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?
Figures wouldn't have changed much since then...
About Al Jazeera, don't read /watch it often enough to have strong opinions, but we understand they have some good documentaries sometimes and, for example, deeper and wider Africa coverage than most international news channels. They also probably have many reliable news items and others that are less so, and ultimately every reader / viewer should also be aware / will hopefully be aware that they are the soft-propaganda / soft-power arm of the Qatari government.
Why don't you share a few good and bad Al Jazeera articles and we can all decide whether to trust each of them or not on their own merits?
We are happy to try and fact check all claims, whether we personally agree with them or not, and even at the risk of feeding the trolls.
It just so happens that in our moderation experience the vast majority of dog-whistle and disingenuous comments tend to come from the right of the spectrum (or from people who get pleasure out of trolling so-called 'wokes').
So, what happened to right-wing intellectuals interested to debate and where are they?
LI should definitely be a space for those on both sides of the political spectrum to air genuinely held views. But if it becomes dog whistle calls for hate or blatant attempts to troll that are not based on fact, then those are not genuine actors who are interested in having an honest informal discussion but have ulterior motives (OP's Fox video was an example thereof, as it was a distortion of facts based on the speech of one publicity-hungry lower court judge / politician to feed into a popular propaganda narrative that, to paraphrase another comment 'wokeism is worse than fascism').
If we receive no answers that even try on a postcard or a comment (and instead more rants like #3 and #4 below), then that will be taken as a good signal that future comments in a similar vein will just be marked trollish and not published at all, since they apparently lack factual backing and/or reasonably held-beliefs supported by evidence.
We can understand woke and cancel culture is annoying to some and has arguably gone too far. But much of this hyperbole is, frankly, bullshit.
1. What do you think fascism is? How about authoritarianism?
2. Would you prefer to live under a fascist or authoriatarian government or a broadly liberally-democratic government?
3. Why do you think that people being 'cancelled' online by 'wokes' on Twitter or being occasionally shouted at by wokes is a worse problem than a fascist government (or modern-day fascist-playbook / authoriarian / less-democratic governments such as in China, Russia, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Turkey) persecuting minorities or political opponents or others they disagree with, by throwing them in jail or sending them to 're-education' camps, or in some cases, just murdering them?
That said, the vast majority of what they publish does have journalistic merit and is important. Just take respective yardsticks such as the WaPo's Watergate reporting and NYT's Pentagon Papers, or things more recently like the Snowden leaks. Or on a more mundane level, the thousands of stories about daily governance and events that they get right.
But yes, the editors and reporters are people too and sometimes make mistakes, or buy propaganda from the wrong quarters, or get destabilised by professional bullshitters like Trump or politicians like him, who routinely tell so many lies and half-truths it becomes very hard for journalists to do their job covering what they say without their own biases beginning to creep in after a while.
Take Covid lab leak, which you cite.
1. Trump did not know for sure that it was a lab leak but very quickly claimed he knew, no doubt for political mileage.
2. NYT, WaPo etc did not know for sure it wasn't a lab leak either, but at the time there was no evidence other than Trump's statement and speculation, and reporting it as fact would have been the wrong thing to do.
3. The 'lab leak as fake news' very quickly took on an orthodoxy of its own amongst the anti-Trump media, where coverage of it was long derided as conspiracy theory, whereas the right basically claimed to know for sure that it was a lab leak. But conclusive evidence for either side does not (and may never) really exist, and until then claiming you know one or the other as fact, is passing off opinion as fact.
If you're talking about the other end of the spectrum, CNN, MSNBC, etc are almost as bad on some topics but from the other side of the political spectrum.
Sure, CNN & MSNBC are sometimes a bit more subtle and inconsistent in their propaganda, which arguably makes them even more dangerous as it makes it even harder to spot the lies, whereas on Fox News it's usually pretty obvious when they're lying if you're somewhat clued in and can listen between the lines.
Therefore, neither of these should be relied on as primary sources of information but you should make up your own opinions, perhaps by pitching various media-organisations' versions of the truth against each other and trying to figure out what's the most realistic version of events without the hyperbole and spin.
If an interesting debate was intended by the OP (as opposed to a debate / clutching of pearls on how 'cancel culture' - which is perceived by a few on the 'right' as the greatest evil of our times - is bad), there are other more useful resources than a Fox News 'debate' (besides the obvious polarisaiton / politicisation of US society / culture).
Here something from the conservative National Review, which broke the story, and thinks the judge's approach is 'misguided':
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/judge-hos-misguided-answer-to-illiberalism-at-yale/
Here's the left Mother Jones making fun of the judge:
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/10/james-ho-yale-law-school-boycott/
And here's Above The Law with its always-amusing take:
https://abovethelaw.com/2022/10/after-james-ho-boycott-another-conservative-judge-responds-great-more-yale-clerks-for-me/
Over to you.
https://www.legallyindia.com/images/pdf/NALSAR_recruitment-Press_Release-2022.pdf
Quote:
https://www.legallyindia.com/convos/topic/237916-Laptops-Best-and-worst-brands-for-corp-lawyers
https://www.legallyindia.com/convos/topic/189045-Laptop-suggestions
Another option is buying a cheap / second hand laptop for work, and getting yourself a second-hand gaming desktop for the weekends. Another advantage is also you can theoretically do gaming while you are also on a video call, without your video / framerate lagging... :)
Chapter 1 here: https://www.legallyindia.com/convos/topic/237313-chapter-1-the-overthrow
In future, posts of this ilk will not be corrected but simply not posted.
https://www.legallyindia.com/convos/topic/195922-why-are-law-firms-so-opposed-to-permanent-wfh
and https://www.legallyindia.com/convos/topic/197799-Corruption-in-lower-judiciary
We have copied your updated backup copy in a Google Sheet for now. If you open it in an incognito / private window, anyone can edit it completely anonymously without a Google account, and we get version control too in case someone deletes something or we want to revert to a previous state of the history: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ltk2xnERP1OWklq60BEsJFhl3eSuQX7nQEdo_v37ggs/edit?usp=sharing
If we should use another platform, please do share - we can open up the file / account there, so the 'owner' of the doc stays anonymous]
But if you say LI is 'ded', what would you most like to see here? Maybe we can help you.
We are currently working hard on a significant upgrade to the site to get out of a technological dead-end it was in, to deal with spammers more effectively and with some more fun ideas in the pipeline.
We will keep you posted!
We understand that the following names have been shortlisted by the selection committee: Faizan Mustafa, Srikrishna Deva Rao, Balakista Reddy and Priti Saxena.
Letter from students:
To, The Chief Justice, The Hon’ble High Court for the State of Telangana, Madina, Charminar, Hyderabad.
Subject: Subsequent representation for consideration of Prof. (Dr.) Faizan Mustafa for re- appointment to the post of Vice-Chancellor of NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad
Respected Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, We, the undersigned, are students belonging to NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad. We are writing to you in your capacity as the Chancellor of our University. This representation is in addition to, and complements, the representation made on 27 April, 2022 to the members of Search-cum-Selection Committee, constituted under Section 17(1)(iii) of the NALSAR Act, 1998. We write to you with the hope and request that you consider Prof. (Dr.) Faizan Mustafa for appointment as the Vice-Chancellor of our University for a third term.
The second term of Prof. Mustafa’s Vice-Chancellorship ended on 30 July, 2022. Under his administration over the past decade, our University has grown tremendously in all aspects- academic quality, including research output, talent attraction among both, students and teaching faculty, and overall reputation. We, the students, especially appreciate the accommodative steps that Prof. Mustafa undertook during the COVID-19 pandemic. His approach of engaging in deliberative discussions with the students as the primary stakeholders has created an inclusive and democratic campus. A prime example of this is the establishment of the NALSAR Accessibility Lab on the 28th of July 2022 for disabled persons in the student body.
Resultantly, Prof. Mustafa enjoys immense popularity among the student body. Therefore, it was only natural for students to be disheartened when he demitted office and re-joined Aligarh Muslim University, vacating the post he has held over the past ten years. However, we wish to bring to your attention a few troubling incidents that we have witnessed in the recent past. Lately, we have been witnessing the publication of a few media reports that express an inclination for the Vice-Chancellor with roots in Telangana, to augment local representation.
With all due respect, while we have absolutely no objection to having a Vice-Chancellor who belongs to Telangana, however the appointment of a Vice-Chancellor keeping their domicile as a primary or a significant consideration is against the spirit of the institution and the NALSAR Act which established it. The Act envisions the creation of a national legal institution in its letter and in spirit. In light of the same, it is respectfully stated that such territorial contemplations should not form the basis of any decision in selecting the Vice-Chancellor of our University. The selection should be made only based on academic competence, administrative experience, and actionable vision for the institution's future or any other factors, as you deem fit. However, we stress that the territorial background and domicile of the candidates should not be a consideration.
Furthermore, any claims that there is a lack of representation from the state are misguided. Of the 51 full-time teaching faculty, 20 belong from either Telangana or Andhra Pradesh, constituting nearly 40% of the total strength. Additionally, almost all the non-teaching staff employed by the University are from the state. Therefore, there is sufficient state representation within the institution. We would like to highlight that having faculty from all over not only creates a diverse faculty pool but also enriches the learning experience and enables students to rely on networks of their faculty in different places in the country. A purely regional focus is not ideal for the advancement of education and career of students who come to NALSAR from all over the country and from other countries as well.
In light of the same, we humbly request you to consider the highlighted concerns while making a decision as to the final appointment of the Vice Chancellor. We would also be grateful if you could, and if you may deem it fit, consult the Selection Committee, prior to making an binding decision. We make this appeal to you in the interest of the future of NALSAR and its students.
Yours Faithfully,
---
Signatures (~2/3rd of the NALSAR Student Body)