Bye Bye e-? Mon Makes a Ruling!
Should Law Technology News drop the e- from e-discovery?
After a wonderful debate, with 22 comments (and counting) — as well as some back-channel commentary from folks I (also) listen to very carefully — I'm ready to issue my ruling:
Nope, the e- stays.
It was a Solomon-esque decision, but ultimately, our underlying agenda is to educate folks and demystify technology, and keep things clear and simple. I was persuaded by the arguments that with so many legal professionals still befuddled by electronic data discovery, the time isn't right to just go back to generic discovery. EDD has specific meaning, and right now, the e- helps clarify the discussion, so we will continue using e-discovery in the pages of LTN and in this blog. But let's all move to the day when we no longer need the appendage.
THANKS for a great discussion!
P.S. I was not swayed at all by the "green" argument of the benefits of dropping two characters. I may be a certified addict of Planet Green and eat more than my share of granola, but I don't think even Al Gore, Malcolm Gladwell, or Thomas Friedman would be persuaded that the energy consumed to type and process 2 characters could ever hit critical mass (or barely even a mass at all) and impact our lousy, crummy, humid, August weather in NYC. :)
P.P.S. - at the request of Brad Blickstein (see comments)
I hereby declare these style rules for LTN:
• First reference: electronic data discovery, electronically stored information
• Second reference: EDD or e-discovery, ESI