Althouse: If law school deans still don't understand email lists...

November 13, 2007

If law school deans still don't understand email lists...

... how are they ever going to understand blogs?

25 comments:

Simon said...: Would a particularly strong allergy count as a "disability" for purposes of ADA? If the allergy is so strong as the email implies, to the extent that it's not enough that the person simply avoid such materials but has to exist in a virtually scrubbed environment, does that count as a physical impairment that substantially limits major life activities for the person?; 11/13/07, 7:38 AM
MadisonMan said...: I would think a law school dean could spell accommodate (or Whoops). But I'd be wrong.; 11/13/07, 7:39 AM
Unknown said...: Even veteran bloggers make mistakes on e-mail. And even deans write less formally in e-mails to friends than in more formal documents. I would hope bloggers wouldn't publicize to the world such embarrassing and everyday kinds of mistakes.; 11/13/07, 8:06 AM
MadisonMan said...: wyat, your rite. What was i thinkign.

Maybe they allow slipshod work at Villanova as a matter of course. When you write things from work, or as a head of an establishment, even on a private email account, you are representing the place where you work.; 11/13/07, 8:20 AM
Simon said...: Just to follow up on my question above, in Land v. Baptist Medical Center, 164 F.3d 423 (8th Cir. 1999), the Eighth Circuit considered whether a child's peanut allergy that led to their exclusion from a daycare center they'd previously attended met ADA's threshold. The court said no, but it seems quite clear from the opinion that the issue was that although Land's allergy didn't qualify, it didn't qualify because it wasn't severe enough, which is a far cry from saying that no allergy could qualify, and the allergy described in this correspondence seems a great deal more extreme.; 11/13/07, 8:22 AM
Unknown said...: Madison Man -- he was writing (he thought) to a friend about going to the opera. Are you telling me that every time a law school dean writes to a friend from his law school account e-mail account he should be held to the same proof-reading standards he would be held to if he were writing in his official capacity?

Do you ever accidentally send e-mails to friends with typos?; 11/13/07, 8:30 AM
Ron said...: What? Do you really expect the piano players at whorehouses to know Chopin, too? 'Law School Dean' is an analogous function...; 11/13/07, 8:44 AM
MadisonMan said...: Yes. And No.

I repeat that I think a person who has risen to be the dean of the Villanova Law School will have pretty good proofing skills, but I am apparently wrong in thinking that. I'm not sure why it bothers you that I'm wrong in assuming law school deans are good spellers.

Any emails I send with typos are sent deliberately.; 11/13/07, 8:44 AM
Unknown said...: I send e-mails all the time with typos. I'm as highly educated as they come, but proof-reading is seriously difficult work for me. I do that work when the medium demands it. It seems to me, however, (and what I've read about e-mail confirms it) that conventional expectations of spelling and grammatical correctness in e-mails are not the same as those expectations with respect to more formal documents. I don't expect more from a law school dean than I expect from myself.

And plainly, given my post above, I feel the same way about blog comments. :); 11/13/07, 8:50 AM
rhhardin said...: Nobody can print up a quick brochure for the peanut agricultural research center that's active at the center of campus?; 11/13/07, 9:25 AM
Swifty Quick said...: Whether a peanut allergy is a disability within the meaning of the law is one thing. Add to that the issues of reasonable accommodation and undue hardship.; 11/13/07, 10:45 AM
former law student said...: You can't child proof the world.; 11/13/07, 1:16 PM
reader_iam said...: Who says she'll be old and feeble in just 20 years? A surprising number of people in their late '70s are more spry than people far younger used to be not so very long ago.

As for debilitating disease, requring intensive caregiving ... that can occur at ages far younger.; 11/13/07, 5:16 PM
Maxine Weiss said...: Whenever it happens....guess who's gonna be saddled with the burden of caring a single woman who ditched her spouse years ago?

It falls to the grown children.

Had she stayed married, she could have spared them that burden.; 11/13/07, 5:37 PM
reader_iam said...: Oh, I don't know, Maxine. My parents are still married, and my mother was recently diagnosed with a progressive, terminal and untreatable disease which will inevitably leave her physically helpless, before it kills her. The care required will be beyond the scope of what one person, spouse or not, can handle (I will likely relocate, or long-distance commute, or something yet-to-be determined). Saddling has nothing to do with it.

You know, this really isn't a very funny subject to be using to taunt anyone, Maxine. Life's a crapshoot. Do you know what your future holds?; 11/13/07, 5:54 PM
Maxine Weiss said...: Well, good thing I brought this up then.

Let's talk about custodial care, what it entails, and who it falls to...

Who shall be saddled with the burden?

What sort of monetary reimbursement are adult children entitled to if they promise not to but their parents away in a rest home ?????; 11/13/07, 7:05 PM
Maxine Weiss said...: Heavy lifting, bed pans, and colostomy bags.

Why go to law school?, when in 20 ++ years ....that's what your life is going to be taken up with....; 11/13/07, 7:06 PM
reader_iam said...: So you can afford a better class of bedpan, of course. Why else?; 11/13/07, 7:43 PM
reader_iam said...: So you can afford a better class of bedpan, of course. Why else?; 11/13/07, 7:43 PM
blake said...: Nonsense.

Althouse will get herself a young blog fan. Probably a rich one, too.

Problem solved.; 11/13/07, 8:21 PM
reader_iam said...: Perfect!

***

The comments over at the post to which Althouse linked were interesting. I was pretty amazed that whole law schools are willing to go peanut-free (if not fellow students). The hitting-reply-all thing sort of paled, in comparison.; 11/13/07, 8:29 PM
Maxine Weiss said...: But then her children will feel guilty that strangers are providing more care than they.

I can't imagine lifting Althouse into the tub, 20+ years from now.

And yet, I can't get the image out of my mind. Those lucky children !; 11/13/07, 8:54 PM
Anonymous said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 11/13/07, 9:00 PM
David said...: My 5 year old niece has a severe peanut allergy.

She has already learned to take personal responsibility for avoiding any food that might contain peanuts. She understands that the world can not be peanut proof, and that she must take care of herself.

Could a law student possibly take similar responsibility?; 11/13/07, 9:01 PM
Anonymous said...: Could a law student possibly take similar responsibility?

This one cannot, apparently. That said, as I'm sure that you know, David, there are degrees of severity. After I waded through all 300+ comments as of a short time ago, I concluded that this person sounded particularly rude and obnoxious about her problem. As a result, others say they tested her claims by bringing in contraband and that, as long as she was unaware of the presence, there was absolutely no reaction. Have no idea if it is true, but enough reported it to make me wonder. Others reported seeing her dining in Thai and Chinese restaurants. Anyone highly allergic to peanuts simply could not possibly make it through a meal at any Thai restaurant. Peanuts are everywhere in sauces and in dishes. So this make me wonder just what the story is.

If the various stories reported in the comments over there are true, it seems to me she takes very little responsibility for her problem.; 11/13/07, 9:18 PM