Paul’s post puts me in a terrible bind: If I’m arguing in my essay that blogs aren’t well-situated to advance legal scholarship, and Paul’s blog post suggests I may be wrong, I can’t very well post a substantive response on this blog without conceding defeat! Seriously, though, I think his post brings out a point that I touch on briefly but should expand in my draft, that blogs can provide a means to discuss and critique scholarly ideas in the same way that a workshop can. He’s also right that I need to be more careful about defining my terms. At the same time, I’m sticking to my guns that blogs aren’t well-suited to the scholarly enterprise. Paul is right that it is possible to use a blog to develop scholarly ideas. But I don’t claim it is impossible; rather, I claim that the blog format makes it difficult. And I think that’s right, for the reasons I discuss in the essay.