Fellow mediator and blogger Geoff Sharp and I issued a challenge today to our fellow ADR bloggers: pick your best post from 2008 and submit it, then readers will choose the top three from all the submissions.  This friendly competition is open to any blog listed on the World Directory of ADR Blogs at ADRblogs.com.

ADRBlogs.com is the online project I launched over two years ago to track and catalog ADR, negotiation, and conflict resolution blogs around the globe. Today it covers 176 blogs from 27 countries.

I wanted to take a moment to highlight some of the most recent additions — the ones that stand out from the rest of the crowd by virtue of the quality of their writing and their embrace of blogging as a medium for connecting people and ideas. Here are my picks:

• Settlement Perspectives by attorney John DeGroote. DeGroote shares wisdom and smart advice for negotiators, lawyers and others from eight years as the Chief Litigation Counsel of a global company. Some fine examples of his craft include, “Why Mediate at All? Can’t We Just Work It Out?” and “Why We Can’t Just “Cut to the Chase”: Acceptance Time in Negotiation“.
• DIALOGIC Mediation Services by Arnold Zeman, a multi-lingual mediator and conflict coach based in Ottawa.  The motto of this new arrival on the ADR blogging scene is “turning conflict into conversation“. It could also be “turning visitors into loyal subscribers”, since the quality of the writing and the diversity of ideas have turned me into a regular reader.  Zeman provides a fresh view on topics relevant to the resolution of disputes, exploring issues ranging from “Genuine Apologies” to a humorous look at “Re-focusing Anger“.
• Real Divorce Mediation. One of my favorite bloggers, Nancy Hudgins, has teamed up with mediator and lawyer Debra Synovec to produce a blog designed to help couples face divorce with civility and dignity, inviting them to “open the door to a better future“. As mediator and marketing coach Tammy Lenski recently pointed out, it’s a fine example of a client-centered blog.
• Practical Dispute Resolution. Published by the Center for Legal Solutions, Inc., in Marietta, Georgia, this blog, which makes the most effective use of graphs I’ve yet seen on any ADR blog, focuses on the practical aspects of mediation and ADR and provides empirical analyses.  Recent posts include “Correlation of Mediator Gender to Settlement Rate”, “What is the Best Time to Mediate a Case?“, and “Some Types of Cases May Be Better Suited to Mediation than Others“.

Do you have a blog you’d like to submit for inclusion in ADRblogs.com? Read the submission guidelines and then get in touch.

ADR blogs Mediation Channel and mediator blah… blah… are combining in a quest to find the 3 best mediation and negotiation related posts written in 2008.

Together we are asking all ADR bloggers to send us your very favorite mediation/negotiation related post that you have written this year for inclusion in the competition. All you have to do is email us with the details.

Once we get bloggers’ posts we will open up the voting to the ADR community.

In the next week, we need to receive your e-mail with ‘ADR Post 2008′ in the subject line and then in the email the following information:

1. the name of your blog and its URL
2. the title of your nominated 2008 post and
3. a link to your post - all before close on November 30, 2008 at 11:59 PM (UTC-8).

Voting will then be open from early December until December 19, 2008. The ADR blogosphere and their readers will be asked to vote for their 3 favorite posts of 2008. Voting will close on December 19, 2008.

We hope all ADR bloggers will carry the list of posts and link to the voting site so we get a good voting turn out from readers in December. All that detail will be provided shortly after the close of entries on November 30.

The rules for inclusion are simple:

1. Your blog needs to be listed at World Directory of ADR Blogs at the time you submit your favorite post.
2. You can submit only one post and it must be mediation or negotiation related.
3. Your post needs to have been published on your blog during 2008 and still be available there.

Once voting is open in December, you are welcome to solicit votes for your own or another’s post in any way you want. As well as a bit of fun we hope the competition will showcase the very best of this year’s ADR writing.

Why are we doing this? In the ADR blogosphere wonderful posts seem to come and go so very quickly, often becoming irretrievably lost within days. We hope this good-natured exercise will allow bloggers to fish out their best writing and hold it up for all to see.

To submit your best post for 2008, email:

mediator blah… blah… at mediate [at] geoffsharp.co.nz
or
Mediation Channel at mail [at] mediationchannel.com

The latest edition of The Complete Lawyer is now available, putting the focus on “Doing Business Internationally.” The Complete Lawyer is a web-based magazine focusing on quality of life and career satisfaction for attorneys but with relevance for dispute resolution professionals as well.  It features a regular ADR column, “The Human Factor“, which explores ADR from the perspective of four attorneys who mediate - me and three colleagues, Stephanie West Allen of Idealawg and Brains on Purpose, Gini Nelson of Engaging Conflicts, and Victoria Pynchon of Settle It Now Negotiation Blog .  The four of us alternate as writers.

It’s my turn this month with this particular installment of “The Human Factor”, where I invite readers to “Master the Geography of Collaboration.

The Complete Lawyer is published by Don Hutcheson, a good friend to the four of us and an enthusiastic supporter of “The Human Factor”. Thanks, Don, as always for your encouragement — we are all deeply grateful.

The UMA protects communications made during a mediation and establishes a limited evidentiary privilege that prevents the use of those communications in subsequent legal proceedings.  The UMA could replace the current law in Massachusetts, M.G.L. ch. 233, § 23C.

During the course of two years, the MassUMA Working Group through the efforts of its subcommittees has produced recommendations and most recently an amended version of the UMA for consideration and public commenting.

The Working Group has scheduled the following public meetings to provide information about the UMA and invite input from mediators and the general public:

• Friday, November 21, 2:00 - 4:15 p.m., Fehlow Room, Main Library, 132 South Street, Plymouth, MA
• Monday, November 24, 1:00 - 4:00 p.m., Greenfield Community College (downtown campus), Greenfield, MA

(FYI, I’ll be facilitating the meeting on November 24 in Greenfield.)

In addition, two meetings of the MassUMA Working Group, also open to the public, will be held on the following dates:

• Thursday, December 4, 2008, 3-5 p.m.
• Tuesday, December 16, 2008, 2-5 p.m.

These meetings will take place at the offices of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Services, 99 Summer Street, Boston, MA. If you cannot attend in person, you can still participate by phone by calling 712-429-0690, enter access code 317609 and wait for other participants.

The public (that’s you) is strongly encouraged to comment online on the amended version of the Uniform Mediation Act proposed by the MassUMA Working Group, known as the UMA One Text.

If you’re interested in my two cents, you can read my objections to the amended version in an article I posted a year ago, “In weighing the Uniform Mediation Act, Massachusetts mediators may be poised to repeat mistakes of the past. I’m planning to revisit and refine those objections in an upcoming post soon.

Last week, legal marketing guru Larry Bodine put his foot in it with a blog post describing the “Best ‘Elevator Pitch’ Ever…?”, courtesy of a “silver-haired senior-most litigator” who relies on a cheap joke about the Holocaust to woo business clients.

Bodine’s readers responded with outrage, and, to his credit, Bodine deleted the post from his blog and offered an apology that mediator Victoria Pynchon has described as “heart-felt”:

I sincerely apologize for the crude and offensive “Elevator Pitch” post I put online last week. In the clear light of morning, it is clear that it was anti-Semitic and repellent. I want to thank all the people who commented and called me about it; I listened and took what you said to heart.

I have deleted the post. It was a mistake to repeat a crude joke that I heard in rural Illinois, and I should have known better. It was a worse mistake to say it was the “best” of its kind, when actually it was hideous.

Curiously, at Legal Blog Watch, a well regarded blogger approvingly repeated Bodine’s anecdote in a post captioned “Great Elevator Pitch for Lawyers“. Quickly realizing her error, she amended her post to apologize for her mistake:

Law firm public relations expert Rich Klein makes the important point at his blog that an elevator speech making light of the Holocaust is offensive. Klein is right and I apologize to anyone whom this post may have offended.

Although Bodine’s apology has earned the praise of some, not everyone was willing to let him off the hook so easily, including one blogger from a family of Holocaust survivors.

But what interests me about this whole event is not so much the apologies that resulted, or their acceptance or rejection. Instead, I wonder how it is that two people, one who recounted the anecdote and one who repeated it, missed its offensiveness the first time around.

In a post published in The Situationist in the aftermath of the Don Imus firing last year, authors Jon Hanson and Michael McCann mused,

…the stereotypes that we purport to abhor when articulated explicitly reside within most of us unexamined and unchallenged, sometimes wielding influence on our cognitions and behavior. We are, in a way, all carriers of the same virus…

What happened to these two bloggers could happen to you or me.  We, too, are susceptible; it is all too easy for any of us to err.  Without warning, we can all be deaf to the import of our words, blind to their effect.  In the end, we can only learn from incidents like these.  As James Joyce wrote, “A man’s errors are his portals of discovery.” Experiences such as these can build our immunity to the viruses within us.  And healing will come — through prevention and, yes, through apologies.

In the U.S., thousands of graduate school applicants sit each year for one or more of the standardized tests that most universities require as part of their admissions process.  One of them, the Law School Admission Test, known as the LSAT, measures the reading comprehension and verbal reasoning skills of hopeful attorneys-to-be — yielding results that purport to predict success in law school and in practice later.

But does the LSAT in fact measure the right stuff?

Researchers at the UC-Berkeley School of Law think that they have identified tests more accurate than the LSAT, according to a report by Petra Pasternak published at Law.com, “Berkeley Wants Research on LSAT Alternatives to Go National“. According to Pasternak,

Roughly 10 years have passed since Berkeley law professor Marjorie Shultz set out to find a more complete way to test students for admission to law school. This fall, she and Berkeley psychology professor Sheldon Zedeck have wrapped up their findings in a 100-page report, now available on the law school’s Web site. They say the LSAT, with its focus on cognitive skills, does not measure for skills such as creativity, negotiation, problem-solving or stress management, but that they have found promising new and existing tests from the employment context that do…

Jeffrey Brand, dean of the University of San Francisco School of Law, said that the research is welcome. Brand…said that passing the bar exam is clearly important.

“But we also need lawyers with the kind of skill sets that the world needs — like empathy, persuasiveness and the willingness to have the courage to do the right thing — which the LSAT does not measure,” Brand said.

Proponents of alternatives to the LSAT will no doubt have tough negotiations ahead of them as they endeavor to persuade the legal community of the merits of utilizing other measurement tools to predict effectiveness in law school and beyond. I wish them success: the legal profession and the public it serves can only benefit from this closer inquiry into what it takes to be an effective lawyer today.

With over 120,000 users, Style Matters has helped business managers, organizational consultants, and conflict resolution trainers worldwide teach personal conflict management skills. What distinguishes Style Matters from other conflict mode instruments is its commitment to cultural sensitivity, providing different instructions for collectivist and individualistic cultures.

As he has done in the past with previous releases of Style Matters, Dr. Kraybill generously offers a free review copy for downloading, along with a trainers’ guide (PDF).

This move comes in response to the decision by Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick to order deep cuts in the state budget to offset a projected revenue shortfall of roughly $1 billion. Mediation programs are but one more casualty of the fiscal crisis Massachusetts, like many other states around the U.S., currently faces.

As a mediator — particularly one who devoted time to promoting the use of court-connected ADR as a member of the Trial Court Standing Committee on Dispute Resolution — I feel this blow acutely. It dismays me to see mediation devalued in this way. It is, in Massachusetts at least, expendable not essential.

Fortunately, elsewhere in the U.S., courts are ramping up their commitment to ADR, not downsizing it. Examples include foreclosure mediation programs rolled out in New Jersey, Ohio, and Florida.

How disappointing to learn that Massachusetts, the place where ADR pioneer Frank Sander had his vision of the multi-door courthouse, has elected to slam shut one doorway to justice.

Reflecting on rights and interests, I note that this year marks the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.  In celebration of a document that recognizes and honors the basic dignity and worth of human beings everywhere, filmmaker Seth Pau has created an animated short. With a haunting soundtrack and stark graphics, Pau’s moving interpretation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights invites new and deeper reflection on a 60-year-old text.  Watch it here:

Via Boing Boing.

For those of you who missed last week’s post, I repeat the instructions and the exercise here:

To complete the exercise, read the following story. Below it are 12 statements about the story. After you read the story, determine whether each of the 12 statements is

• T - true;
• F - false ; or
• ? - you do not have enough information to determine whether the statement is true or false

Allow yourself no more than 5 minutes to complete the exercise. Ready? Here goes:

The Cash Register Exercise

The Story

A businessman had just turned off the lights in the store when a man appeared and demanded money. The owner opened a cash register. The contents of the cash register were scooped up, and the man sped away. A member of the police force was notified promptly.

12 Statements about the Story

1. A man appeared after the owner had turned off his store lights.
2. The robber was a man.
3. The man did not demand money.
4. The man who opened the cash register was the owner.
5. The store owner scooped up the contents of the cash register and ran away.
6. Someone opened a cash register.
7. After the man who demanded the money scooped up the contents of the cash register, he ran away.
8. While the cash register contained money, the story does not state how much.
9. The robber demanded money of the owner.
10. It was broad daylight when the man appeared.
11. The story concerns a series of events in which only three persons are referred to: the owner of the store, a man who demanded money, and a member of the police force.
12. The following events in the story are true: someone demanded money, a cash register was opened, its contents were scooped up, and a man dashed out of the store.

Correct Answers for the Cash Register Exercise

I warned readers that only twice when I’ve conducted this exercise has anyone gotten every answer right.

I provide the answer key on the right within this post, displayed upside down so as not to spoil things for those of you still trying to figure it out. To see the text right-side up, you can either turn your computer screen upside down (just kidding) or simply place your cursor over the answer key and the answer will appear as alt-text.

I’ll leave you to mull the answers over and will plan to discuss them next week. Out of curiosity, did anyone out there get them all right? Just wondering.

Welcome to Blawg Review #181, celebrating International Conflict Resolution Day.

For those of you who are unfamiliar with Blawg Review, allow me a brief introduction. Hosted each week by a different blogger, Blawg Review highlights noteworthy legal blogging, sharing the pleasure of discovery of insight, news, and commentary sampled across the spectrum of legal practice.

In preparation for my turn as host, I did a little research into the significance of this particular date, October 13. I turned to that sometimes unreliable, always entertaining, font of 21st century wisdom, Wikipedia, for some answers, and learned that in 1582, thanks to the implementation of the Gregorian calendar that year, October 13 did not exist in Italy, Poland, Portugal and Spain.

That’s somehow fitting for a presentation of Blawg Review that celebrates Conflict Resolution Day. Conflict, after all, can be like that. It can make us fiercely wish for entire days to vanish, and that the events that mar them vanish with them. Resolution though looks determinedly ahead; we can’t undo the past, but we can at least undo its results by the choices we make today.

Mediation? Or litigation? That’s how some might frame the choice among dispute resolution methods. With Blawg Review #181, you can have it both ways. Since I’m a mediator, half of this presentation of Blawg Review will commemorate International Conflict Resolution Day by presenting posts relating to conflict resolution, ADR, and negotiation. And, since I’m also a card-carrying member of the Massachusetts bar, the other half will review the best in legal blogging on topics other than ADR. Mediation, litigation — which do you prefer? I’ll let you be the judge (or arbitrator, if you’d rather).

However, to get you in the mood for either mediating or litigating, I invite you first to watch this classic Monty Python sketch, “The Argument”:

1. International Conflict Resolution Day: related posts on ADR, negotiation, and conflict resolution

In thinking about the significance of Conflict Resolution Day, I was struck by a post written by Bob Sutton at Work Matters, “Touch People With The Better Angels of Your Nature“, as he reflected on words U.S. president Abraham Lincoln spoke during his first inaugural address at a time when the U.S. was divided, North against South:

We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battle-field, and patriot grave, to every living heart and hearth-stone, all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.

Sutton writes, “I think it is excellent advice. Nastiness sometimes leads to short-term wins, but the long-term costs are usually horrible.” If only we could all be touched by our own better angels.

You and your better angel may in fact like to attend one or more of the free events honoring Conflict Resolution Day to be held this week. Tom Kosakowski at The Ombuds Blog alerts readers that the Association for Conflict Resolution (ACR) has two free teleconferences planned: one on “Conflict Resolution, Democracy, and Policymaking: Lessons and Challenges”, and the second on “Working for Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding: How Can I Make a Better World?”, geared toward undergraduate and graduate students. You can get more information about these and other Conflict Resolution Day events or find out how to register by visiting ACR’s web site.

If you’re interested in finding out what role the internet and technology can play in resolving disputes, then sign up for ODR Cyberweek 2008, an all-online conference featuring demonstrations, discussions, and other events exploring the application of technology to dispute resolution, negotiation, and more, running from October 13 - 17, 2008. Registration is entirely free. (Bonus for the eco-conscious: because it’s all online, you can keep your carbon footprint small.)

Last year I celebrated Conflict Resolution Day online with my friend Geoff Sharp, a barrister and mediator from New Zealand, with a special double-hemisphere edition of Blawg Review. Geoff, an accomplished blogger known for punchy, no-holds-barred posts like last week’s “Counsel, strap on a pair!“, has just been singled out for a special and well-deserved honor: he has been named LEADR Australasian Fellow for 2008-2010. LEADR is an Australasian, not-for-profit membership organization that promotes and facilitates the use of consensual dispute resolution processes. Congratulations, Geoff.

Cognitive Daily, a cognitive psychology blog, shares the results of a recent survey it conducted about a popular illusion that depicts a dancer spinning. The illusion, created by Nobuyuki Kayahara, does not, contrary to popular belief, prove whether you’re right-brained or left-brained. What makes it so fascinating is that some people perceive her to spin clockwise, some counter-clockwise, and some are able to reverse the direction in which they see her spin. I find optical illusions useful in teaching negotiation or conflict resolution skills, since they remind us of the unreliability of our senses, and that it is always possible to see things differently, even when you and I find ourselves looking at precisely the same thing.

The illusion appears on your right — which way do you see her spin?

Nothing ignites conflict faster than ill-chosen words or a lack of common courtesy. David Giacalone, the poet and retired mediator who publishes f/k/a, a blog combining “breathless punditry” with “one-breath poetry”, asks, “Who are you calling ‘dearie’?“, as he examines the phenomenon known as “elderspeak” — the terms of endearment the well-intentioned use to address (and offend) elders. Scott Greenfield of Simple Justice soberly shares “A Lawyer’s Lesson About Inflammatory Rhetoric“. And Eric Turkewitz at New York Personal Injury Law Blog says, “I’m Sorry You’re A Jerk (Lawyering 101: Professionalism)“.

When mistakes happen, conflict resolution can produce apologies and reconciliation. Yet fear of civil litigation can stand in the way of disclosure and apology — although movements across a number of fields are pushing to change that. Slaw reports on “New Proposed Apology Legislation in Ontario” designed to promote accountability and patient safety, together with the speedy resolution of civil disputes, among other goals. With apologies for mistakes in mind, Richard Webb at the Health Care ADR Blog muses, “Do Doctors Confess Errors Only When Caught?”

There would probably be far less need for apologies if only people would stop using technology when drunk. Peter Black, of Freedom to Differ, points to “Drunks outsmart Google,” an article he’s written for the Courier-Mail that mocks Mail Goggles, Google’s effort to create an email tool that verifies that users intend to send an email by requiring them to correctly complete a few math problems first.

Trust is integral to negotiating or working things out. Trust gets transactions done and people talking. Charles Green of Trust Matters, and a host of an earlier edition of Blawg Review, served as host this past week to another blog carnival, the esteemed Carnival of Trust, for October 2008, where he rounds up the top ten posts that deal with trust across a range of issues, including leadership, influencing, and politics. Elsewhere on his blog Green asks, “Do Lawyers Behave Rationally?“, as he looks at the zero-sum games that a little relationship building can avoid.

Blogs about ADR abound these days. The newest addition to the steadily growing ADR blogosphere is Real Divorce Mediation, published by experienced civil litigator and mediator Nancy Hudgins, who also blogs at Civil Negotiation and Mediation, and collaborative lawyer Debra Synovec. (If you’re curious to sample the wide range of blogs devoted to ADR, conflict resolution, and negotiation, visit the blog I created to track them world-wide, ADRblogs.com.)

Speaking of global concerns, Victoria Pynchon at Settle It Now Negotiation Blog considers weighty matters affecting women world-wide in “Armed Conflict and Sexual Assault.”

At CKA Mediation and Arbitration Blog, Chris Annunziata wonders, “What, exactly, does the mediator DO?” and has some answers. But not only humans have a talent for mediation: French mediator Dominique Lopez-Eychenie, who writes the French language blog ADR-Blog de la Mediation, describes how dogs make effective mediators in work involving youths.

Arbitration was a hot topic this week among bloggers. John DeGroote, who draws on his years of experience as chief litigation counsel for a global company as he writes the blog Settlement Perspectives, gives advice on “Non-Binding Arbitration: Get Your Day in Court Without One Day in Court“. And InhouseBlog offers a comprehensive “Corporate Counsel’s Guide to International Arbitration“.

Richard D. Tuschman, writing for Florida Employment & Immigration Law Blog, considers mandatory arbitration agreements in the workplace in “Eleventh Circuit Upholds ‘Open Door’ Dispute Resolution Policy and Compels Arbitration“, and explains why he generally prefers to “duke it out in court rather than in front of an arbitrator.” And the Womble Carlyle Team at Fair Labor Standards Act Law, warns of the hidden rocks off arbitration’s coast in “Rough Seas for Long John Silver’s“, concluding that “If you … think arbitration is a preferable means of dispute resolution, consider the voyage of [Long John Silver's] through five courts… Beyond here there be dragons!” Finally, Dan Hull at What About Clients? sees just two advantages to arbitration in “Recession: Litigation, litigation, litigation–but different this time” (don’t miss Dan’s bonus practice tip).

Speaking of litigation, in “Earthcomber Sues TechCrunch Out Of Spite, Pisses Me Off Personally“, Michael Arrington of Tech Crunch tells us what he thinks about filing suit as a negotiation tactic: “…suing someone to get them to return your calls is not exactly a sign of brilliance.” And Justin Patten of Human Law predicts that financial necessity will drive more disputants to mediation over litigation.

One advantage to disputants that mediation offers over litigation is this: it allows those who are directly involved in the dispute and most knowledgeable about the facts and the issues involved — namely the disputants themselves — to be in charge of designing the resolution — rather than leaving the outcome in the hands of a judge and jury who may well know bupkes about the subject matter of the dispute. In “Supreme Court Balancing“, Patterico’s Pontifications illustrates this brilliantly, reporting on a Supreme Court case involving the use by the Navy of sonar that might interfere with the ability of marine mammals to navigate, in which Justice Stephen Breyer commented:

You are asking us who know nothing about whales and less about the military to start reading all these documents to try to figure out who’s right in the case where the other side says the other side is totally unreasonable.

Yup. Exactly my point.

Just as filing suit has its limitations as a tactic in negotiation, so, too, do fisticuffs as a tool for resolving disputes. Sometimes though a punch in the nose can produce some small satisfaction (although not, as a general rule, for the recipient of such attention), as Colin Samuels at Infamy or Praise reports in his weekly feature “Thank God It’s Schadenfreude” (motto: “this week’s joy in the misfortune of others”): “Richard Fuld, the disgraced head of Lehman Brothers, was punched in the face in the office gym amid the bank’s collapse…”

I’ll wrap up this section with two final posts. As you probably know, mediators are all for bringing people together. How heartwarming therefore to note that Sweet Hot Justice is offering advice for lawyers negotiating with romance in “Online Dating for Lawyers: A Primer” — but, alas, also breaks some bad news to lovelorn litigators: “Guess who finds lawyers sexy and funny and cool? No one. Not even other lawyers.” (Um, gulp, but what about mediators?) On the subject of romance, Carolyn Elefant, writing for Legal Blog Watch, reports on newlywed lawyers who celebrated their wedding by spending a year traveling the globe together and recounting their adventures on their blog, One Year on Earth. (The FAQs on the couples’ site answer all questions but the one I was most interested in: how did they resolve the inevitable disputes with each other en route?)

2. Posts on law and legal issues

Now here’s the rest — posts on legal issues and ideas, the business of law, and legal miscellany.

The following posts cover legal issues, decisions, and trends in the law.

In “Before Carcieri v. Kempthorne, It’s Olson v. Larisa“The Wall Street Journal’s Law Blog reports that lawyers just might need a mediator to settle a dispute over who gets to argue a case before the Supreme Court — the lawyer involved with the case for 10 years or an attorney who’s argued 49 Supreme Court cases.

Above the Law selects as its “Lawsuit of the Day” a suit brought against cosmetics and haircare giant L’Oreal by a blonde claiming to have been traumatized when a hair coloring mishap transformed her into a brunette.

Traverse Legal shares a transcript of a radio interview on “Online Trademark Infringement: The Unauthorized Use of Trademarks as Keywords for Online Advertisements“. And Drug and Device Law reviews the “Principles Of Aggravated … Er … Aggregated Litigation“.

Sheppard Mullin’s Intellectual Property Law Blog explains how “Two Recent Decisions Reframe the [Digital Millennium Copyright Act] Discussion” and may well predict how hotly contested issues regarding the use of copyrighted works in user-generated content on the Internet will be resolved. Jillian Weiss of Transgender Workplace Diversity warns of pitfalls of the Human Rights Commission’s Corporate Equality Index, which rates companies on their diversity leadership with regard to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender employees.

Not one to shy away from a debate, Joel Schoenmeyer at Death and Taxes provides “A Rebuttal Re. Probate Investors“, responding point by point to a reader’s reaction to one of his earlier posts.

The following posts cover the business and practice of law:

The Greatest American Lawyer confirms it: “Despite What They Say, Size Does Matter…” — at least when it comes to competitiveness. The verdict: “I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Large companies cannot compete.” Dan Hull and his colleagues at What About Clients? know something about that. Mark Beese of Leadership for Lawyers once wrote that “Large and regional law firms should quake at the thought of small, nimble, expert, high-service firms like Dan’s“. This week at WAC?, Holden Oliver graphically demonstrates “What your clients will do–and your firm needs to do” to thrive in uncertain economic times.

Law21 warns “You ain’t seen nothin’ yet“, seeing ominous signs ahead in tough economic times, both for corporate law firms and law students seeking loans. Of course as markets falter and economies totter at disaster’s brink, many depend upon access to information and news. The Times Online has rounded up a list of “Top ten blogs to read during the banking crisis“, naming, among others, The Becker-Posner Blog, published by jurist Richard Posner with economics professor Gary Becker.

In “Clients Are Extraordinarily Understanding“, Bruce MacEwan at Adam Smith, Esq., asks whether 19th century notions of conflicts make sense in a 21st century world: “In what other profession would going to the most qualified expert raise the hint of the shadow of the bizarre notion of ‘conflicts?’”

Robert Ambrogi at Legal Blog Watch invokes images of infamous Captain Renault and “Casablanca” with “Survey Shocker: Lawyers Hate Stress“, a report on a recent survey of 300 lawyers by staffing firm Robert Half Legal, which, in Ambrogi’s words, does little more than “round up the usual suspects” as the causes of lawyer job dissatisfaction. (For an alternate view, Tammy Lenski at Conflict Zen offers a mediator’s take on stress.) Stephanie West Allen of Idealawg links to a law review article that reveals the path to “Finding Interior Peace In the Ordinary Practice of Law“.

Of course anyone contemplating a career move should partake of the wisdom George Lenard offers in a post on his eponymous Employment Blawg, “Staying Afloat in a Sea of Sinking Markets: Help for Career Changes During Hard Times“.

Executive Women’s Networking Blog advances a ringing defense of women’s initiatives and explains “Why Women’s Initiatives Work” when they focus on “increasing a women’s access to potential clients through internal and external networking and strengthening leadership skills through mentoring”. And The Greatest American Lawyer explains how the internet and a talent for the generation of quality content give lawyers an opportunity equivalent to — nay, more powerful than — “Standing at a Podium as a Lawyer in Front of 100,000 People and Yelling My Marketing Message“. (Prudent bloggers, however, may wish to purchase “BlogInsure: New Insurance for Bloggers“, now available, as Eric Goldman reports.)

I’ll now wrap things up with some legal miscellany:

Pink has become an almost universally recognized symbol for breast cancer awareness. Two blogs bring different thoughts to the meaning of pink, with Likelihood of Confusion contemplating Pepperidge Farm Mint Milanos in pink packaging in “Think Pink“, and Crooked Timber pondering how culture shapes the way people discuss and cope with cancer in “Pink“.

Last but not least, grieving baseball fan Kevin O’Keefe at Real Lawyers Have Blogs laments that “Presidential candidates offer no solutions to Cubs’ failures“.

This takes me to the end of Blawg Review #181. Next week Dave Gulbransen will do the honors at his blog, Preaching to the Perverted.

[Important update:To my embarrassment, I have discovered that I inadvertently overlooked the fact that today is Canadian Thanksgiving Day. I'd like to offer my sincerest apologies to my friends to the north. To correct this unfortunate oversight, I'm adding to this presentation of Blawg Review the following posts from these excellent Canadian law blogs: According to Michael Geist, "ISP Tax May Be The Next Big Culture Funding Fight". David Fraser, who publishes Canadian Privacy Law Blog, reports on "Calculating the cost of reading online privacy policies". Law is Cool, a law school blog and podcast, announces the good news that "Canada Has Its Own Voice on the International Scene". The Vancouver Law Librarian Blog considers "Legal In-sourcing", while Connie Crosby writing for Slaw.ca lets you know that "Your Seat is Waiting! New Business Conferences Starting Online Now". Finally, The Court has some thoughts on a provocative topic: "Privacy and investigative dumpster diving: R. v. Patrick". Happy Thanksgiving Day, Canada!]

In closing, I’d like to give thanks to my better angels — the anonymous Editor of Blawg Review; my Blawg Review sherpa, Colin Samuels; the newest member of the Blawg Review team, Vickie Pynchon; and you, my reader.

It wouldn’t be right to salute Conflict Resolution Day without mentioning one of the world’s best known advocates for peace. Last Thursday, October 9, would have been John Lennon’s 68th birthday. Feel free to sing along:

Blawg Review has information about next week’s host, and instructions how to get your blawg posts reviewed in upcoming issues.

A new IAT is now available, one which tests for implicit associations about policy, the government, and the market. You can access the Policy IAT at the Project on Law and Mind Sciences at Harvard University or via The Situationist, a social science blog that provides a forum for exploring the effect of situational forces on human behavior.

A big hat tip to Bill Warters at the Campus ADR Tech Blog, one of the best sources online for tech news and tools for conflict resolution teachers and trainers.

But stereotypes and assumptions about gender may reach women on the other side of the negotiating table as well — the women who work as mediators, according to a research paper titled “Males and Females as Mediators: Disputant Perceptions“. From the abstract:

Third-party mediation is a popular means for resolving conflict in a variety of contexts. We investigated the extent to which a mediator’s gender may influence the disputing individuals’ view of the mediation. An examination of existing studies indicated that in general male mediators were perceived more favorably than their female counterparts were. Different perceptions could be the result of either behavioral differences between men and women or the stereotypes that disputants may hold regarding males and females. These results provide yet more evidence that additional barriers and challenges exist for women, compared to men, in the world of work.

(A hat tip to Geoff Sharp for sending along the link.)

Google, understanding full well the dark side of human nature (particularly that side of human nature that responds to its email after too many Jell-O shots in the wee hours of the morning), offers a solution: Mail Goggles. Here’s how it works:

When you enable Mail Goggles, it will check that you’re really sure you want to send that late night Friday email. And what better way to check than by making you solve a few simple math problems after you click send to verify you’re in the right state of mind?

By default, Mail Goggles is only active late night on the weekend as that is the time you’re most likely to need it. Once enabled, you can adjust when it’s active in the General settings.

Mail Goggles may prove to be one of the world’s most powerful conflict prevention tools yet. It’s available on all Gmail accounts. Simply click on “Settings”, then “Lab”, then scroll down to “Mail Goggles” and select “Enable” to protect yourself from further embarrassment.