The obvious extension to this argument is to question whether blogging is, therefore, a good way to “…enter into a discussion with a cross-disciplinary group of people who share their interest?”. Based on my reading (and occasional writing) here and elsewhere, I would conclude that it is, but this conclusion needs to be made to the philanthropy world as an argument.

While most would agree that entering that discussion is important, I think the task at hand is convincing them that blogging is a good way to do so; perhaps a qualitative way would be to describe the successes of this blog in bringing people together for dialog?

It would be great if everyone in the country was a active philanthropy blog reader, but I think the field wasn’t even taken seriously until this year so it is no surprise to me that people are just beginning to pay attention.

But do you sense a resistance to participating and extending this dialogue?

I’m surprised at how relatively few philanthropoids are even aware of these discussions.

I bet noboby in my office can name a single blog on your blogroll, but everyone knows that J-Lo may be having twins.