Friday, September 30, 2005

Joke Worth Repeating

What do you think about lawyer jokes? On the one hand, some of them are hilarious. I subscribe to the belief that it is a sign of good character that you can laugh at yourself. I also think it's important for our state of mind, as lawyers, to have a good sense of humour. So, at first glance, the jokes are good fun. I came across a series of lawyer jokes (you can find them in abundance on the Net) and I enjoyed this one:
After drafting a will for an elderly client, the attorney announced a fee of $100. The client gave the attorney a $100 bill. After the client left, the attorney saw that the client had in fact paid $200, as two of the client's $100 bills had stuck together.

Looking at the $100 overpayment, an ethical question arose in the attorney's mind: "Do I tell my partner?"
But there's another side to this story. How about the belief that every joke holds a grain of truth. The protagonist of the joke above has a poor grasp of ethics and this seems to be a common theme among lawyer jokes. By retelling these jokes, aren't we perpetuating the stereotype? Am I reinforcing the notion that lawyers struggle with ethical dilemmas by posting the joke?

The Daily Show rocks!

I was watching Jon Stewart tonight - hilarious! His news correspondent Rob Corddry described ex-FEMA director Mike Brown's testimony as pointing youa culpa to his coworkers. Funny guy.

Thursday, September 29, 2005

In 2nd year they work you

The maxim is right: second year is a lot of work. Right from the first class, my courses have been very demanding. But also, thankfully, very interesting. Unlike some schools, Queen's prescribes all the courses for first year so the courses I'm taking now are the first ones I selected myself. They might think about changing that. More electives in first year might be an improvement.

Thursday, September 08, 2005

The Perils of Blogging: Getting Dooced

The perils of blogging have been well documented since Heather Armstrong lost her job as a result of the content of her blog Dooce. In fact, the term "dooced" was coined as a result of her firing and it can be found in some dictionaries. The Urban Dictionary defines dooced as, "to lose one’s job because of one’s website". I posted about her site and blogging anonymously back in February. Another high profile case involved Mark Jen losing his job at Google as a result (partially) of his blog. His story was picked up by and many others have recounted similar tales.

The question is: what motivates the blogger? Some are only interested in money, sadly. The number of spam blogs is getting out of control. Other sites seem to be based on opinionating. BitchPhD, for example, actually makes money with her rants about politics and academia. I wonder if she will join the list with Ms. Armstrong and Mr. Jen in the near future. Personally, I don't find those sites too compelling but I can imagine how they would be. The same curiosity got me hooked on The Diary of Adrian Mole series when I was a teenager. Opinionating does not carry much appeal for me and I'm aware of its potentially hazardous consequences. Besides, I have no desire to complain (except, I suppose, when I'm thinking about not getting a JD).

Today I heard a motivating story from a fellow TwoL. He had spoken with a first year law student who had been deliberating between Queen's and Western for law school. Apparently, he decided to come to Queen's because of this blog. Now, I assume QLL was only partially responsible for his decision. Even so, I'm touched. Thank you reader. I will blog on.

Wednesday, September 07, 2005

First week (again)

I've been having mixed feelings about being back in school. On the one hand, it's wonderful seeing everyone again. On the other hand, I'm still in summer mode and I really don't feel like getting into gear.

BTW, welcome to the new class of '08! Have a great year!