Last night I decided to read the comments on the post. I shouldn't have....
"The only differences that I can see between this knit and the baby kimono from Mason Dixon Knitting is that the Mason Dixon kimono is in garter stitch, while this one is in stockinette, and it ties at the bottom instead of using sewn-on ribbons like the Mason Dixon pattern.
It's not *quite* the same pattern, but it's certainly close enough that it shouldn't be called an original pattern. It's more like a variation"
"That looks remarkably like the baby kimono in Mason Dixon Knitting. I'm not a big fan of copyright infringement and suggest CRAFT check this out."
There was one comment of support, pointing out the obvious differences in construction. I am a huge fan of the Mason-Dixon One-Piece Kimono. In fact a browse through my archives will show that I have knit it twice. Suggestions that I have "ripped it off" are insulting to me and insulting to the Mason-Dixon ladies as I have not at any point had any contact from them with similar concerns. To suggest that I would change the MD pattern from garter to stockingette, call it my own design and post it on the Internet are deeply hurtful.
One problem with the Internet is that it is all to easy to post an anonymous comment about someone's integrity and walk away with little thought as to the person you are defaming. I realise the I could comment back on the Craft blog but I am loathe to look like I need to defend myself.
All that I ask folks is that next time you are about to type first and think later, remember that the person on the other end of the computer is a real person and that this real person was very upset.