The New And Improved Fashion Board

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by nononono
And not only that, but I can't believe it took her 20 minutes to craft what she did end up typing. Fucking lawyers. I bet she was in a big firm her entire, illustrious career. Imagine the drafts.

Yes! Big firm lawyers are so incompetent at drafting things! Including evite responses!

[crumpin' 2 da oldskool]

Originally posted by patentparanyc
Yes.

Word!

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Just respond with a "Best" and be done with it.

I don't reply to anything. My wife hates it. If you know me well enough to invite me, you know whether I'll be there or not (we probably speak a lot).

[nononono]

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
Yes! Big firm lawyers are so incompetent at drafting things! Including evite responses!

Sigh. Having worked at a big firm for a number of years, my perspective is that large firms often draft and re-draft minor communications incessantly. I mean, maybe it's me, but I'm certain I've heard associates complain and complain about partners spending a ton of time reworking a simple letter, for their own mysterious reasons (too tedious to list the possibilities here). The comment was about the culture of revision, not a suggestion that (ooooooooh) big firm lawyers can't write, Francis.

[nononono]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Perhaps, but I bet she was missed at the party (if the party was not attended by her in-laws who, apparently, hate her).

I didn't hate her response. In fact, I liked it just peachily fine. I am not sure why it took 20 minutes, however. Jesus. I'm going back to being nice.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by nononono
Sigh. Having worked at a big firm for a number of years, my perspective is that large firms often draft and re-draft minor communications incessantly. I mean, maybe it's me, but I'm certain I've heard associates complain and complain about partners spending a ton of time reworking a simple letter, for their own mysterious reasons (too tedious to list the possibilities here). The comment was about the culture of revision, not a suggestion that (ooooooooh) big firm lawyers can't write, Francis.

You might check in with Anne--I think she's in a WhiffWhiff present exchange this year.

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I don't reply to anything. My wife hates it. If you know me well enough to invite me, you know whether I'll be there or not (we probably speak a lot).

I followed up with people the week before the party to see who was actually coming. But I was more anal than most, since I had to turn in a guest list and pay for the open bar. It worked out pretty well, but the 6 or 8 people who no showed on me the night of because "the babysitter backed out" or "the kid had the sniffles" cost me in the neighborhood of $500 on bar tab that went unused. From now on I invite only singletons and childless couples. Done and done.

[nononono]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
You might check in with Anne--I think she's in a WhiffWhiff present exchange this year.

Rats. Not my day.

[patentparanyc]

Originally posted by nononono
Rats. Not my day.

Damn, I need fucking coffee. This relentless year end pace and the shitty weather is making me sleepy

[greatwhitenorthchick]

Originally posted by nononono
Rats. Not my day.

I have never dropped a set of keys down an elevator shaft (mmm, shaft). I have, however, dropped two sets of keys, on two different occasions, down a garbage chute.

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by nononono
Rats. Not my day.

If it restores your faith in the BigLaws of the world, I work for a big firm, and I don't even spend the extra time that you do deciding whether my audience is more of a "Kind Regards" or a "Regards" sort of crowd. I'm a bit of a rebel that way, though.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I don't reply to anything. My wife hates it. If you know me well enough to invite me, you know whether I'll be there or not (we probably speak a lot).

It's a pain in the ass if you have a large party with food and drink, and no expectation that your guests will bring anything, to have absolutely no idea how many people are showing up.

[LessinSF]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Perhaps, but I bet she was missed at the party (if the party was not attended by her in-laws who, apparently, hate her).

She is retired at 32. You should all hate her.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
From now on I invite only singletons and childless couples. Done and done.

woo hoo!

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by nononono
Sigh. Having worked at a big firm for a number of years, my perspective is that large firms often draft and re-draft minor communications incessantly. I mean, maybe it's me, but I'm certain I've heard associates complain and complain about partners spending a ton of time reworking a simple letter, for their own mysterious reasons (too tedious to list the possibilities here). The comment was about the culture of revision, not a suggestion that (ooooooooh) big firm lawyers can't write, Francis.

The culture of revision isn't necessarily a bad thing. I agree it's silly in the context of an evite, but there's no reason we shouldn't try to make our communications proper. I loath all stripes of lawyer, but people who revise stuff and demand it be well written are a speedbump against the sort of crap email language that's beginning to infect people's formal correspondence.

The problem with lawyers is most of them are more fixated on finding immaterial mistakes in docs/correspondence so they can insult/embarrass one another than they are in analyzing the meat of what's between the four corners of the paper. I understand that in a complex transactional agreement, all must be perfect. But in litigation, you do nothing more than show yourself a gaping horse's ass when you quote an opponent's misuse or minor immaterial misspelling of the name of a witness as a (sic) in a letter to the court. Knowing when to use the rule is at least (if not more) important than knowing the rule.

What drives me nuts is when a lawyer tells you someone "doesn't know how to write." What he means most often is that person doesn't know how to write like him, or write as lawyers are expected to write (dry, dull, not using any language that might challenge the mental thesaurus of a dim little clerk). The tragedy of legal writing is its studied dullardry.*

*I don't know if this is actually a word, but you know what I mean. Which is more than adequate.