1. How and when to cite blogs is a tricky business that publishers are still grappling with. Thanks for pointing out the errors in citing your; I’ve forwarded it to the editors.

    Personally, I can agree with your final line: “So when are biblioblogger posts appropriate for printed scholarly materials? When they’re not mine.” That’s my feeling about my blog, too…


  2. Jim Eisenbraun

    Someone once said to me that, when you get a letter in the mail from someone you don’t know, you should look to see if it’s signed. If it’s not, don’t read it. I erred in not checking the end of this post to see whether it was signed or not. Lack of a signature reflects lack of willingness to take responsibility for one’s views. Who is “D”? And is there a compelling reason why “D” needs to remain anonymous?

  3. DageshForte

    I don’t think its anonymous, at least not to the degree that someone like NT Wrong was. I’ve given a Twitter handle where I can be reached. Joel knows me. If you go to SBL and hang out with bloggers, you probably know me. If you’d like to friend me on FB, we can converse there as well. Facebook.com/dageshforte

    I do agree with the sentiment of the tradition. I think folks should put their name on it. My name’s Daniel. I don’t wish to share my surname because that’s what I’ve decided. You don’t have to respect that and you would not be the first. Yes, I think I have a compelling reason. But I also think that an informed sense of privacy is reason enough. Not only does our government monitor us, many of us even freely offer up personal info to Big Brother (I’m reminded of a James Crossley paper some years ago at SBL). I don’t want to do that, but I still want to be a part of this online community. And I think there is room for those of us who don’t want to share a surname or face pic. I am happy to meet anyone face-to-face, preferably at a bar.

    Biblioblogs discuss difficult issues and those discussions should be weighed on their content first. I understand the necessity of taking responsibility for one’s ideas in the academic community. I also understand the need for individuals to protect themselves in an unsecure, changing online world. I’ve chosen to negotiate that this way.


  4. Robert Rezetko

    Young, Ehrensvärd, and I feel that Zevit misunderstood the interviews and that he used them to misconstrue our scholarship and arguments in LDBT. We will discuss this issue in our review of his article in his and Miller-Naudé’s co-edited book.


Leave a Reply, Please!