Interested in commenting on the legal community?WWL is looking for a few good contributing writers to help share the secrets, whispers and other legal gossip with the legal community.
Description: work with the editors of WWL to develop one story a week. The story can be pulled from the headlines, based on whispers about town, a more substantive research-based piece or an out and out goofy idea.
You will be able to write and post stories under a pseudonym to ensure that your all-important reputation is untarnished.
If you're interested, email us at nevadalegal@gmail.com
Please do not add Legally Unbound.
ReplyDeletethanks in advance,
I don't want to be a contributing writer, but I think there might be some kind of interesting story behind Judge Mosley's former use of the name "Charles Dry" - as reflected in the recent Order of Affirmance in his child custody case.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nevadajudiciary.us/index.php/view-documents-and-forms.html?func=startdown&id=1872
Agree with 2:31. LU is annoying and does not add anything to the discussions. Please go away LU.
ReplyDeleteI third 2:31 & 5:23. I started reading this site not because I wanted a replacement for hard hitting expose news journals written by conspiracy theorists, I did so because it is funny and interesting to read about antics and other happenings around Vegas.
ReplyDeleteLU is like a prescription downer.
LMFAO.
ReplyDeleteYou guys are cracking me UP.
If you prefer fantasy...I can make crap up, too. Unfortunately for all of us, I am not a conspiracy theorist. If you don't want to be scared, I'll back off and give you a pacifier when you cry next time. I'll leave the deep thought for my blawg and won't pollute your mind with truth and analysis.
What I don't understand, though, is why so many of you comment without a nickname? Is it so we can't track your random opinions?
I'm sure LE won't stop the antics reporting, everyone. Do not be dismayed. That is obviously the Blawg objective.
It is interesting to see that the censorship attitude is so alive and well. Hitler would be proud. Especially to note that you in such force on a "fun & light" Blawg. Maybe LE & JL need to have more pictures on here for you guys & fewer words. Personally, I like the words.
@ 5:28 -- I'll try to be more of an UPPER. But, you know, the truth can be a buzzkill.
Legally Unbound is da BOMB! Hey LU, don't let the haters get you down.
ReplyDeleteLU: just because someone finds your posts longwinded, rambling and annoying does not equal Nazi censorship. Good to see hyperbolic ad hominem attacks are alive and well. Oh, and I post anonymously because I JUST DON'T CARE about having a screen name and am not self-absorbed enough to expect anyone else to "track" my posts.
ReplyDeleteLU's invocation of Godwin's Law means she loses, conversation is over, and she may not be a contributing writer. One would think such an experienced blogger would know better.
ReplyDeleteCount another vote to the "Please do not add Legally Unbound" tally.
ReplyDeleteAlmost without fail, each posting by LU is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in LU's rambling, incoherent responses is LU even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this blog is now dumber for having listened to it. I award LU no points, and may God have mercy on LU's soul.
Busted by the NetCops...Thread Over. Good call.
ReplyDeleteIt was weak and ending. You are right. It was a moment of weakness. Sorry.
Beantown needs to get out more and for the rest of you...we'll enjoy this in the next thread, where you will sling personal insults because you're too busy doing surface legal work and are still learning to be counsel and develop your own arguments.
You big dummies, I hate you, you stupid face!!!!
Um..."scared"..."pacifier when you cry"..."too busy doing surface legal work and are still learning to be counsel and develop your own arguments"...and others are the ones "slinging personal insults"? Yes, as a relatively inexperienced associate I am happily doing surface legal work and still learning to be counsel. Isn't that they way this job works?
ReplyDeleteI agree with everyone else re LU. I find his comments boring.
ReplyDeleteThe Nevada legal system is corrupt, blah blah blah. We all know about that. Surely most of us are concerned about that. But it's just not the reason we come to read WWL.
And besides, LU has his own "Blawg." Why would he need to post here?
I find LU creepy.
ReplyDeleteI'm so uninteresting that you all read and re-read my comments, quote them and then comment about them. Interesting does not mean "approving". But you can't say I've not gotten your "interest".
ReplyDeleteLE & JL have not seen this much "action" since their senior prom.
@ 6:43 am -- you want a job? You really get to work early and are obviously busting your hump. And listen, if it is true, it is not a "hack".
For the rest of you LU fans...how do you kids say it, "I got mad love for you."
Now, this thread is supposed to be OVER. Yesterday one of the Mr./Mrs. Anonymous Whatever 7:44 PM called Godwin's Law. Not me.
@ 8:15 am, thanks for pubing my Blawg. Aw Shucks...
I cannot agree more with 2:31 et al. (See what I did there LU?)
ReplyDeletePlease do not, under any circumstances, add LU as a contributing writer.
Re 6/17 @ 8:15:
ReplyDeleteLU posts here because nobody is reading his/her blog and he/she is attempting to hijack WWL to benefit from the goodwill generated by the excellent posts on WWL. I understand and appreciate his/her predicament, but to be honest, I think it kind of lame to try this tactic on other blogs in such a manner.
I'd suggest that if LU wants people to read his/her drivel, that he/she do what other bloggers do - write about something more interesting.
I can remember what I was told when I would complain about something, such as corruption, double dipping, ad nauseum - 'Complaining without providing a solution is just bitching.'
I don't think that 'interest' is equal to 'attention'. I can vomit in the middle of a restaurant to get attention but it does not mean someone is 'interested' in my message.
ReplyDeleteLU has my attention just because he's so damn annoying, but I don't really care about his message.
P.S. The individual who referenced Godwin's Law and Beantown, with his/her delivery of the timeless and apropos Billy Madison quote, should consider applying for the contributing writer position. They have my vote.
ReplyDeleteCan WWL please just pacify LU by adding his blog to the "Nevada Links" list? Maybe that'll keep him from posting lengthy useless comments.
ReplyDeleteAnd I agree w/ 8:46, LU grabs attention for being annoying, not interesting.
On the other hand, everyone should be free to post whatever comment they like. But I don't think LU should be a contributing writer. His messages just don't fit into what WWL is all about.
BTW, is WWL on Twitter? If not, does anyone else feel that WWL should be on Twitter?
ReplyDeleteCouldn't agree more @8:58 a.m.
ReplyDeleteBeantown and "Anonymous Godwin's Law" have an open invitation to contribute to the blog.
I would love to follow WWL on Twitter.
ReplyDeleteYou can do it...come on, beat out the thread about the Billboard Attorney's Bracket by whining about me.
ReplyDeleteI guess I have to work on unintentionally weaving quotes from old Adam Sandler movies into my writing in order to achieve acclaim in the eyes of the Anonymous said... Thankfully your approval is not determinative of my opinions.
I'm not here for any other reason than that some of your comments suck me in. Well, not true. LE & JL can be pretty funny.
yes to Twitter...
ReplyDeleterequest and you shall receive. You can now find us on Twitter, tweeting at @WildWildLaw
ReplyDeleteI would like to offer a suggestion to all. The proliferation of various communication media on the Internet has contributed to an unfortunate degradation of civilized society that any legal professional should be by default averse to - poor writing. Now admittedly much of this may be attributable to the fact that I'm a pompous, stuck in the mud, decrepit Colonel Blimp sort of fellow (actually I'm quite sure it is), but nonetheless, the sort of quick zap-writing that blogs, instant messaging and Twitter encourages doesn't really lend itself to better communication. And I think if Internet users approached their writing with just a touch more care everyone will better appreciate what is being said. Which one assumes is the writers objective.
ReplyDeleteA few suggestions. Firstly, write as though you are composing a real letter, however short. Avail yourself of spell check - please. And just read it out loud to yourself before posting. I'm still astounded at how poorly constructed and clumsy some things I write sound once I read them out loud to myself.
wehre them new polls at???
ReplyDeleteThe bracket challenge will be up on Friday. We're trying to figure out how to make the HTML pretty for the reader, but may just resort to a spreadsheet.
ReplyDelete@ Beantown, haw, haw. Billy Madison!
ReplyDelete@ Jordan Ross
ReplyDelete"Which one assumes is the writers objective."
I don't know Jordan, you tell us who assumes. Passive voice is a cardinal sin.
@ 12:09 PM - perfect response to Jordan Ross. LOL!
ReplyDeleteDear Jordan Ross, & etc.,
ReplyDelete"Which one assumes is the writers objective," is a sentence fragment; your sentence is missing an apostrophe in the possessive "writers" (sic).
One would think that one would take the time to edit the mistakes from one's excoriating comment on the vice of poor "writing" in internet comments.
Would you be teh pot or teh kettle?
Sincerely,
A Humble Internets Reader
Is "Firstly" even a word?? Outside of a Dennis the Menace comic strip, I mean.
ReplyDelete"Firstly" is a very common word, both at Skadden and in Department 10. Quite the paradox . . .
ReplyDelete- Anonymous Godwin
@2:51. When I type "firstly" into Microsoft Word, there is no red squiggle under the word...so it's probably a real word...
ReplyDelete"Firstly" may be common, but according to Garner, it is "considered inferior to first" (OED), because it has "an unnecessary syllable" (Dictionary of Modern Legal Usage).
ReplyDelete"First" = best primary enumerator.
"Firstly" = inferior because you sound like a pretentious git.
Do we really need to tear Jordan Ross' comment on this post apart? We've been over this before. Numerous times. See comments on WWL posts on interviews with Ross.
ReplyDeleteEveryone reading WWL knows by now that Ross is not the greatest authority on proper English grammar and spelling.
Note to self:
ReplyDeleteAnother way to get Mr./Mrs. Anonymous said... riled up is to criticize his/her grammar and include a fragment. Otherwise, just continue bringing up corruption in NV and write more than 2 sentences.
C'mon, it's hump day. Lighten up! I mean, sure, if Ross were merely commenting on the topic of the OP, the tearing apart would be gratuitous. However, when Ross' comment takes the tone of tearing others for their poor Net grammar, well, it's open Shark Pimp season.
ReplyDelete- Because I can. (Apologies to Sohmer)
I may be showing my relative youth with this posting, but does anybody relate LU to "that kid" in law school?
ReplyDeleteYou remember him/her, the one who has to raise their hand repeatedly throughout the class, just to make a wholly irrelevant comment (typically related to something they recently watched on TMZ). They never add anything of real substance to the class, other than being a humorous recipient of the professor's irritation.
LU, I apologize for consistently calling you out (and I promise to get out more in the future), but every time I happen to pop into this Blog for a good read there you are - hand waiving, yelling "Call on me!" Hence, you have become WWL's humorous recipient of constant ridicule.
Firstly, "Huzzah!" to the pretentious gits at Skadden.
ReplyDelete@ 4:41 PM
ReplyDeleteI agree. In fact, I recall this one incident in Torts class where our professor's response to "that kid's" upward hand was "you can't possibly have another comment" and refused to call on her. And the whole class applauded the professor.
I think that applause might be the attitude that the general WWL reader population has towards the recent LU-bash as well.
BTW, thanks 2:31 PM, for writing out what obviously many had thought, but never cared to elaborate on until now.
4:45 PM
ReplyDeleteSkadden? WTF are you talking about Skadden for? No one here cares.
Thank you Beantown for keeping up with identifying yourself, it is very helpful in setting yourself apart from the mob as an individual with thoughts and opinions.
ReplyDeleteFrankly, I hardly remember law school, & I don't remember what I do remember. As for class commentary, nothing has changed in 20 years it sounds like. However, in the pre-laptop era, things were a little different. So, I'm not sure any of you would recognize any of my law school stories as anything you experienced, or whether or not I was "that kid". Though I can say that I pissed off "that crowd" pretty well, kind of similar to how I annoy most of you. Not for commentary in class, though, but for wearing Minor Threat and Sid Lives t-shirts (sorry kids, this is pre-Green Day) and then beating out the "shirt & tie kids" for top spots on whatever review, team or journal I wanted to annoy. (Shhh, don't tell anyone. Most people now have no clue that I was so ??, now I'm just "creepy", I guess. See what information you squeeze out of me with anonymity).
As for being called out...it's the story of my life. I couldn't care less. In fact, you only encourage me. What you call ridicule, I call disillusion.
5:32 PM, Ummm, that's kind of the point. Anonymous Godwin's obsequious post @ 3:11 PM mentioned Skadden as commonly using a second-rate word.
ReplyDeleteIt's called reading! Top to bottom, left to right... a group of words together is called a sentence. Take Tylenol for any headaches... Midol for any cramps.
@5:58
ReplyDelete+1 for Tommy Boy reference.
I hereby propose that as of this moment, we cease and desist from responding to LU's posts on this or any other thread. Like LU said, responding only encourages him/her/it, sort of like when your dog defecates on the floor right in front of you believing that bad attention is better than no attention. All in favor, say nothing and remain silent.
ReplyDeleteI've been reading this thread and I can't understand why you would want to end it. LOL. I don't necessarily agree with everything that LU has said but I've not seen this interesting of a thread in months on WWL. Plus you gotta admit you guys aren't really always making a lot of sense either. I'm just surprised he/she/it keeps coming back for more abuse. It's funny. So, "no" don't stop my entertainment. This is better than the office drama.
ReplyDeleteI feel like it's Christmas in Kuwait. Crickets... Thanks to the lonely few.
ReplyDelete50!
ReplyDeleteI will plead guilty to the charges in this thread, both for grammatical errors as well as being pretentious. And in all fairness, yes it's always open Pimp Shark season. My point however was to encourage more in the way of complete thoughts and to perhaps a slightly more (but not too much) civil tone here. No offense intended; quite the opposite in fact. I will take slight issue with the question of the usage of "firstly" versus "first". Despite my high regard of the OED, may I suggest that my choice is perhaps archaic (which I have a penchant for) as opposed to inferior.
ReplyDeleteI would like to remind everyone that I believe the original goal of this thread was to encourage contributors to the blog to compose complete articles. I hope everyone will consider taking a stab at it.
Well said Ross. I'm glad you re-focused us back on the issue that LE & JL were originally desirous of making. "Lending a Hand" would be welcome.
ReplyDeleteLU + Shark Pimp = Dream Team
ReplyDelete