PJ widely respected

I'm sure "PJ" has more followers in the open source community but those are mostly just credulous people who don't see through Groklaw's pseudolegal smokescreens. In terms of respect by professionals, my blog is in a far stronger position (even though it started only a year ago) than Groklaw ever was. IP professionals and top-tier media turn to my blog for serious analysis, not to Groklaw. Just this week I was quoted by the Financial Times, Los Angeles Times, BBC News, law.com, and Bloomberg. The week before, by CNN.com, Reuters, etc. That's because professionals look for serious analysis, not propaganda meant to misinform a community and then, with the help of censorship, misrepresent that community's positions to the rest of the world.

> The fact is that PJ is widely respected for her ... and balance,

I don't know what balance is intended by the above, but I largely stopped reading groklaw precisely because it seemed that the coverage was unbalanced: that groklaw was good at digging up what appeared to be problems in SCO's case, but you wouldn't want to rely on it for a balanced, unbiased portrayal of the issues.

Note, that's just my own assessment, made with the amount of care appropriate to readership decisions. (Someone else said that the bias was more generally a pro-IBM bias; I wouldn't know about that.)

I should add that if groklaw is just the product of an individual writing in their spare time about something that interests them, then maybe that one-sidedness is just a reaction to some underhandedness on SCO's part and an attempt to redress the balance. I.e. the lack of balance doesn't necessarily reflect badly on the person; but whatever tributes you may pay to the groklaw work, I wouldn't praise its balanced writing myself.