http://www.bitstrips.com//read.php?comic_id=17789

Quite an impressive group. Dean

There are many aspects to this story that I think I would like to write about for a future Library Journal. The responsible use of social software, for one, and the limits of free speech. Next year, I’ll be sure to be less complacent and nominate several young movers and shakers too. (I don’t know why I missed that.) Oh, and a few more health librarians such as Michelle Kraft and Mark Rabnett.
Do you think they would be interested in that?

Dean

Don’t let the sour grapers get to ya!

but i don’t have my MLIS yet (May ’08)
- so i shouldn’t be included in the M&S list.

hmmmm.

in such an interdisciplinary field, deeming only those with alphabet soup after their name as worthy to “move” and “shake” would be shooting ourselves in the foot.

and yes, i appreciate i don’t know the finer points of Canadian librarianship, and that my lack of experience calls my credibility into question.

but i still believe that excluding those without an MLIS because they aren’t “librarians” is ridiculous and backward-thinking.

then again, i frequently say outrageous things.

amy “shakes when she moves” buckland

Easton says that I “can parse people’s statements to the point that it’s embarrassing” and suggests that others see what I “said about Susanna Fox recently.”

Dean’s post and every “non-librarian” snark he’s made in the last several weeks (all of which were removed from his site after Meredith put up this post) were inspired (by Dean’s own admission) by my criticism of an editorial he wrote. Perhaps this is where Easton sees something embarassing.

I wrote about Susannah Fox that she was wrong to criticize the AMA for suggesting that doctors are a more reliable source of health information than chat rooms (because Doctors ARE a more reliable source of healthcare information than chat rooms) and that her comparison of the RIAA and the AMA was a very poor, misleading analogy.

I implore George Easton to attempt to support his own assertions- because I’m tired of people like he and Giustini making unsupported ad hominem attacks instead of ever debating the merits of an argument.

I’m very grateful to Meredith for this post and to Rachel for hers.

especially the nice mention about non-MLSs… dividing people into this group and that, while ignoring skill and value is such a waste of energy.

i heart librarians, whether they move, shake, or stay still!

Kidding aside, I think the basic point is that while it’s an honor to get it, not getting it is meaningless. It’s not a careful, rational, fair process designed to get at some M&S quintessence–which would be impossible anyway–but a fun way to recognize some people, give the nod to some trends and produce an article that isn’t boring.

One of the Canadians points was that there weren’t enough such “prizes” to go around. Well, how hard is *that* to change? Library Journal made it up, after all!