My #LawTwitter Disclaimer


492
492 points

OMG, I retweeted something. Is it an endorsement? Does this mean that I agree to the message? What if I liked it and retweeted it? There has been a debate about what it means when law experts retweet or like a Tweet. Or more precisely, what it should mean and what it might mean for students.

For me, the main point of Twitter is learning. This is what I do on Twitter. I’m learning interesting things, from science to philosophy. It also entertains me. I see humor. I see joy, support and hope. Of course, I see the worst of Twitter too.

I started retweeting more political stuff. One reason is that his law professor was tweeting more political stuff. But it’s mostly because I find #whataboutism crazy. It is like two children involved in a knife fight which suggests that only the stab wounds they inflicted are good. The catchk games and the “referees” who play for only one team flying flags on the opposing team’s plays are annoying to me. There are more deterministic factors than first being stabbed, such as the area of ​​the stab wound and the intention behind the wound. I hope to quit my political Twitter reading habit soon.

I Retweet and love my heart’s desire, both the things I agree with and the things I disagree with. I learn regardless of whether or not I agree with the tweet. Does this make me higgly? Sure, sometimes I talk about tweets that I think are problematic, incorrect, or wrong. Sometimes I monitor my political preferences, especially in my areas of expertise. I might be right, or I might learn. Either way, cool.

The role of the legal academy is to search for our basic facts, which requires some stare at moral values. Suppressing ideals – even the bad ones – counter that. It’s easy to listen to others when we all have the same values. As a friend once told me: “Developing the ability to listen and understand different ideas, different cultures, different moral values ​​and different experiences is definitely the primary way to reduce one’s ignorance and maximize your academic experience through learning from one another.”

This does not mean that we should tolerate bigotry in the academy. The root of bigotry is the ignorance that comes from protection from various worldviews. As my friend also said, “There is no place for blind fanaticism in an academic institution, especially those that engage in the never-ending search for truth, the critical examination of moral values ​​and the development of basic skills for creativity and peaceful conflict resolution.”

This search for truth requires professors to be more humble and compassionate than I often see. This means that we must let go of our ego (or more precisely, our own fears). This means admitting that we don’t have all the answers. This means admitting that we are not always right.

This means no contradiction to win the Al Shaabiya competition in the eighth grade. The purpose of counterarguments is to find the truth and improve the quality of your arguments. It might even mean – Gasp Reject your arguments in the face of evidence to the contrary.

But, it might be because law professors need a Twitter policy in case students read tea leaves and think the professor has them for students with the ideologies identified here to me.

Twitter Policy: LAWPROFBLAWG

  1. Retweet is not authenticated.
  2. Admiration is not endorsed.
  3. The endorsement may not be an endorsement of the reasons you think it is.
  4. If I follow an account, this does not mean that I endorse or read the posts of that account. I follow over 18,000 people, and I don’t have that kind of time.
  5. Whenever I tweet it’s usually only of the purest heart and intention. But I am a human being. If you have concerns or problems please drop me a line. I will do my best to listen and respect. If you choose a more confrontational approach, I will assume that you just want to become famous and be less likely to hear your concerns.
  6. My Tweets usually fall into the following categories:
    • Pun
    • Tweets about my opposition to certain food items like pineapple on pizza or instant pots. These are just my preferences and I am not trying to impose my will on others.
    • Tweets about two spaces after the period at the end of the sentence. These are rebellious tweets against the imperial masters who are one space apart. We will be victorious.
    • Tweets of an analytical and intellectual nature. Yes, I still own the game.
    • Satire (“Snark”) is usually applied to denote inconsistencies or faulty logic.
    • I reserve the right, as with everyone else, to sometimes Tweet other things or be sarcastic. I will do my best to reduce that.
  7. It is possible that I interact with followers that you do not like or like. OK. I learn from people I do not get along with. However, if we had an unpleasant interaction, we might mute you. Life is too short. And I finished walking on eggshells. Repeated hate will stop you.
  8. I know it sounds like this, but I’m not always on Twitter. Also, I work. a lot.
  9. If you want to amplify your scholarship, email me. I read it first, though.
  10. You must remember this: a kiss is not a kiss yet. Ask Fredo.
  11. But a sigh is just a sigh.
  12. The basic things apply, over time.

Of course, I might change it as I progress. But you can find it updated forever Here.

I hope if you love pineapple on pizza, you won’t feel my paradoxical view will affect your score. I won’t even notice if you’ve set aside one space after stopping completely on your exams.


Professor Blaug He is an anonymous professor in the top 100 law schools. You can see more of his meditations Here. It is claimed to be the funniest on social media. Please follow him on Twitter (Embed a Tweet) Or The social networking site Facebook. Email it on lawprofblawg@gmail.com.


Like it? Share with your friends!

492
492 points
admin

0 Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *