LibraryCrunch Visual Archive

EDIT This post has been removed. On 5/19/06 I received an email from the CEO of the "1.0 Delivery Company" (herein referred to as "the corporation") that the ALA contracted to manage the Library 2.0 Boot Camp. That email led me to believe that legal action was being threatened. I stand by my assertion that "the corporation" chose the wrong tools to teach a course on Library 2.0. I remain convinced that there exist better open source options instead of the proprietary and less flexible tools that "the corporation" chose. WordPress, Drupal, and certain tools from 37 Signals, as well as other options, would have allowed the students to use the same 2.0 tools in class that they will be using outside of class. This argument is very well made in the comments to a post on Wandering Eyre. As one of several original writers on the concept and theory of Library 2.0, I believe I am well positioned to express my personal opinion regarding anyone's attempt to interpret and teach on this topic. My opinion continues to be that there are others better qualified to manage a course on Library 2.0. That being said, I have no desire or intent to defame or harm "the corporation", and in fact I do not believe that I have harmed or defamed "the corporation". However, I have no desire to meet "the corporation" in court; despite the fact that I believe my criticism of their business practices was protected speech.