I'm about to return from a long blogging hiatus, but let me begin with an announcement that may be of interest to those who plan a career in legal academia. Duke Law School has established a program to bring aspiring law teachers into the law school as visiting assistant professors. Visiting assistant professors spend two academic years at the law school (to give them time to work on scholarship in anticipation of their entry on the law school teaching market). Each visiting assistant professor is provided with an office and is invited to participate in faculty activities open to visiting professors. Each has a very light teaching load – one course per year. Selection for participation in this program is competitive, based on potential for success in an academic career. The website for this program is at http://www.law.duke.edu/teaching.
Features
Stuff from us
Academic Legal Writing: personalized bookplates
Sources on the Second Amendment
What's the cost of living out there in Durham? Hope they have dollar pint nights...
"And then he ... he told me I had to proof-read his monograph on admiralty juridiction in the wake of Executive Jet. I told him I didn't do kinky stuff, but insisted, said he'd make it worth my time. I tried it ... but it made me sick. He couldn't bluebook worth squat."
It depends on the color of your skin and the election that year.
Actually, 50k to teach one class isn't bad coin. My concern would be student loans which would leave me penniless on a 50k salary, not necessarily the value offered. I *paid* 35k a year to go to law school...getting 50k to stick around isn't a bad deal, were it not for a crushing debt load.
[Important Note to Helpful Readers: If we have confusing typos and especially ugly formatting errors, such as an unclosed underline or bold tag, we'd love to hear from you about them -- but please e-mail the author about this, rather than leaving a comment. We often won't read the comments for a while after the post, and if there's a glaring formatting error, we'd see it quickly when we revisit the post, even without the comment; and in any event the comment likely isn't going to be that helpful to your fellow comment readers. So please e-mail us directly about glitches like this. Thanks!]
Comment Policy: We'd like the posts to be civil, of course (no profanity, personal insults, and the like), but we're also hoping that people try to be as calm, reasoned, and substantive as possible. So please, also avoid rants, invective, substantial and repeated exaggeration, and radical departures from the topic of the thread. Sticking with substance -- and staying on-topic -- will make the comments more helpful to other readers, and more pleasant.
As editors, we reserve the right to delete posts, and even to kick out posters, though we hope that both of these will be exceptional events. (We also reserve the right to be busy with other things, and therefore (1) not remove all the posts that might merit removal, and (2) ignore demands such as "You should remove A's posts, because they're just as bad as B's!")
Here's a tip: Reread your post, and think of what people would think if you said this over dinner. If you think people would view you as a crank, a blowhard, or as someone who vastly overdoes it on the hyperbole, rewrite your post before hitting enter.
And if you think this is the other people's fault -- you're one of the few who sees the world clearly, but fools wrongly view you as a crank, a blowhard, or as someone who overdoes it on the hyperbole -- then you should still rewrite your post before hitting enter. After all, if you're one of the few who sees the world clearly, then surely it's especially important that you frame your arguments in a way that is persuasive and as unalienating as possible, even to fools.
Our goal is to provide an interesting and pleasant environment that can help inform readers. To do that, we'll occasionally have to exercise our editorial discretion. Think of this as an in-person discussion group, where having different voices is critical to a great conversation -- but where sometimes the leader has to deal with cranks who sour the conversation more than they enliven it.
Naturally, there's always a risk that this discretion will be used erroneously, no matter how well-intentioned the editor. But discussion groups (especially on the Internet, but also off it) generally need an editor who'll occasionally make such judgments.
And, remember, it's a big Internet. If you think we were mistaken in removing your post (or, in extreme cases, in removing you) -- or if you prefer a more free-for-all approach -- there are surely plenty of ways you can still get your views out.