The author of the Harvard Law Review Note I previously blogged about has been identified as Phil Telfeyan. He has created a blog in support of his Note. He's spent a lot of time so far making excuses for the fact that the statue from which the title of his Note was taken represents the exact opposite of what he argued that it portrayed--as Telfeyan would have seen had he looked at the inscription on the other side of the statue.
Comments on his blog are open.
UPDATE: Welcome, ATL trolls!
UPDATE 2: According to ATL, some sources report that Phil Telfeyan sent emails to HLR editors disclaiming responsibility for blog comments and postings made in his name. However, Telfeyan would neither confirm nor deny responsibility publicly.
As ATL notes, "the blog contains no written content that could not be derived from the piece itself," and with that in mind I find the issue of whether Telfeyan actually authored the blog almost beside the point. If a blog consisting entirely of your ideas is universally condemned as patronizing, callow, unoriginal, and wrong, culpability flows back to you.