Hopefully, nobody in libraryland doubts the importance of libraries. That shouldn’t be a debate we need to have.

I tend to think that almost any dichotomy is too simple to accurately describe anything in this complex world and tends to oversimplify both one’s own position and that of those one disagrees with.

Fusty-

Ask anyone who knows me- I’m frequently more grumpy than called-for.

I think that the AL frequently makes good points, including in her last couple posts. But that last post isn’t “a defense of library principles.” If you think it was, please tell me *what* principles were under attack and *in what lines* the AL defended them?

I think I have proven that it is possible to criticize the substance and presentation of something without resorting to nastiness or personal attacks. I think her/his/their readership would grow if the pseudonym was set aside and the writing, while remaining as opinionated as ever, was more professional and less nasty.

Lastly, we should know better than to call something “good” simply because it is popular. We know that popularity does not equal authority or quality. More often, I find, popularity is the result of catering to the lowest common denominator.

And of course, we can disagree on all of this, Fusty- but the civility with which we disagree is important to the profession. Thanks for the comments!

Clearly Libraryland is forming into two camps. The keep the library like it is, and the what the hell is the library going to be in the future.

I think it *is* different from the AL’s criticism because I signed my (actual) name to it and because I didn’t make an ad hominem remarks.

There was no “exhortation to the masses not to read or comment at AL.” I advised (only) those who don’t like her/his/their work to not comment in the comments section of her blog or link to her blog from elsewhere.

Hey, if you like her/his/their stuff, go ahead and read it. If you feel like commenting on her/his/their stuff, please do.

Since I don’t like her/his/their nastiness and I don’t think LJ should publish a pseudonymous author, I won’t be giving LJ the traffic or Google juice- but that’s just me.

Thanks for the comment!

Seriously, you are one of the awesomest people in libraryland.

As far as the M&S/LJ/AL thing goes … I see both yours and Jason’s points. Like Jason, I was pretty tickled to be included, because of the others already included – to me, it IS a type of “good job” recognition. But my view of that award changed drastically a few months after my award was given – when LJ decided to pay for anonymous ad hominem posts, and to brand it as LJ content. Pretty unprofessional move from an organization I used to respect.

What have I done since? Other than mentioning when some of my friends get the M&S thing (ie., Jason, et al) … I don’t link to them or mention them on my blog. I also don’t comment at LJ. To be fair, I’m not sure there has been a reason – not sure if anything I’d actually WANT to blog about from LJ has crossed my path recently. But it’s something I think about.

Not that that’s any big thing – I’m just one blogger in a heap of smarter bloggers, authors, etc. But it’s what I do … primarily because of LJ’s stance on paying for anonymous namecalling, etc. So for me, it’s much more than not feeding the troll.

And, very off-topic – it was Logic Express, not GarageBand. Sheesh!

First, I have no problem with self-promotion (obviously). The problem is when the self-promotion is so strong that it subverts (or replaces) an actual message.

Well, of course people like Jenica and Dorothea rock. A lot of people who were named Movers and Shakers rock- after all, they did something cool enough that it got the attention of an LJ editor. That doesn’t legitimize the ‘award.’

At first, you said it was an honor because you were nominated by your peers. Now you’re saying it was an honor because there were other people named Movers and Shakers who you admire, regardless of the fact that the M&S *isn’t* recognition from your peers.

I think anyone working in libraries feels pretty damned delighted to receive any kind of recognition at all, especially when one is recognized in good company. Still, I think we have to look past our need for recognition in order to avoid hypocrisy.

If you publicly criticize the LJ editors for their AL support, I think you should put your money where your mouth is. But we can disagree.