I seem to recall that I talked about the importance for me of discussions within blogs (in comment threads) and between blogs (often aided and abetted by that unsung hero the trackback) in a couple of ways: 1) helping to get things going when I’m starting on new research, with suggestions for reading and sources and approaches; 2) unexpected conversations that can start up around topics I already know something about and post on in order to communicate beyond the usual academic circles. With examples. I thought that would be more fun.

The session as a whole was really diverse and quite hard to pin down (so a pretty good parallel for the current academic blogosphere, really, and personally I hope that continues). And I’ve mislaid my notes, such as they were.

I’ve seen it blogged here as well as some thoughts generated by the session. But I may have missed quite a lot this week, so if anyone has seen any more posts about or inspired by it, send in the links!

It’s much more like a considered, transcribed newsgroup conversation than a blog conversation, which has obvious advantages (more clearly structured answers, imho) and disadvantages (a bit too stilted, a bit too published-academic in the stylistics of the discourses – e.g. footnotes, correct punctuation, polite argument). The fact that it is retrospectively structured into heirarchical forms also interests me as a counter-example. AS DOES the presence of correct-name author biographies to serve as authorisation. And the cliqueyness…

In fact, I think it’s a goldmine counter-example of how a web-based discussion has/can/should work. So there!

Regarding conversations and collaboration, I would also point out that blogging has helped many people ease the transition from grad school into their post-graduate life: in some ways, the old saw “on the internet, nobody knows you’re a dog” — http://www.unc.edu/depts/jomc/academics/dri/idog.html — works to let ideas and academic interests connect across the divide of academic ranks and farflung institutions.

For web links, I’d also add a link to Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com ) which isn’t entirely useful in our field but has the advantage of open access. There are many wonderful new databases and sources available online but we’re already running up against questions of accessibility (does your institution have access to the New DNB? to EEBO? etc.) that I think that’s an important question to consider.

Finally, enjoy the AHA!

kristine: you snuck in there while I was writing this! That’s a really nice point I hadn’t thought about.