I set up a Del.icio.us's account and tried some popular social bookmarking sites. I did notice the tags used under books, reader lists, readers advisory, readalikes, bookclub, booklists, Bookseller Lists and Library.
I tried exporting and importing Favorite links from the computer browser. It confirmed in Del.ici.us that I exported and imported but I could not get it to import correctly.
Tuesday, October 9, 2007
Thing # 14 - Best of the Web 2.0
I chose Technorati and searched for "law" to see what would come up. Technorati came up with a decision on a Gitmo case that was released today:
Breaking: Court Rules for Gitmo Detainee, Against Pentagon
By Jeralyn, Section Terror Detainees Posted on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 04:39:29 PM EST Tags: Guantanamo, Detainees (all tags)
A federal judge in Washington, D.C. Gladys Kessler, has granted a preliminary injunction to a Guantanamo detainee. It is believed to be the first time a federal court has said "no" to the Pentagon. The case is RAFIQ BIN BASHIR BIN JALLUL ALHAMI et al., vs. GEORGE W. BUSH, et al.
The opinion, unsealed today, is here.
In a nutshell, the Pentagon wanted to send Gitmo detainee Mohammed Rahman, a Tunisian, back to Tunisia to serve a 20 year sentence for a crime for which he was charged and tried in absentia since his arrival at Guantanamo. He objected, arguing among other grounds, he would be tortured in a Tunesian prison. He filed a habeas action seeking an order preventing his transfer.
From the opinion:
Petitioner Rahman (“Rahman”) is a Tunisian citizen allegedly captured by Pakistani bounty hunters and transferred to the custody of the United States on an undisclosed date. He has been detained in Guantanamo Bay since shortly after his capture. Rahman maintains that Combatant Status Review Tribunal (“CSRT”) proceedings have never resulted in any finding that he is an “unlawful” enemy combatant. On May 15, 2007, the Government provided notice to Petitioners and the Court of its intention to transfer Rahman out of Guantanamo Bay and release him to the Government of Tunisia. A 20-year prison sentence awaits Rahman in Tunisia.
More...
Rahman was tried in absentia under the Tunisian Patriot Act in 2003, convicted and sentenced to 20 years. He has severe health problems.
Rahman has presented evidence that he would face a serious threat of torture if rendered to a Tunisian prison. He cites to reports of international organizations that document torture of prisoners and police brutality in Tunisia. Rahman’s serious health problems, his Tunisian ex poste facto conviction in absentia, and his allegations of the indiscriminate use of torture in Tunisian prisons demonstrate the devastating and irreparable harm he is likely to face if transferred.
The Court noted it has the right to determine its own habeas jurisdiction. In deciding to grant the relief sought in the habeas filing seeking the injunction, Judge Kessler ruled:
In view of the grave harm Rahman has alleged he will face if transferred, it would be a profound miscarriage of justice if this Court denied the Motion based on the Court of Appeals’ decision in Boumediene and the Supreme Court later reversed or modified that decision. At that point, the damage would have been done.
....Finally, the Government suffers absolutely no harm from entry of the Preliminary Injunction, whereas the failure to grant Rahman the interim relief he seeks–-relief necessary to ensure his survival until the Supreme Court rules–-would be irremediable if Boumediene is reversed.
Great work by Rahman's defense lawyers, one of whom is Seton Hall Law Professor Mark Denbeaux.
A decision refused by the Supreme Court today was:
Supreme Court refuses torture case
Posted on October 9th, 2007 (14 minutes ago) by blogger
A German man who says he was abducted and tortured by the CIA as part of the anti-terrorism rendition program lost his final chance Tuesday to persuade U.S. courts to hear his claims.
The Supreme Court rejected without comment an appeal from Khaled el-Masri, effectively endorsing Bush administration arguments that state secrets would be revealed if courts allowed the case to proceed.
El-Masri, 44, a German citizen of Lebanese descent, says he was mistakenly identified as an associate of the Sept. 11 hijackers and was detained while attempting to enter Macedonia on New Year’s Eve 2003.
He claims that CIA agents stripped, beat, shackled, diapered, drugged and chained him to the floor of a plane for a flight to Afghanistan. He says he was held for four months in a CIA-run prison known as the “salt pit” in the Afghan capital of Kabul.
After the CIA determined it had the wrong man, el-Masri says, he was dumped on a hilltop in Albania and told to walk down a path without looking back.
The lawsuit against former CIA director George Tenet, unidentified CIA agents and others sought damages of at least $75,000.
“We are very disappointed,” Manfred Gnijdic, el-Masri’s attorney in Germany, told The Associated Press in a telephone interview from his office in Ulm.
“It will shatter all trust in the American justice system,” Gnijdic said, charging that the United States expects every other nation to act responsibly, but refuses to take responsibility for its own actions.
“That is a disaster,” Gnijdic said.
El-Masri’s claims, which prompted strong international criticism of the rendition program, were backed by European investigations and U.S. news reports. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said that U.S. officials acknowledged that el-Masri’s detention was a mistake.
The U.S. government has neither confirmed nor denied el-Masri’s account and, in urging the court not to hear the case, said that the facts central to el-Masri’s claims “concern the highly classified methods and means of the program.”
El-Masri’s case centers on the CIA’s “extraordinary rendition” program, in which terrorism suspects are captured and taken to foreign countries for interrogation. Human rights activists have objected to the program.
President Bush has repeatedly defended the policies in the war on terror, saying as recently as last week that the U.S. does not engage in torture.
El-Masri’s lawsuit had been seen as a test of the administration’s legal strategy to invoke the doctrine of state secrets and stop national security suits before any evidence is presented in private to a judge. Another lawsuit over the administration’s warrantless wiretapping program, also dismissed by a federal court on state secrets grounds, still is pending before the justices.
Conservative legal scholar Douglas Kmiec said the Bush White House uses the doctrine too broadly. “The notion that state secrets can’t be preserved by a judge who has taken an oath to protect the Constitution, that a judge cannot examine the strength of the claim is too troubling to be accepted,” said Kmiec, a law professor at Pepperdine University.
The court has not examined the state secrets privilege in more than 50 years.
A coalition of groups favoring greater openness in government says the Bush administration has used the state secrets privilege much more often than its predecessors.
At the height of Cold War tensions between the United States and the former Soviet Union, U.S. presidents used the state secrets privilege six times from 1953 to 1976, according to OpenTheGovernment.org. Since 2001, it has been used 39 times, enabling the government to unilaterally withhold documents from the court system, the group said.
The state secrets privilege arose from a 1953 Supreme Court ruling that allowed the executive branch to keep secret, even from the court, details about a military plane’s fatal crash.
Three widows sued to get the accident report after their husbands died aboard a B-29 bomber, but the Air Force refused to release it claiming that the plane was on a secret mission to test new equipment. The high court accepted the argument, but when the report was released decades later there was nothing in it about a secret mission or equipment.
I liked the ease of searching Technorati, I just put in the Advanced Search box the topic I wanted. It pulled up the latest news on a very hot topic, the detainees at Guantanamo Bay. I would like to see more relevant hits on that topic and not all the junk that has nothing to do with my search term. Technorati could be useful because it is easy to use. It is a little frustrating going through all the other information it pulled up that was irrelevant.
Breaking: Court Rules for Gitmo Detainee, Against Pentagon
By Jeralyn, Section Terror Detainees Posted on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 04:39:29 PM EST Tags: Guantanamo, Detainees (all tags)
A federal judge in Washington, D.C. Gladys Kessler, has granted a preliminary injunction to a Guantanamo detainee. It is believed to be the first time a federal court has said "no" to the Pentagon. The case is RAFIQ BIN BASHIR BIN JALLUL ALHAMI et al., vs. GEORGE W. BUSH, et al.
The opinion, unsealed today, is here.
In a nutshell, the Pentagon wanted to send Gitmo detainee Mohammed Rahman, a Tunisian, back to Tunisia to serve a 20 year sentence for a crime for which he was charged and tried in absentia since his arrival at Guantanamo. He objected, arguing among other grounds, he would be tortured in a Tunesian prison. He filed a habeas action seeking an order preventing his transfer.
From the opinion:
Petitioner Rahman (“Rahman”) is a Tunisian citizen allegedly captured by Pakistani bounty hunters and transferred to the custody of the United States on an undisclosed date. He has been detained in Guantanamo Bay since shortly after his capture. Rahman maintains that Combatant Status Review Tribunal (“CSRT”) proceedings have never resulted in any finding that he is an “unlawful” enemy combatant. On May 15, 2007, the Government provided notice to Petitioners and the Court of its intention to transfer Rahman out of Guantanamo Bay and release him to the Government of Tunisia. A 20-year prison sentence awaits Rahman in Tunisia.
More...
Rahman was tried in absentia under the Tunisian Patriot Act in 2003, convicted and sentenced to 20 years. He has severe health problems.
Rahman has presented evidence that he would face a serious threat of torture if rendered to a Tunisian prison. He cites to reports of international organizations that document torture of prisoners and police brutality in Tunisia. Rahman’s serious health problems, his Tunisian ex poste facto conviction in absentia, and his allegations of the indiscriminate use of torture in Tunisian prisons demonstrate the devastating and irreparable harm he is likely to face if transferred.
The Court noted it has the right to determine its own habeas jurisdiction. In deciding to grant the relief sought in the habeas filing seeking the injunction, Judge Kessler ruled:
In view of the grave harm Rahman has alleged he will face if transferred, it would be a profound miscarriage of justice if this Court denied the Motion based on the Court of Appeals’ decision in Boumediene and the Supreme Court later reversed or modified that decision. At that point, the damage would have been done.
....Finally, the Government suffers absolutely no harm from entry of the Preliminary Injunction, whereas the failure to grant Rahman the interim relief he seeks–-relief necessary to ensure his survival until the Supreme Court rules–-would be irremediable if Boumediene is reversed.
Great work by Rahman's defense lawyers, one of whom is Seton Hall Law Professor Mark Denbeaux.
A decision refused by the Supreme Court today was:
Supreme Court refuses torture case
Posted on October 9th, 2007 (14 minutes ago) by blogger
A German man who says he was abducted and tortured by the CIA as part of the anti-terrorism rendition program lost his final chance Tuesday to persuade U.S. courts to hear his claims.
The Supreme Court rejected without comment an appeal from Khaled el-Masri, effectively endorsing Bush administration arguments that state secrets would be revealed if courts allowed the case to proceed.
El-Masri, 44, a German citizen of Lebanese descent, says he was mistakenly identified as an associate of the Sept. 11 hijackers and was detained while attempting to enter Macedonia on New Year’s Eve 2003.
He claims that CIA agents stripped, beat, shackled, diapered, drugged and chained him to the floor of a plane for a flight to Afghanistan. He says he was held for four months in a CIA-run prison known as the “salt pit” in the Afghan capital of Kabul.
After the CIA determined it had the wrong man, el-Masri says, he was dumped on a hilltop in Albania and told to walk down a path without looking back.
The lawsuit against former CIA director George Tenet, unidentified CIA agents and others sought damages of at least $75,000.
“We are very disappointed,” Manfred Gnijdic, el-Masri’s attorney in Germany, told The Associated Press in a telephone interview from his office in Ulm.
“It will shatter all trust in the American justice system,” Gnijdic said, charging that the United States expects every other nation to act responsibly, but refuses to take responsibility for its own actions.
“That is a disaster,” Gnijdic said.
El-Masri’s claims, which prompted strong international criticism of the rendition program, were backed by European investigations and U.S. news reports. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has said that U.S. officials acknowledged that el-Masri’s detention was a mistake.
The U.S. government has neither confirmed nor denied el-Masri’s account and, in urging the court not to hear the case, said that the facts central to el-Masri’s claims “concern the highly classified methods and means of the program.”
El-Masri’s case centers on the CIA’s “extraordinary rendition” program, in which terrorism suspects are captured and taken to foreign countries for interrogation. Human rights activists have objected to the program.
President Bush has repeatedly defended the policies in the war on terror, saying as recently as last week that the U.S. does not engage in torture.
El-Masri’s lawsuit had been seen as a test of the administration’s legal strategy to invoke the doctrine of state secrets and stop national security suits before any evidence is presented in private to a judge. Another lawsuit over the administration’s warrantless wiretapping program, also dismissed by a federal court on state secrets grounds, still is pending before the justices.
Conservative legal scholar Douglas Kmiec said the Bush White House uses the doctrine too broadly. “The notion that state secrets can’t be preserved by a judge who has taken an oath to protect the Constitution, that a judge cannot examine the strength of the claim is too troubling to be accepted,” said Kmiec, a law professor at Pepperdine University.
The court has not examined the state secrets privilege in more than 50 years.
A coalition of groups favoring greater openness in government says the Bush administration has used the state secrets privilege much more often than its predecessors.
At the height of Cold War tensions between the United States and the former Soviet Union, U.S. presidents used the state secrets privilege six times from 1953 to 1976, according to OpenTheGovernment.org. Since 2001, it has been used 39 times, enabling the government to unilaterally withhold documents from the court system, the group said.
The state secrets privilege arose from a 1953 Supreme Court ruling that allowed the executive branch to keep secret, even from the court, details about a military plane’s fatal crash.
Three widows sued to get the accident report after their husbands died aboard a B-29 bomber, but the Air Force refused to release it claiming that the plane was on a secret mission to test new equipment. The high court accepted the argument, but when the report was released decades later there was nothing in it about a secret mission or equipment.
I liked the ease of searching Technorati, I just put in the Advanced Search box the topic I wanted. It pulled up the latest news on a very hot topic, the detainees at Guantanamo Bay. I would like to see more relevant hits on that topic and not all the junk that has nothing to do with my search term. Technorati could be useful because it is easy to use. It is a little frustrating going through all the other information it pulled up that was irrelevant.
Saturday, October 6, 2007
Thing # 13 - Online Productivity
Discovery Resources:A short list of web-based productivity applications – Note: This list was authored in ZohoWriter and exported as HTML.Discovery Exercise: Create a free account for yourself in Zoho Writer.
I created an account in Zoho Writer. Explore the site and create a few test documents of two. Try out Zoho Writer’s features and create a blog post about your discoveries. Optional: If you're up for the challenge, try using Zoho’s "publish" options to post to your blog.*
Note: You can also explore Google Docs (formerly known as Writely), Google's online word processer, as an option for this exercise. On Oct 11th, Google relaunched Writely (which it acquired in Spring 2006) as Google Docs.
Google Docs was easy to use, I up-loaded an earlier document from Word, made changes and posted it here.
Legal Resources on the Internet
Pathfinder
Prepared by: June VanWingen, Law Librarian/
U.S. Attorney’s Office & Reference Librarian/
Kent District Library - Plainfield
The following are web sites that provide legal information free of charge.
Thomas - http://thomas.loc.gov/- U.S. Congress on the Internet. Legislative information on Congressional bills under debate, the Congressional Record, committee information, new laws and historical documents are available at this site.
United States Supreme Court – http://www.supremecourtus.gov/ The Supreme Court of the United States provides access to the calendar, docket information, recent decisions, a history of the Court and biographies of the Justices. As the highest court in the land, the U.S. Supreme Court is called the Court of last resort. All appeals from state and federal courts can be appealed up to the Supreme Court, but the Court decides which cases it chooses to hear. The Supreme Court has the final say on all interpretations of Constitutional law.
The Executive Branch of the federal government is vested in the President of the United States. As the home of the President, the White House web site http://www.whitehouse.gov/ provides Presidential Proclamations, Executive Orders, proposed new laws, speeches, Presidential radio addresses, historical information about the house and Presidential signing or veto of laws or legislation from Congress.
The United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan has their site available now at http://www.miwd.uscourts.gov/. General information on the location, judge’s chamber information, employment opportunities, jury information, local rules, maps, a telephone book, public access, rates and fees, attorney information, a list of arbitrators, mediators, a pro bono list, plans and policies, forms, reports, links to other legal sites and civil jury instructions are available at this site. Also at this site is a link to the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Michigan, which provides general information, hours of operation, courtroom locations, a court telephone directory, fee schedule, listing of Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 Trustees, job announcements, a FAQ section, links to the online docketing system (Pacer), local rules online, case filing statistics, the 1999 Court Calendar, Motion Day Calendars, an Unclaimed Funds section and downloads of forms. http://www.miw.uscourts.gov/
The Federal Court Locator http://www.law.vill.edu/Fed-Ct/fedcourt.html has a United States map, with all the federal courts divided into their circuits, then the District and Bankruptcy Courts within each circuit. Web Locator provides a United State map, which allows the user to locate an attorney within a state. <http://www.weblocator.com/indexbody.html
State Bar of Michigan - http://www.michbar.org/ The State Bar Association of Michigan provides this site, with links to federal, state and local legal sites. Recent Michigan Supreme Court and Courts of Appeals decisions are also available.
The State Law Library provides excellent guides to finding Michigan law and links to other good legal web sites. Information on locating federal and Michigan statutes, regulations, researching a legal topic or legal periodicals and even a how-to guide on compiling a legislative history is provided. As the Library of Michigan is also a government repository library, many federal and Michigan legal documents are in this collection. The State Law Library, a division of the Library of Michigan, http://www.michigan.gov/hal has a FAQ listing, law related Internet sites, a listing of “Michigan Law Libraries Open to the Public” and the text of the State Constitution of 1963.
The State Bar Association of Michigan provides links to the Michigan Supreme Court and Michigan Court of Appeals decisions, specialized sections of the bar association, a legal gateway, committee information, news, meetings and event schedules, a marketplace, legal resources, a desktop directory of members, publications and links to related legal sites. The State Bar is composed of licensed attorneys in the State of Michigan. http://www.michbar.org/ Information for the public on a Lawyer Referral Program, Legal Aid, legal forms and opinions of Michigan courts, Michigan law schools and the Attorney Grievance procedure are also available.
The Michigan Courts are linked at the One Court of Justice web page. Links to the Michigan Supreme Courts, Michigan Court of Appeals, Trial Courts, the Michigan Legislative site, Court Rules and Administrative Orders, Court Forms and links are provided http://courts.michigan.gov/ The Michigan Court of Appeals site http://courtofappeals.mijud.net/ includes recent decisions, history, judges, rules, pro per (a term derived from the Latin in propria, meaning "for one's self," used in some states to describe a person who handles her own case without a lawyer) manuals, maps and directions, forms and legal links.
The official web site http://www.michigan.gov/ for the state of Michigan includes links to all state agencies, courts and the legislature. Links to city and county governments are available as well. The Governor is the head of the Executive Branch of state government.
The Michigan Legislature site http://www.michiganlegislature.org/ provides a searchable full-text database to Michigan statutes. The search features include a basic, advanced, Constitution, Chapter and Historical Documents search engine. Michigan’s Office of Regulatory Reform http://www.michigan.gov/orr explains the rulemaking process, recent and pending rule changes, the Michigan Register and Administrative Code. Similar to the federal system, state agencies propose rules to interpret state statutes, then final regulations are posted on this site.
The Michigan Attorney General's Office provides information on AG Opinions, consumer and business legal issues, women/children issues, FOIA/Open Meetings laws, senior citizen legal information, press releases, environmental information, healthcare/insurance information, charities, crime and victim information. As with the Department of Justice, the Michigan Attorney General prosecutes violations of state laws. http://www.michigan.gov/ag
The Michigan State Appellate Defender’s Office has increased the information available at their web page.<http://www.sado.org/fcomm.htm Find defense attorneys, criminal justice system basics, addresses and maps, bulletins and recent newsletters, recent criminal decisions, a criminal defense database, the SADO Forum (subscription only) and links to other legal web sites and listservs are available. In the criminal justice system basics, administrative rules in prison visitation are reviewed, the full text of the Michigan Sentencing Guidelines are available, information on pre-sentence reports, a memorandum on attorney visits, attorney guidelines, standards and appointments systems are reviewed. Addresses and maps include information on city, county, state and federal jails and prisons, county prosecutors in Michigan, Michigan State Police posts, Circuit and Appellate Courts. The criminal defense database is restricted with password requirements.
The Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan (PAAM) provides information on all the prosecutors in Michigan, local, state and federal, with a map for each of the counties in Michigan. http://www.ag.state.mi.us/AGWebSite/pacc Another valuable legal site is the Eaton County, Michigan Prosecuting Attorney's Office web site. This site provides information on the "Anatomy of a Prosecution," "Appeals," "Legal Definitions," "Domestic Violence," "Family Support," "Frequently Asked Questions," "Links," an "Office Overview," "Personal Protection Orders," "Press Releases" and "Prosecutor Web Sites." http://www.co.eaton.mi.us/ecpa/
61st District Court lists biographical information on the six judges and two magistrates, names and contact numbers for administrators and department managers, types of cases handled, juror information and legal links. http://www.ci.grand-rapids.mi.us/departments/61stcourt/ Also included is a map to the new Kent County Courthouse in downtown Grand Rapids. AccessKent provides information on the Courts throughout Kent County. The Circuit and District Court links are provided in one location. http://www.accesskent.com/government/courts/
The Grand Rapids Bar Association provides a Lawyer Referral and Information Service for consumers. Consumers can meet with an attorney for 30 minutes for a charge of $25.00 The Association tries to match an individual with an attorney practicing in that area of law. http://www.grbar.org/ The Legal Assistance Center is a public service of the Grand Rapids Bar Association. http://legalassistancecenter.org/ This non-profit organization provides legal counseling and help with locating an attorney or referring an individual to Legal Aid of Western Michigan. The Legal Assistance Center is working on providing self-help forms with instructions on filling out and filing court forms with the local courts. Self-help computer access is available at this Center in Grand Rapids. Michigan Law Help: A Free Civil Legal Aid in Michigan is also at this site and online at this URL. http://www.lawhelp.org/MI/
The Seattle Public Library hosts the Municipal Codes Online. Arranged by state, only Ann Arbor is listed in Michigan at this site. http://www.spl.org/govpubs/municode.html The Municipal Code Corporation provides a listing of municipal codes including Belding, Cedar Springs and Grand Rapids. The codes are listed alphabetically by state. http://www.municode.com/ The State Bar of Michigan provides additional city ordinances. http://www.michbar.org/sections/realprop/mi_city_codes.html The Michigan Townships Association provides model ordinances for townships. http://www.michigantownships.org/sample_ordinances.htm Many cities with web sites now include ordinances on their site. Rockford - http://www.rockford.mi.us/services/Ordinances/OrdinancesIndex.htm Walker - http://www.ci.walker.mi.us/Resources/Ordinances/OrdinanceHome.html Vergennes Township - http://www.vergennestwp.org/vtordinances.html are several examples of local governments with ordinances on their web sites.
Mel, the Michigan eLibrary, provides information and links to comprehensive legal sites, international legal resources, state laws and courts, legal directories, Federal Judicial Branch, Michigan law, legal associations, legal journals and media. http://www.michigan.gov/hal
Martindale-Hubbell is a legal directory of law firms, attorneys, biographical information and a topical review of each state’s legal requirements. Bankruptcy, family law, contracts and business information are included here. Lists of attorneys in each state include where attorneys earned their undergraduate and law school degrees. Law firms with attorney listings and areas of practice are included in another section. http://www.martindale.com/xp/Martindale/home.xml
American Bar Association's site provides information on this national organization of attorneys for its’ members and the public. A Lawyer Referral Service, publications, legal products, services, legal links under "Lawlink," federal and state government information, courts, legal associations on the Internet, legal indexes, International law sites and Internet guides are available. http://www.abanet.org/
FindLaw - http://www.findlaw.com/- FindLaw provides links to cases, statutes, state constitutions, legal news, attorneys, law firms and legal directories. A legal search engine, Law Crawler is provided.
The law schools in Michigan, the University of Michigan http://www.law.umich.edu/ , Detroit College of Law at Michigan State University <http://www.dcl.edu/>, Thomas M. Cooley Law School http://www.cooley.edu/ , Wayne State University http://www.law.wayne.edu/ and the University of Detroit Mercy School of Law http://www.udmercy.edu/ .
The American Law Sources On-Line (ALSO) provides “a comprehensive, uniform, and useful compilation of links to all on-line sources of American law that are available without charge. This site contains additional links to sources of commentary and practice aids that are available without charge (or available at a reasonable charge from governmental and nonprofit providers.) Links “to the legal systems of the United States, Canada, and Mexico, at a site maintained by the Commission for Environmental Cooperation (Quebec, Canada).” http://www.lawsource.com/also/
Hieros Gamos http://www.hg.org/hgfr.html continues to add additional legal information to this site. An easier to use directory of resources has been added. In addition, world reports and country guides are available. The European Union Legal Guide, as well as the traditional United States and state guides has been organized more efficiently. Related legal information Internet and commercial search engines and links to online commercial services are available.
Monday, October 1, 2007
Thing # 12 - Customized Search Engines
Explore Rollyo and create an account for yourself. I created an account.
Create a search roll for any subject you like. I set up a search roll on Law Librarian Searches.
Create a post in your blog about your experience and link to your search roll.
http://www.rollyo.com/13reflib8/
I created a search roll on Law Librarian Sites, the link is above.
Can you see a potential use for tools like this? It is an easy way of providing valuable information to the public. This was an easy one.
OPTIONAL: Explore Google Co-up. Note some of the differences between it and Rollyo in your blog. Google is more template driven, copying of computer code, a little more techie than Rollyo.
Select Search Engine...PLCMC Web Family SearchSearch The Web
Powered by RollyoCustom Search Engines - You just never know when this little tool might come in handy. What a nice job The Public Library of Charlotte & Mecklenburg County did. It was easy to find a group just for each patron.
Create a search roll for any subject you like. I set up a search roll on Law Librarian Searches.
Create a post in your blog about your experience and link to your search roll.
http://www.rollyo.com/13reflib8/
I created a search roll on Law Librarian Sites, the link is above.
Can you see a potential use for tools like this? It is an easy way of providing valuable information to the public. This was an easy one.
OPTIONAL: Explore Google Co-up. Note some of the differences between it and Rollyo in your blog. Google is more template driven, copying of computer code, a little more techie than Rollyo.
Select Search Engine...PLCMC Web Family SearchSearch The Web
Powered by RollyoCustom Search Engines - You just never know when this little tool might come in handy. What a nice job The Public Library of Charlotte & Mecklenburg County did. It was easy to find a group just for each patron.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
