Connecticut lawyer (and Gerry Spence chronicler) Norm Pattis, who Googles himself regularly, takes a crack at describing A Typology of Legal Blogs.

Blawgs, says Norm, come in three flavors: “prophetic” (his, Appellate Law and Practice, SCOTUSBlog), “proselytizing” (Simple Justice), and “incestuous” (Matlock).

I’m interested in the ways that blawgs fit together. I’ve written on the topic here and described a method for mapping the blawgosphere here. I’ve given the different types of blawgs some thought.

Norm’s a smart guy — by some accounts brilliant — but his typology strikes me as forced. Is it either accurate or fair to call Shawn’s blog “incestuous”? Is Shawn’s blog really any more resistant to outside influence than Scott’s . . . or yours, Norm? Why the disapprobation for a blawg that you read and on which you comment?