We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
In this post, some of the giveaways were constructions like this, which are so overused by AI trying to go for some imagined rhetorical effect that it has 'learned' by averaging some click-bait blog / Linked-in posts:
> The businessman has actually built something. Thousands of families earn their livelihood because of decisions he made over decades. Genuine risk. Genuine skin in the game.
Language like this calls into question whether the entire post was just fiction generated by a lazy prompt like: "Tell me an engaging story why businessmen are better than lawyers".
But maybe the wider question should be: is the community okay with publishing AI generated posts and 'experiences'?
But it bears repeating: the author's point would have been a lot more persuasive and more pleasant to read had they made it in their own voice, just like few mothers or other unpaid / unpaying recipients want to receive an AI-written birthday card or email.
In this case, the OP's post read like AI slop and it was impossible to tell whether something was their opinion, had actually happened or whether it was hallucinated / embellished / sloppified by an AI model.
To be honest, even if you had a valid argument, it's really hard to read through to sloppy part and style to figure out whether you're just a lazy troll or a lazy writer with something substantive to say.
It might seem like you have no other option, but time and perspective will reveal new options. This might seem like the most important thing in your life right now, and the disappointment and frustration you feel are real, but in years from now you will look back on this as just another obstacle you managed to scale to get to where you are meant to be in your career and life.
hopefully some others have some practical suggestions too.
please also strongly consider calling one or several helplines if you are having such thoughts, which are never the answer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_suicide_crisis_lines#:~:text=emergency%20number%20in-,India,-.
lots of love, you are not alone.
you really don't like this firm, do you?
and for many it's a satisfying career. you get to help people, sometimes problems are tricky to solve intellectually or in terms of EQ, you might be getting to understand various businesses and their problems from the inside, bw involved in structuring, etc.
and even if you don't make partner, you might enjoy research or become counsel where the money is decent and hours might be good, or get into BD which some people enjoy, or you can start your own firm, which is pretty entrepreneurial, where you provide jobs to dozens or maybe hundreds of others, etc.
it's fine to prefer litigation, but to repeatedly discount an entire necessary part of the profession as paperwork, might be your genuinely held opinion, but it seems naive.
re OP, this has been discussed before: most RW vs LW vs blabla posts will be automatically marked trollish because they're usually off topic and not relevant or interesting to most readers, and are usually posted to provoke a flame war.
1. Calling mods 'snowflake' is not a bona fide attempt to engage in discussion.
2. Please learn constitutional law: the government has a duty to you to protect your right of free speech, internet platforms or people's living rooms have no such duty to you.
3. You are constantly posting spam about law firms being places to do clerical work and only litigation being real law. We get it, you really do believe so and have reasons for it, but it's not what the person has asked and is a trollish attempt to derail a thread.
There was something broken on the server but should now be fixed.
At the end of day, political trolling and bona fide debate are a bit like obscenity: you know it when you see it (and we regularly seen a lot of attempts at the former here).