in Alabama or New York or Texas — should receive the full benefit of all the rights contained in the Bill of Rights because they are all (first and foremost) Americans.” I suppose I am remiss to not see the clear endorsement of an individual right to bear arms within that statement.
5) Re-read point two. If Mr. Turley was upset with me, I would be happy to respond to his concerns, as I did in point 4, via e-mail. Perhaps it is nothing more than a good faith misunderstanding, as I was not out to assassinate his character or misrepresent his views. As best as I can tell, you are not a blogger or connected to the competition, making your untold time investment in this situation meta by several degrees.
6) I make no apologies for Jenna Haze re-tweeting mine and Randazza’s lengthy screeds. That was awesome.
Seems awfully funny that this creepy and obsessed clown has “no illusions that you will actually allow my reply to be published.”
Meanwhile, my post to the Turley Toilet has been “awaiting moderation” since December 26. <a href="https://randazza.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/turleys-lack-of-balls.png" Here is a screen shot of it.
Perhaps Ms. Janisch should find another hobby.
Marc, any posting with more than two links is automatically sent to moderation hell and no one ever sees them.
“Turley Toilet”? LOL. Stay classy and feel free to call me by my first name.
“Any posting with more than two links is automatically sent to moderation hell and no one ever sees them.”
Except ones that are negative, right?
“6) I make no apologies for Jenna Haze re-tweeting mine and Randazza’s lengthy screeds. That was awesome.”
Yes it was, and as I posted creepily, elsewhere, had her fans seen a natural ally and do a search which resulted in votes for your blawg would be an entirely appropriate way to garner votes. A celebrity shout-out is always flattering.
“My e-mail was not sent to the Maryland shooters, but forwarded to them by a personal contact.”
At one time it was believed that what distinguished us from other animals was our use of tools.
“If Mr. Turley was upset with me, I would be happy to respond to his concerns”
I suspect that he is upset by and with very little having to do with the ABA competition. I do not speak on his behalf or at his direction.
“As best as I can tell, you are not a blogger or connected to the competition, …”
I am not but knowing the TLS distain for the ABA awards I was surprised to see that TLS didn’t remove itself from competition this year. As well, TLS actively campaigned for votes using an appeal based on a competitor being “anti-gun” and an elitist:
“Turley, on the other hand, believes that his obvious intelligence gives him authority to make decisions for others; as such, he is strongly anti-gun. As such, we do not want to give him an easy victory, or any victory at all.”
Really, who could have dreamed such an appeal would be passed on to rabid gun aficionados? And passed on to other similar sites from Maryland Shooters. Certainly not one with your intellectual credentials. ;-)
Here’s the nut of it:
To solicit votes to receive an award that would be rejected by passing it on to a non-contender is IMHO, a lack of sportsmanship. The TLS lack of sportsmanship toward other, all other, nominees (including one of the bawgs I follow and comment at) and the disrespect for the award itself offended me and I had some time on my hands. Sportsmanship counts.
Seems funny that you’re concerned about a “lack of sportsmanship toward other, all other, nominees,” while other nominees seem to either a) not care, or b) support LS anyhow.
Find something else to do with your time. Your obsession borders on mental illness.
Regarding the blog comment with three links which you highlight in your reply at 1:32pm above:
that posting is unique in my time as a visitor to the site as was that poster’s visit. That was a posting that I found odd for those reasons and because the negative characterization of one blawg recommending votes for another is not ‘trolling for votes’. Recommendations are a perfectly acceptable way for votes to be garnered.
To digress momentarily; I disputed Justice Friendly’s characterization of your endorsements by other blawgs in the same thread as soon as I saw them. I quote herewith in full because if you feel that leaving his/her characterization on valid recommendations stand without rebuttal is inappropriate, you should not believe that it went unchallenged. It did not.
1, December 21, 2010 at 10:28 am
Justice Friendly, I think you’re off the mark regarding the endorsements you posted (not all are still available for view). Those are normal endorsements consistent with any campaign for an award that is voted for. They are not examples of calculated, negative campaigning and mining reactionary single issue voting blocs divorced from the substance of the greater issue involved in blawging and the award competition. I doubt that anyone, anyone could find any basis for saying anything to disparage the above endorsements or any similar endorsement for any blawg in competition for an ABA award.”
Comments made both before and after on various threads that contain more than two links are rejected by the software. That quirk has been the subject of more than one discussion on Turleyblawg. In any event, as comments go, it was unique in the use of more than two links.
—————-From your posting immediately above
“Seems funny that you’re concerned about a “lack of sportsmanship toward other, all other, nominees,” while other nominees seem to either a) not care, or b) support LS anyhow.”
Sportsmanship isn’t about how ones competitors feel, or say they feel. It’s about how YOU play the game.
It’s been diverting over a long holiday vacation but I am now finished with it.
To solicit votes to receive an award that would be rejected by passing it on to a non-contender is IMHO, a lack of sportsmanship.
I disagree. As someone who is susceptible to the ABA’s poor policy decisions, and is seeing firsthand the effects of their decisions, from rubber-stamping the outsourcing of legal work overseas to their ignorance to the obvious glut of young and under-skilled attorneys in this country (not to the new lawyers’ fault, either – it’s impossible to obtain skills without employment and training), I think that it would be a fair referendum of the ABA, to the extent the ABA Journal is a manifestation and extension of that organization. The ABA has screwed a generation of new and would-be attorneys. Isn’t this fitting civil disobedience? It’s not about sportsmanship, but about the ABA itself. If they wanted to give away something useful, they could give away enough money for a small firm to bring on and train one of my promising law school classmates who is looking for work. That would be a much better use of everyone’s effort than some blog nonsense.
Also, Goatsegirl was something originally floated by Marc. I wanted to give it to the brilliant madhouse over at Encyclopedia Dramatica, who would do far worse things to it, but I don’t have any contacts there. Thus, Goatsegirl it was.
We can still give it to ED. Oh, oh! OR we can give it to xoxo!
I have a nomination for the ABA Blawg 100 Creepy Commenter. Congratulations, Lottakatz, you win – which means you’ve failed at life and every other endeavor.
Turley is a notorious post thief. He’ll see something on a blog, re-write and re-post, and not give the blogger a “hat tip.”
Ask any legal blogger about this. We’ve all had a post ripped off by Turley.
Fuck that guy.
I just hope Lattacreepz doesn’t go Mark David Chapman on J. Devoy.
Yes, I have heard other bloggers complain about Turley in this regard.
Thanks guys. I appreciate the thought.