Search the Lounge


« Robert Schapiro Stepping Down As Emory Law Dean | Main | Paul Jones in 1949 »

March 30, 2017


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


hardly a revelation, you could have looked at the Standard 509 Report and figured that one out; however, at least someone there admitted that's what they did

Captain Hurska Carswell, Continuance King

To quote Mr. Bunker, "Stifle yourself." Even a three bill retail theft Leading Super Lawyer like me who attended a T-2 school and graduated in the top 85% of my class, would advise clients not to say something like this... Gawd.


When did this blog turn into the "Infilaw Sucks!" blog? Can we return to its previous form, please. Btw, I do agree that Infilaw sucks, but there's other things going on in legal education.


And while we're at it, can someone PLEASE ban Captain from his inane posts? The commentary here was once insightful, and probably could be again.


I second Anon, but to a point. In my view, "Captain" is probably a law prof with a grudge of some sort, who is bound and determined to destroy the commenting feature on this site.

"Banning" won't work, however, as I believe it can be shown that "Captain" has posted under different "names." "He" likely knows how to use different devices, etc. Moreover, that sort of censorship of speech is contrary to the values that I think the proprietors of this site share.

If enough readers comment on this issue, and NEVER respond in any way (albeit, it is my belief that "Captain" simply responds to his own comments, using a different name) then it may deter his efforts.

BUt, I've seen authorized bloggers here engage with "Captain." That is a mystery that, if the shoe were on the other foot, might get some attention.

Orin Kerr

"And while we're at it, can someone PLEASE ban Captain from his inane posts? The commentary here was once insightful, and probably could be again."

Or perhaps change the name of the blog at the top of the page to "FACULTY LOUNGE: Conversations About Law, Culture, Academia, and Comments From Captain Hurska Carswell, Continuance King"


Check out these two comments:

Comment posted by “Deep State Speical Legal Counsel”:

"If just one person passes the Bar and scores an auto wreck matter with multiple fractures, airbag deployment and serious disabilities, they are a SUCESS!!! They can become a Leading Lawyer. A Super Lawyer with an AVVO rating of 10 a year out of law school. Got to look at this as the glass half full. Just Beautiful. Look, our Leader never had a government or other real job and now he is the top dog. Same thing could happen with a degree from this joint."

Comment posted by “Captain Hruska Carswell, Continuance King”:

"Frankly, I don't blame Fox for this one. I blame our legal profession. We have become a veritable "used car lot" of titles, monikers, and descriptors for what we are: Attorneys. We have Leading Lawyers and Super Lawyers and the slick magazines that go with the title. We have AV rated (whatever the hell that means) and Martindale Hubble Lawyers. Throw in AVVO too. I guess it's not good enough any longer to just be an advocate of the Constitution on behalf of an ordinary citizen."

Were these two "comments" posted by the same person? If so, what would be the proper way to characterize the motive, etc.?


"When did this blog turn into the "Infilaw Sucks!" blog?"

Not too long after Mr. Frakt had a run-in with an Infilaw school's administration during his interview for a deanship at one of the Infilaw law schools, I believe. To be fair, though, I'm sure that kind of interaction can bring one's view of a school's goals and values into sharp relief.

Special Deep State Legal Counsel

"K-Mart sucks"

Anon JD/MD

David, I appreciate your coverage of the Infilaw scam. The Infilaw schools admit students to law school who have very little chance of passing the bar. These students are saddled with six figure debt and abysmal job prospects, all so Infilaw and people like Jay Conison can get rich off of student loans. The Infilaw schools are an embarrassment to the legal profession. A profession already reeling from poor job prospects, indebtedness, and high rates of depression and substance abuse.

It’s funny to read comments calling for the Captain to be banned. Law professors go to elite schools, work a few years in law at an elite firm, then go into academia and earn six figure salaries. They live in a bubble where they get to write op-eds about the million dollar value of a JD, make incorrect predictions about the 2016 shortage of law graduates, and claim that it has never been a better time to go to law school. But when people like the Captain come along who don’t have the same pedigree as your typical legal academic, and they have the nerve to shed some light into what life is like for a typical solo, then it’s time to shut him up.


If only that was what he was doing...instead he is a repetitive bore fixated on destroying the comments to this site one inane distraction at a time.


Anon JD/MD

REad the comments above by "Special Deep State Legal Counsel" and "Captain Hruska Carswell, Continuance King."

You are making a BIG unfounded assumption if you assume that these comments were posted in good faith, and by one who "doesn't have the same pedigree" as others.

To the contrary, it is my impression that the author of the "Captain's" comments (and others that appear to be authored by the same person) is a law professor, with a grudge against this site. The tone and content of the comments varies strikingly, and it appears at times that the author actually doesn't speak in a way that mocks the ignorant and belittles practitioners. (IMHO, a law professor with a grudge would be drawn to this site to comment incessantly on a site like this one in a disgusting voice that ridicules and demeans those who practice law. A few years ago, some reactionary law professors came into this space to vent in a particularly vicious way against the "attacks" they perceived from hordes of, among others, practitioners. They have now mainly left the field, at least overtly. Moreover, a law professor is a likely candidate for one who would write so ignorantly about the subject of criminal law practice while throwing around grains of truth that he has gleaned from some sources to create a veneer of plausibility.)

It takes a certain cleverness to create sock puppets, and manipulate them skillfully. However crude any such effort may appear, these efforts, if carried on for months if not years cannot be said to be completely unsophisticated.

Devoting all this time to discussing these efforts actually only encourages the problem. If I'm right, the destruction of the commenting section on this site is proceeding apace.

Oh well. The owners of this site were to have established a commenting policy long ago, but they never did. Combine that fact with the observation that some with posting privileges in the FL appear to welcome and encourage the "Captain" and, well, you figure it out.

Captain Hurska Carswell, Continuance King

To all of my fans and followers, and my cyber friend, VoteTrump. Thank you for your love and attention. Mrs. Captain is upset with me because the leaves still need to be raked. So, ANON, anon, anon professor and whoever else has become my surrogate family until I rake the leaves, I salute you and say thank you. I thought they would have either blown away or decomposed by now. The leaves, that is. No, I am not a Professor. I am a shlepper solo----a Fiddler on The Roof belting out a lonely tune saving driver's licenses. Yes, I do make fun of some practitioners as do my colleagues. Good night all, Mrs. Captain is calling...


Yes, while the crowd boos, the Captain takes another bow.

Is the goal of this effort obscure in any way whatsoever?


I am removing this website from my bookmarks, and will not visit again, unless the directors of this website do something about this issue. I also ask for anyone else who cares about thoughtful dialogue to do the same. The first amendment/free speech is not a license to be a total jacka*s and derail other people's efforts at good faith discussion.

David Frakt

I agree with many of you that there are certain frequent commenters who rarely, if ever, contribute anything useful to the discussion. I have tried, on occasion, to delete their comments, but they usually just repost them, along with a complaint that their prior comment was deleted and that I am trying to silence them or am selectively deleting critical comments. So, unless the comments are patently offensive, my general policy is just to ignore them. Responding to these commenters only seems to encourage them to comment more. I am not really sure what the motivation is for someone to constantly anonymously comment on matters upon which they appear to know absolutely nothing. My guess is that they enjoy getting a rise out of people. That is another reason not to rise to the bait and just ignore comments which do not reflect a serious attempt to engage with the subject matter of the post. For those readers who are frustrated with the comments, you of course have the option of just reading the post and ignoring the comments altogether or skipping over the comments from the repeat offenders.

Special Deep State Legal Counsel

Anon at 9:52,

My hero is Paul Robert Cohen. Your legal analysis is faulty. Commenting, shouting or saying something you don't like is distinguishable from any sort of physical actions to silence speech. What Professor Melissa Click did by requesting "muscle" to physically prevent speech would be unlawful and certainly derail good faith discussion.

I believe some of the commenters that are calling for some of the poster's heads maybe fronts or operatives of the Sterling Partners, owners of the Infilaw chain of Law Schools. I would point out that nearly all comments were in good humor and indeed furthered the discussion. Look at the number of posts and comments that followed...The thing speaks for itself.

The comments to this entry are closed.


  • StatCounter
Blog powered by Typepad