At the recent SBL meeting (which was well-blogged as usual, by the way ... I'm compiling the posts for tomorrow), a session devoted to blogging has apparently caused some controversy about the 'exclusive' nature of the term 'biblioblog' (e.g. at Jim West's Biblical Theology, a term which, as my fifteen-minutes-of-fame moment, I apparently coined). A while back the 'bibliobloggers' as I refer(red) to them, also were going through paroxysms of bloggery over the use of the term and reluctantly settled on calling themselves that. Ladies ... gents ... it's just a label! I had only coined it because I wanted a nice one word (catchy) 'heading' that would fit in the sidebar of a blogroll (which still needs updating, incidentally). That said, I think you're looking through the wrong end of the telescope guys (and a few gals) ... it's a label we 'outsiders' apply to you ... you needn't apply it to yourselves; kind of like Romans calling Hellenes 'Graeci'. FWIW, I tried to come up with something similar for my Classics colleagues and 'Classicoblogs' simply didn't have the same 'catchiness' as 'Biblioblog' and I suspect it's because I'm an 'insider' in that group (or like to think of myself as same, despite the title of my blog). So, perhaps katharsis for the Bibliobloggers will come not from handwringing over what *I* call you (and you have reluctantly decided to call yourselves), but by labelling blogs like mine to 'exclude' them ...