李毅:《中国社会分层的结构与演变》

中国社会分层的结构与演变
 
作者:李毅  译者(编者):
ISBN:0-7618-3331-5  语言:中文
出版日期:2005年11月  出版社:University Press of America
 
The Structure & Evolution of Chinese Social Stratification has finally addressed this gap. Dr. Li provides detailed analysis critical to understanding the class structure of Chinese society, both pre-1949 and in the post-Mao era. His explanation of the origin, structure, and evolution of the model will be essential reading material for any introductory student of Chinese society.
 
 

 

  目 录
 

页面来源:
http://www.sachina.edu.cn/Htmldata/longbook/liyi_structure_china/index.html

中国社会分层的结构与演变
 
作者:李毅  译者(编者):
ISBN:0-7618-3331-5  语言:中文
出版日期:2005年11月  出版社:University Press of America
 
The Structure & Evolution of Chinese Social Stratification has finally addressed this gap. Dr. Li provides detailed analysis critical to understanding the class structure of Chinese society, both pre-1949 and in the post-Mao era. His explanation of the origin, structure, and evolution of the model will be essential reading material for any introductory student of Chinese society.
 
 

 

  目 录
 

页面来源:
http://www.sachina.edu.cn/Htmldata/longbook/liyi_structure_china/index.html

Some Useful Links on China Internet Governance

Internet Governance in China is an aspect of my research topics. The following is a list of some useful publicated materials on the topic. I believe this collection is very copyrightable even it is just a rough version. This list is also contributed by Dr. Zhao Yun, so please at least mention our name (Zhao Yun and Dong Hao) and the URL of this site (www.blawgdog.com) after you use it.
 
Click HERE to see the details.
Internet Governance in China is an aspect of my research topics. The following is a list of some useful publicated materials on the topic. I believe this collection is very copyrightable even it is just a rough version. This list is also contributed by Dr. Zhao Yun, so please at least mention our name (Zhao Yun and Dong Hao) and the URL of this site (www.blawgdog.com) after you use it.
 
Please refer to the links to see the relative materials, which are in English unless followed “CN” after the links.
 
I. Major Structure of Internet and Internet Law in China
Articles:

Legislations:

 
II. Cybercrime Law in China

Articles:

China legislations on cyber crimes:

HK legislation as a Comparison

HK Laws against Hacking

HK Laws against Criminal Damage

Laws relating to Pornography

Laws relating to Internet Gambling

III. Critical Information Infrastructure via Legislation

On 16 April 1996, Chinese Central government set up a temporary unit: Work Group of Informationalization (which was substituted by some organ of the Department of Information Industry), which takes the responsibility of constructing information infrastructure. After that, many governmental documents (both in central and local levels) mentioned the term “Information Infrastructure”. In the newest 2006-2020 National Information Development Strategy, Chinese government proposed some aims of the development of information infrastructure. But in China, the term information infrastructure is mostly appeared as slogans, and it rarely lies in regulative provisions. Click here to see a rare example in a provincial regulation, and here (see Art. 5) is another example.

 

China has promulgated some ordinances on the information safety, apart from the above legislations. The followings are some other focusing on the security of computer, information assurance, information infrastructure, content censorship, and so forth.

l           Implementation Rules for Provisional Regulations of the Administration of International Networking of Computer Information in the People’s Republic of China (Should be visited in the network of City U)

l           Provisions on the Technical Measures for the Protection of the Security of the Internet (Should be visited in the network of City U)

l          Regulations of the People’s Republic of China for Safety Protection of Computer Information Systems (CN)

l          A definition of “nocuous information” that should be prohibited can be find here (CN), and one can find more regulations at here, and here (CN) provides some basic regulation to the information infrastructure.

 

One should remember that besides the legislations, there are some other documents that appeared not in the forms regulatory documents but policy statements, administrative notifications and even slogans in the field of information infrastructure. These documents are also very useful in the empirical research, though legal interpretations and deductive analyses to them may not applicable.

IGP launches Chinese website

The Internet Governance Project announced today that its website is now available in  Chinese. "We view it essential that one of the world’s largest Internet user community  have access to the global debate on Internet governance," said IGP Operations Director  Brenden Kuerbis. "In anticipation of the upcoming Internet Governance Forum, all  individuals, the private sector and governments must have access to objective analysis of  issues of freedom of expression, content filtering, and competition policy surrounding  critical network resources."  While only providing limited translation at this point, IGP  plans to publish translations of key papers prior to the Forum.

http://internetgovernance.org/cn_index.html

The Internet Governance Project announced today that its website is now available in  Chinese. "We view it essential that one of the world’s largest Internet user community  have access to the global debate on Internet governance," said IGP Operations Director  Brenden Kuerbis. "In anticipation of the upcoming Internet Governance Forum, all  individuals, the private sector and governments must have access to objective analysis of  issues of freedom of expression, content filtering, and competition policy surrounding  critical network resources."  While only providing limited translation at this point, IGP  plans to publish translations of key papers prior to the Forum.

http://internetgovernance.org/cn_index.html

法豆:中文Blawg批判——别让Blawg变成BBS

  不是正题,但要说在前面的话(可以略过): 国人对“blog”一词的翻译,有网志、博客、部落格等多种。在中国大陆,在Blogspot等全球最有影响的blog服务提供者被屏蔽的条件下,众多blog服务提供商利用“博客”一词在中国媒体文化中独特的亲和力和吸引力,使其成为“Blog”在中国最通用的翻译。但是,一些对互联网文化有所认识的人们,早已对这个词汇的模糊性、误导性提出过强烈的批评(点这里看),这种批评绝非仅仅基于技术,而是对中文Blog的体制性忧虑。为了正本清源,我今后将直接用Blog、Blawg(法律“博文”)、Blawgger等词汇——这绝对不是所谓“美国的月亮圆”,而恰恰是为了防止和批判只学形式,而忽略实质的、真正的生搬硬套。

在前两天的Blog中,我对“BLawg是什么?”进行了解释,此前,我还写过“博客这个狗东西”、“法律博客更应重视知识产权”等关于中文Blawg圈的批评文章,因为(1)自己的能力太差,并且思考也有不断深入的过程;(2)Blog、Blawg发音的近似让人容易犯晕,而且在中文法律Blawg圈,对互联网文化有所了解及希望了解的人还不多;(3)人们对互联网特别是Blog的认知限于中文环境(出于某种原因,中文简体网络一直在一定程度上与世界隔绝);(4)读者习惯性的对电脑屏幕上的文字的囫囵吞枣……等等原因,这些文章没能起到我企图起的作用。不过这没关系,这一现状本身就值得我反思和进一步努力——除了自己的blog文章继续恪守blog的原则外,继续发表对中文Blawg圈的批评。以下是我的最新想法,权且命名为“中文Blawg(法律博客)批判之一:别让Blawg变成LawBBS”。

正题:中文Blawg批判之一:别让Blawg变成LawBBS

  不是正题,但要说在前面的话(可以略过): 国人对“blog”一词的翻译,有网志、博客、部落格等多种。在中国大陆,在Blogspot等全球最有影响的blog服务提供者被屏蔽的条件下,众多blog服务提供商利用“博客”一词在中国媒体文化中独特的亲和力和吸引力,使其成为“Blog”在中国最通用的翻译。但是,一些对互联网文化有所认识的人们,早已对这个词汇的模糊性、误导性提出过强烈的批评(点这里看),这种批评绝非仅仅基于技术,而是对中文Blog的体制性忧虑。为了正本清源,我今后将直接用Blog、Blawg(法律“博文”)、Blawgger等词汇——这绝对不是所谓“美国的月亮圆”,而恰恰是为了防止和批判只学形式,而忽略实质的、真正的生搬硬套。

在前两天的Blog中,我对“BLawg是什么?”进行了解释,此前,我还写过“博客这个狗东西”、“法律博客更应重视知识产权”等关于中文Blawg圈的批评文章,因为(1)自己的能力太差,并且思考也有不断深入的过程;(2)Blog、Blawg发音的近似让人容易犯晕,而且在中文法律Blawg圈,对互联网文化有所了解及希望了解的人还不多;(3)人们对互联网特别是Blog的认知限于中文环境(出于某种原因,中文简体网络一直在一定程度上与世界隔绝);(4)读者习惯性的对电脑屏幕上的文字的囫囵吞枣……等等原因,这些文章没能起到我企图起的作用。不过这没关系,这一现状本身就值得我反思和进一步努力——除了自己的blog文章继续恪守blog的原则外,继续发表对中文Blawg圈的批评。以下是我的最新想法,权且命名为“中文Blawg(法律博客)批判之一:别让Blawg变成LawBBS”。

正题:中文Blawg批判之一:别让Blawg变成LawBBS

 

  一、中文BBS及其所形成的网络文化

  BBS最初是英文Bulletin Board System的缩写,翻译成中文为“电子布告栏系统”或“电子公告牌系统”(有人从技术角度具体区分了“BBS”和作为其继承者的“论坛”、“社区”的区别,不过,鉴于它们之间是承续的关系,人们大多仍然统一用BBS这个称呼)。

  本来,BBS的作用是给小群体(例如朋友圈、公司)张贴通知和备忘录的“电子白板”(注意,这很重要,决定了BBS的基本结构),但由于其书写随意、讨论方便、发言匿名等特点,竟发展成为中文网络中民间言论发表的最重要渠道,以天涯、新浪BBS、一塌糊涂等为代表的众多大型、巨型BBS网站和大量的中小型BBS社区,提供了远远多于门户网站的信息。

  蓬勃发展的中文BBS,逐渐形成了一套自己的习惯规则乃至BBS文化。我归纳得不全,但至少包括以下几个特点:
(1)大量的、未经允许的转载和复制——一方面,BBS文章的作者一般不会对这种转载提出异议,很多人反而希望这种转载;另一方面,由于BBS发言者的匿名性和大多数BBS表面上的非营利性,其它来源的文章作者也无力或不原追究这种转载行为,在这种条件下,诸如“大旗网”等在国外法律和互联网文化背景中,很可能涉及严重侵权的网站,在中国获得了很好的发展;
(2)以注意力为第一考虑要素的命名和文章风格,由于BBS版面的技术安排是新帖子不断将旧帖子推挤至不显眼地方(所谓“帖子沉了”),并且一旦有回复就重新回到版面顶端(所谓“顶帖子”——这本是为了适应上述“通知”和“备忘录”的初衷),只有能够吸引眼球的标题和能够激起人们说话的内容乃至语调,才能在BBS上获得青睐;
(3)文章书写、阅读和回复的随意性和弥散性,同样是由于其技术安排上的“通知”特性,使得BBS文章的书写具有随意性、口语化的特点,阅读者也往往一目十行,并随手发表直观的感想——在中文BBS中,这一特点不但继续延续,而且形成独特的风景:大量的争论都产生于对文章的误读,而且回复往往很快偏离主题,例如,一个探讨某地人文和风景的游记,很可能因为其中讲到某种食品而迅速演化为对食品健康、减肥的讨论,也可能因为其中偶然的一句“某某地方真的很混乱”而迅速演变为人们为维护自己家乡名声的争吵乃至漫骂,还可能因为对某景点管理的小抱怨而很快变成对环保乃至政府管理体制的讨论,等等;
(4)讨论过程的道德优先性,由于逻辑思辩需要相对认真的阅读和写作,而在上述BBS版面安排下,需要费较大力阅读和回复的推理性文章、思辩性文章必然比以口号和煽动性词汇为特点的、能够迅速博取人们在价值观上的认同的文章要“沉”得快,为了吸引注意力,BBS中的文章或回复大多不强调观点的推论,而倾向于作出没有多少推论的、简单的道德结论;
(5)事件和人物的聚集效应,对所谓“热点”事件和人物有较多讨论,本是大众传播中一直有的现象,这本不足为奇,但值得注意的是,由于上述几个特点,特定事件的聚集效应在BBS中显得更为突出,而BBS参与者的广泛性,又会使一些较为吸引眼球的事件和人物(不论其本身是否真的有多深刻的讨论余地)成为整个社会的热点,反过来影响BBS以外的网络和传统传媒;
(6)论题的概括性,BBS设计的初衷是给小范围的群体张贴告示的,在这种条件下,针对相对具体的问题进行讨论的可能性较大,但是,BBS在中国成为一种大众传播媒介,其用户背景必然千差万别、纷繁复杂,而仍然由于上述BBS技术设计的限制,为了使更多的人参与讨论,保持帖子“置顶”的状态,BBS文章作者便逐渐倾向于讨论一些所有人都可能发言的、概括性较强的问题——即使帖子的论题本身十分特殊和专业化,拥有不同知识结构的读者为了获得对话的平台,也会迅速将讨论引向大家都可以说这么一两句的方面——这种特点,在公众性质的BBS中十分突出,但在分了专业版面的BBS仍然无法避免——如果管理员过于细分版面,就有可能使一些BBS根本无人问津,因而从趋势上讲,讨论的主题和回复的内容总是朝着概括性而非特殊性的方向发展。

  一个BBS在人流量小的时候,上述特点往往不太显著,但只要人流量增大,上述各项特点几乎必然出现——BBS网站程序自身设计的结构性原因决定了这些特点的存在

  由于种种原因(这个就不说了,不然真成博士论文了,但我要强调绝非仅仅是技术原因,其中有很多制度因素),BBS在中文网络世界几乎无可争议地成为人们表达和交流思想的工具,因此BBS中所形成的上述特点也被扩展到BBS以外的网络应用和非网络传媒中,进而形成了相对特殊的中文互联网文化(很多人都对互联网文化的所谓“快餐性”有过探讨,但我估计很少有人看到其所以然,呵呵)。这种文化从总体上来讲较少追求内容的品质、深度和审美,较多追求主题的鲜明、概括和冲击性(芙蓉姐姐就是典型的例子)——其实,我这篇Blog的题目,就很BBS。当然,大众文化本来也有这样的特点,但BBS在中文世界的滥觞强化了这种特点,并且垄断性地控制了互联网上的舆论取向,使得与这些特点不符的信息,在互联网上的传播逾发困难。而这一点,正是很多人发现自己其实非常难以在互联网上进行深入、理性、焦点集中的讨论(乃至所谓学术批评)的原因之一

 

  二、别让中文Blawg变成BBS

  在英文网络世界,BBS及其后继者“讨论组”也并非没有上述特征,但总的来说,由于BBS在设计之初就不是用于公众舆论,所以它们大多能够保持在小圈子和特别专题的范围内,加上公众在传统媒介上获得表达机会的难度相对低于中国,所以BBS没能对互联网文化产生如中文网络中那样巨大的影响。与此同时,为了满足个人在互联网上的表达和交流欲望,Blog作为一种新的应用被开发出来,人们对Blog的较早接受和使用,也遏止了BBS的影响。

  从初衷上看,以个人网站为鼻祖的Blog本身就是专门为个人表达和传播自己的思想而设计的,所以其程序设计也都是围绕着网站拥有者即作者(Blogger)方便、自由、主题突出地阐发思想而进行功能安排的。例如,尽管Blog网站中也有回复和留言功能,但其回复不能决定文章的排列,甚至可以被blogger关闭;又如,blogger可以自由地决定自己的某篇文章是否处于重要的位置,而不以点击量为标准;再如,真正的blog程序都提供了强大的链接和引用功能,使得作者可以在引用他人作品的时候,既不侵权又能使读者方便地检阅相关资料;再再如,“引用通告”功能使作者不必搜索,就知道其他blog站点上对其文章的引用或者评论,也使作者想评论别人观点的时候,只用在自己的blog站点上发表,不必担心自己对他人文章的评论因为被粘贴于自己不能控制的网站上而丢失……,等等还有很多。更重要的是,至少在英文blog圈和blawg圈中,已经形成了一些人们的行为规则(点这里这里看我在先前的blogs中的归纳)。因此,尽管由于blogger们建立blog的目的、blog文章的文风可能不同,但和BBS相比,它显然能更有效率地按照作者的意志集中讨论的主题

  但是,正如我在“从法律博客是什么说开来”中提到的,事物的发展总是有变化的,blog也不例外。在中国,以高度个人化、链接化、平民化、共享化、非营利化为特征的,可以让人们从物理带宽的束缚和弥散性的讨论中解脱出来、畅快地交流的Blog Sites并不多。对于这一现状,除了前面说到的对“blog”的错误翻译外,上述BBS文化的影响也起到了相当大的作用——一些网站的“名人博客”实际上就是利用了中文互联网的BBS特征——出于商业利益的考虑,这种概念的推广并没有错,反而很值得赞叹——在特定文化圈中行商,当然要符合特定文化圈客观存在的规则。

 

  不过,即使在新浪等门户网站的blogger群中,blog的优点也已经使很多在BBS时代无法吸引眼球的人和文章浮出水面。而且,在法律Blog(即Blawg)圈中,也有人对深受BBS影响的中文blawg的发展提出了担忧,我“被迫”(因为他用的blog程序没有引用通告功能)在其中一篇文章后有这样的几段留言(删了一些同样属于BBS特点的情绪化表达):

  ……中国独的现象:blog服务提供商以名人Blog作为自己的招牌……我对这种现象感到非常遗憾,这种现象本身就是中国威权社会体系的折射。如果过分地强调这种精英化的Blog Sites,则将无法发挥Blog的优点
……Blog之所以能够起到传播信息的作用,是因为各个作者在自己的文章中的不断引用、链接相关的资源而实现的。但是,现在的中文Blog圈中,绝大部分bloggers都不会在自己的文章中这么做。这一点,真的可能导致blog的死亡……
……“推荐日志”和“推荐博客”这种东西,是纸张时代的媒体特征,如果一个blog服务提供者不但不增强BLog的链接功能和圈子特征,反而用这种东西来吸引眼球,那么说得不好听点,他对Blogsphere的贡献,也许不如他对Blogsphere的破坏……
……Blog肯定不是私人日记,它生来就是以共享为目的的,但,他的共享,不是通过BBS式样的推荐和留言(顶贴),也不是靠纸张时代的全篇复制,而是靠文中的链接而来的——这表面上是个技术问题,但其实远远不只有技术上的进步的意义,它还有观念上的进步的重大价值——这是Blog“先进文化”的核心……

 

  仔细想想,上面的留言仍然可能有点理想主义。中文Blawg在短短两三年的时间内,由无到有,由有到多,一派繁荣气象。在这个过程中,以Fyfz.cn为代表的一些Blog程序提供者,对中文Blawg的发展起到了巨大的推动作用(方圆“老大”冷眼观潮等网络法律人,其实早在Blog出现之前,就是中国最早建立个人法律网站和法律写作社区的先行者)。客观地讲,在BBS文化已经成为主流的条件下,要使中文Blawg群迅速成为“学术批评”的平台,是十分困难的。于是,利用(或者顺从于)BBS文化的某些特征,推荐一些blog站点或者文章,从而起到“引导”作用,或者也许是达到这一目标的一个途径。

  但是,人们常常很容易把手段和目的混同在一起。既成文化的影响往往又如此之大,以致于我们常常在陷入其中后,再也看不清庐山真面目。所以,必须随时保持警惕,我在邓正来教授的blog后有如下留言:

邓老师及各位前辈:
    我谈一谈“博客是否能够展开学术讨论”
    1、Blog完全有可能进行学术批评,blog并非天生就是不登大雅之堂的自慰器,但很可能成为自慰器。Blog不是什么新生事物,在高速发展的当代,只要出现超过3年的东西,就不是新的,可能很多人的行为和阅读兴趣在考古(法学界也有呀),所以老觉得Blog就只能拿来“玩”,而不能拿来“用”——即使用,也是还没闹清楚怎么回事,就按着自己的意思弄,最后异化了Blog。
    2、中文法律Blog圈里,Blog作为一种新的、便利的技术的优点没有显露,反而继承了BBS的种种弊端。最近的一些无因而起和无果而终的争论,正是积弊的初露端倪,若不反思,呵呵,学术批评恐怕真的只是个梦——我说的不单单是所谓“网上”的学术批评,而是所有学术批评——其实本来就没有什么“网上的”或“网下的”学术批评之分别——网络乃工具。
    3、如邓师所言,是不是能在网上进行(我觉得不要网上两个字也一样)学术批评,取决于参与者的态度。
    4、大多数人不是柳下惠,要保持正确的态度,除了需要各人日三省自身外,还需要一些基本的共同认知。说到网上,就是要有真正的、对Blogsphere或Blawgsphere的冷眼旁者存在。
    4、上述观点,并不等于我不警惕某种意义上的“本质主义”,只是话长纸短,不可能言尽于此。
    以上,算是对中文Blawgsphere圈的一个批评。

  技术对制度乃至文化的影响,以及制度和文化对技术的影响,似乎早就有先哲进行过论述。我没文化且懒,就不再多说了,这里只总结如下:由于种种原因对BBS异化使用,成就了中文BBS的繁荣,而繁荣的中文BBS形成的特点影响了中国互联网文化,这种影响也可能并且甚至已经侵入到blog和blawg圈中(尽管其中有反动),要想不让Blawg受中文BBS文化的影响、要想使中文blawgsphere逐渐成为深入讨论(无论是对理论还是实践问题)的平台,恐怕还需要对Blog本身进行反本归原的再认识,无论是服务提供者、bloggers还是读者,都应该更多地了解blog的特点及其本应有的文化品质——唯其如此,方有可能使中文blawg圈脱离中文BBS的宿命,防止其不符合我们期望的、新的异化。

An Introduction of Chinese Blawgs, Beta

Blawgging For China Blawg Review Vol. 1 Ver Beta 0.1
 
Title: An Introduction of Chinese Blawgs
Ver.: Beta 0.1
Date: 20060330
By: Donnie H. DONG (http://blawgdog.com)
Licence: CC:by-nc-sa
 
Because of the difficulty of reading Chinese characters (even knowing Chinese, one may be crazy when he find that Chinese itself includes three kinds of totally different computer character formats, that’s why Taiwan might split from China in cyber era, I think), a small part of China Blawg map has been unveiled to English surfers. Actually, most of disclosed China blawgs are with some "foreign link", that is, the blawgers may be foreign researchers and/or lawyers interested in China’s law, or its market, and these blawgs are mostly in pure English.
 
However, Chinese lawyers have established a large (not very heavy yet) Chinese blawg atlas in Chinese character, though the first legal Chinese blawg service provider appeared just around Jan 2005. Now there are thousands of blawgs in China, and the blawgers covered nearly all legal professions.
 
Most Chinese blawgs are set on blawg service providers’ servers, and rare ones have their own independent domain name. Now there are 7 blawg service providers. They are FYFZ.cn (more than 8000 registrants), Cnlawblog.com (more than 8000), Lawoy.com (400), Blog.highcourt.org (less than 3000 but only 100 active), Lawblog.cn (700), chinaeclaw.com (less than 400)and Lawspirit.org (more than 1000). The last one declares that it provides a “bilingual” blawg system, but it seems this ad does not allure potential blawgers. Interestingly, the FYFZ.cn, which provides the poorest application, is the most popular one, i.e. there are more than 500 active individual blawgs set on this site and the dozens of new ones are created each day.
 
The most significant characteristic of FYFZ.cn is that it is more "academic" or even "bookishness" than the others. Although the amount of lawyers’ (I mean barristers and solicitors here) blawgs is the highest, scholars dominate the site undoubtedly. A few eminent professors and more legal researchers lawg there activates, ideas, book chapters and even research proposals on there own blawgs. Among them, Dr. XU Xin becomes the top one with his blawg "Poetical Justice", which get more than 347 thousands hits since Jan 2005. Other famous scholars include Prof. XIE Hui, Prof. LIN Lai-Fan, Prof. HE Wei-fang, Prof. WEI Dun-You, Prof. ZHANG Chu, Prof. ZHANG Jian-Sheng, Prof. ZHANG Hai-Bing, Prof. FAN Jin-Xue, Prof. GU Ming-Kang, etc. WANG Yi, whose blog has (at least legendarily) been censored frequently, also registered a blawg in FYFZ.cn.
 
A registrant is not equal to a blawger of cause. Most registrant only post few logs, and a great amount of those logs can not be regarded as "lawgs"—-entertainments and hobbies are always easier than legal analysis. I will introduce some individual blawgs later.  
Blawgging For China Blawg Review Vol. 1 Ver Beta 0.1
 
Title: An Introduction of Chinese Blawgs
Ver.: Beta 0.1
Date: 20060330
By: Donnie H. DONG (http://blawgdog.com)
Licence: CC:by-nc-sa
 
Because of the difficulty of reading Chinese characters (even knowing Chinese, one may be crazy when he find that Chinese itself includes three kinds of totally different computer character formats, that’s why Taiwan might split from China in cyber era, I think), a small part of China Blawg map has been unveiled to English surfers. Actually, most of disclosed China blawgs are with some "foreign link", that is, the blawgers may be foreign researchers and/or lawyers interested in China’s law, or its market, and these blawgs are mostly in pure English.
 
However, Chinese lawyers have established a large (not very heavy yet) Chinese blawg atlas in Chinese character, though the first legal Chinese blawg service provider appeared just around Jan 2005. Now there are thousands of blawgs in China, and the blawgers covered nearly all legal professions.
 
Most Chinese blawgs are set on blawg service providers’ servers, and rare ones have their own independent domain name. Now there are 7 blawg service providers. They are FYFZ.cn (more than 8000 registrants), Cnlawblog.com (more than 8000), Lawoy.com (400), Blog.highcourt.org (less than 3000 but only 100 active), Lawblog.cn (700), chinaeclaw.com (less than 400)and Lawspirit.org (more than 1000). The last one declares that it provides a “bilingual” blawg system, but it seems this ad does not allure potential blawgers. Interestingly, the FYFZ.cn, which provides the poorest application, is the most popular one, i.e. there are more than 500 active individual blawgs set on this site and the dozens of new ones are created each day.
 
The most significant characteristic of FYFZ.cn is that it is more "academic" or even "bookishness" than the others. Although the amount of lawyers’ (I mean barristers and solicitors here) blawgs is the highest, scholars dominate the site undoubtedly. A few eminent professors and more legal researchers lawg there activates, ideas, book chapters and even research proposals on there own blawgs. Among them, Dr. XU Xin becomes the top one with his blawg "Poetical Justice", which get more than 347 thousands hits since Jan 2005. Other famous scholars include Prof. XIE Hui, Prof. LIN Lai-Fan, Prof. HE Wei-fang, Prof. WEI Dun-You, Prof. ZHANG Chu, Prof. ZHANG Jian-Sheng, Prof. ZHANG Hai-Bing, Prof. FAN Jin-Xue, Prof. GU Ming-Kang, etc. WANG Yi, whose blog has (at least legendarily) been censored frequently, also registered a blawg in FYFZ.cn.
 
A registrant is not equal to a blawger of cause. Most registrant only post few logs, and a great amount of those logs can not be regarded as "lawgs"—-entertainments and hobbies are always easier than legal analysis. I will introduce some individual blawgs later.