Comments on: 3L Achieves Networking Failure: Disaster Preserved via Email

By: guest

guest — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 19:35:39 +0000

81 ftw.

By: guest

guest — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 23:37:55 +0000

Wow.
Elie, you are an arrogant douche.
- Not connected in any way to this story.

By: guest

guest — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 21:07:32 +0000

I wonder, incidentally, why the law school gave out the wrong Webster & Associates contact info? Are Career Services offices not even competent enough these days at getting the contact information of the firms they list, let alone at getting jobs for the students?
And I’m with 90. Bruce – you may have gotten some temporary jollies from being mean to this kid, but keep in mind that the kid may also have a network. Stupid as he is, he may know some smart people. Alienate him, and you lose your access to those people. Maybe there was a potential client there? Too late now.

By: guest

guest — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 20:00:47 +0000

Was going to say something about how 95 was wrong, but decided to take my own advice.

By: guest

guest — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 13:02:43 +0000

Wow. Reading the post’s here in the comments responding to Bruce clearly indicate the level of asshattedness that has inflicted this profession. Bruce, the 3L was a douche, nothing more. And good that you gave him/her a reality check. Posters: if you think the guy’s response was dickish — CHECK YOU GUNNING

By: guest

guest — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 21:28:07 +0000

Bruce,
You are a prick. Allow me to explain why: this 3L is a kid who made a careless mistake. And I say that as a practicing attorney with very little patience for gunner law students. You, however, are a purportedly mature adult with years of life experience. Your assertions that you intended only to help him are clearly disingenuous. This is made clear by your apparent need to engage in a pedantic, flawed legal analysis of the merit of his claims. You know nothing about the law. That much is clear from your little soliloquy. The fact that you attempted to posture in such a manner demonstrates that all you sought from this exchange was self-gratification. If, as you claim, your only intent was to impart a lesson; a short, polite note in response would have accomplished this task. Your myriad attempts to highlight your connections (with only the intent of rubbing his face in his loss) demonstrates that you feel you have something to prove.
And then, apparently high upon the fumes of your own perceived intellectuality, you posted the exchange to your website. Trust that, from a professional’s point of view, the person who comes out of this looking poorly is YOU.

By: guest

guest — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 11:59:04 +0000

Ohmygod, another IT guy who thinks he’s a hero. What is it about them?
Bruce, you threw the first punch. You quickly made the determination that any law student sending a resume to the IT “Webster & Associates” rather than the legal “Webster & Associates” couldn’t be anything other than a careless moron, and you just couldn’t go on with your day without taking the opportunity to insult the person, complete with an obviously disingenuous “Good luck with the job search.” You are the prick.
I worked with IT guys for years. You’re all the fucking same. Hanging a shingle was probably the only way you were going to get out of the corral of cubicles they keep you in.

By: guest

guest — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 11:56:31 +0000

By: guest

guest — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 10:03:02 +0000

Elie -
You smoke? …cmon, man, don’t be such a stereotype.

By: guest

guest — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 09:51:36 +0000

BRUCE:
Please read, this is honest advice.
As a second year associate at a mid-sized law firm (100-200 attorneys), I do most of the research and screening for potential experts in our large litigation. I would never pass your name along to a partner managing a case after this publicity that you have pursued. It just shows you are prone to tackiness and like giving advice on subject matters that you are not an expert on. In other words, you enjoy being an expert too much.
When we put people on the stand in litigation with $30-60 million on the line, we have to have confidence that they have the tact and common sense to impress the jury, but not come off as condensending. We also like to know someone picks the right battles to fight. You have picked a battle to fight publicly, stemming from a young professional’s silly mistake. If you can’t see how this is an embarrassment to your credibility, you really don’t have a future as an expert witness or in litigation support generally.