I recently learned that Dennis Kennedy named this weblog the Funniest Legal Blog for 2004. Thank you, Dennis. Before I make my speech, for which I've have allotted myself a brief 250 words, I'd like to say that Dennis was the guy who first got me thinking about weblogs, when I attended a presentation he made at the 2003 annual meeting of the Missouri Bar. Not long afterwards, I started three weblogs of my own.
So Dennis knows weblogs. But I'm not sure if he knows this one. Funniest Legal Blog? Hardly. Sure, I try to be a little irreverent from time to time, but I don't think of this as a humor site. Instead, I try to mix it up. You know, something for everyone, like Rolling Stone magazine. It's not everyone's model, I suppose; Jim Dedman just decided he's been mixing it up too much. But it seems to work for me. Some long posts; some short posts; some satire; some serious commentary; some personal essays; some dopey-looking pictures of myself. If you come here looking exclusively for humor, however, you're certain to be disappointed.
By writing so self-consciously about my own weblog in this post, I realize I'm violating an unstated rule of weblogging etiquette. But if Jim Dedman's post is any indication, introspection seems to be in the air. I partook of it once not long ago in a post titled "What's the Use of This Weblog?" And now that I'm just a few days away from the one-year anniversary of this site, it's hard not to be thinking of ways I should change it.
And change it I will. Most of these changes will probably be subtle. For example, I'm going to post less about how I make my living as a lawyer and more about my life as a writer and a father. Good idea? I don't know. I'm also thinking about abandoning some long-standing features and replacing them with others. I'll still do "humor" from time to time, but not exclusively, and only when I'm in the mood. But that's not really a change; it's always been the rule.
If you have any suggestions for my weblog, please let me know. They'd be very much appreciated.