Thanks for the welcome, John. I look forward to mixing it up.

I thought your cheap shot was funny, rude, but funny.

"Former editor": my mistake, hence corrected.

"Who the hell are you, anyway?!"
The Annoyed Librarian is just words on a page.

It's not that I think Annoyed Librarian is negative. I have agreed with many of her positions. However, it seems that the AL blog is somewhat like the Jerry Springer of the library blog world, particularly the comment section.

So there's like a gazillion posts on the AL blog and two on this blog. What does that say?

LJ: Great move, getting the AL! For both business and freedom of speech reasons. Now I'll visit your site nearly every day.

Blatant Berry. Hmmm. Let's see.

Angry Arnie.
Blatant Berry.
Conspicuous Chris.
Dogged Dave.
Egregious Ernie.
Flagrant Frank.
Glaring Gary.
Harried Henry.
Itchy Irwin.
Jocular Joe.
Krazy Kenneth.
Loudmouthed Larry.
Miffed Marvin.
Noisy Norman.
Obvious Oscar.
Patent Peter.
Qacophonous Quiper.
Rank Rodney.
Striking Steven.
Tinny Thomas.
Unhushed Puppy.
Vocal Vapor.
Whiplash Willy.
X-ray Xavier.
Y Me Y Yu.
Zippy Zephyr.

Given AL's blog is on a blog and not in the LJ as published, how do people cite to the AL's writing on the LJ blog? So far I have used this, but I bet you'll have a better idea:

"Some 'Censorship' is Good," Annoyed Librarian, Library Journal, 8 October 2008.

I hope you're not a librarian if you are asking a question about citation format on a blog. This seems like a subtle attempt at self-promotion.

Guybrarian, are you suggesting that I'm the AL? Well I'm not. I am aware that I could use the MLA and the like to get the correct citation, but I am asking the LJ out of courtesy so that I use the citation as the LJ suggests. I fail to see the need for people to be so unfriendly toward each other. There really was no need for your comment, was there.

Your last sentence is missing a question mark.

Brotha John, you know who this is by that person telling you to remember the direct-address commas after the word "welcome" and before the word "so"! Anyway, I hope this AL business gets sorted out soon--even though it's one funny war of words. Peace.

I meant after the word "so.” ("So, cranky AL, you now know...") Peace.

AL is already deleting messages that she disagrees with. A message I posted calling AL on her plan to delete messages she finds irrelevant or disagreeable was deleted with a comment in passing that only governments can censor things. Really?

AL continues the random deletion of messages that he/she would like to suppress. For example, on 10/20 at about 7:00 EST in the anonymity post, there were at least 51 messages on the board. Within minutes of posting the following message, there were fewer than 45, including deletion of the message that follows:
<

October 20, 2008
In response to: Is It Really the "Anonymity"? anonymous commented:</br></br>
So, we see "global warming is a myth" still up, a note from AL that moderating the yahoos is a joy of life, and the only confirmed deletion to date is a post from "anonymous" commenting
merely that AL posted in one of the comments that "...from now on any commenters who have absolutely nothing of substance or wit to say, will probably be deleted" and that this just might be, according to any number of dictionary-supported definitions, "censorship." </br> </br>Yet we have the unfortunately not pseudonymous Safe Libraries along with the overly loquacious Kat rambling on off-topic and relatively untrammeled. It's pretty clear what AL thinks is censorship and what AL thinks is moderation.

This kind of cavalier treatment of LJ readers might be acceptable on AL's home blog, but should not be supported or tolerated as a standard practice by Library Journal. If LJ really decided to give unlimited powers to AL, it might be time to rethink that decision. LJ can link to AL anytime it pleases; for AL to abuse LJ's readers by censoring comments with which she disagrees merely to prove she can is an abuse of power. LJ's readers deserve better than a a pseudonymous demagogue who deletes legitimate reader criticism on a whim. John, I appreciate your tolerance here, but you have loose cannon firing blanks. To the extent you have some editorial influence, you might want to consider what you support and what you dissapprove. Unless of course, you approve.

Please interview the new president of our Boston Public Library!
groups.google.com/ group/ soc.libraries.talk
bpl.org/ general/ trustees/ trusteeagenda081408.htm

Jamie McGlone has forwarded me your email public records
request of October 20, 2008 asking that the audio of the
interviews for the library president be made available via
soundarchives. bpl. org
and his email response to you indicating that he would make
arrangements to have that done.

Upon further investigation it has become evident that this is
not a simple task and one that would require many hours of
library staff time to accomplish.

The library will not be able to make them
available through the website.


As Mr. McGlone offered initially I will reiterate his offer
to arrange a time at your convenience for you to come to the
library to listen to the audiotapes and to review the
curriculum vitae of the candidates.

Please don't hesitate to call him at
617 859-2366 to schedule a time.

Sincerely yours,
Ruth E. Kowal, Deputy Director

Cc: Jamie McGlone


Books are just the beginning



Boston Public Library
Copley Square &

I love librarians that make prostitution jokes!