I’ve never attacked Mr Maugham, in any way. I’ve never interacted with him. My sole crime seems to have been saying I couldn’t imagine blocking another Advocate.
If he ever wants to chat, he should pick up the phone. Till then: hugely, irredeemably disappointed. pic.twitter.com/TD8DNWIJZc
I just cannot help remarking on the fact that being blocked by a stranger on Twitter can cause a self-styled professional advocate to say he was “hugely, irredeemably disappointed” (notwithstanding that he laid out the conditions under which his disappointment might be “redeemed” immediately prior to claiming it “irredeemable”).
In the immortal words of one David Chappelle, Esq., Twitter is not a real place.
Well, yes, I see the point you’re both making, but then again there is a tradition in English based legal systems of collegiate behaviour. Advocates are supposed to put forward the strongest case lawfully possible on behalf of their clients. They’re supposed to be able to engage in robust debate. But at the end of the day they’re expected to be colleagues capable of working with each other from a position of mutual respect. Fox killer is demonstrating that he can’t do that; and it’s that, not the blocking per se, that other lawyers are finding disappointing.
Der Durchwanderer, it was a little funny that you called Roddy Dunlop “a self-styled professional advocate” when he is Dean of the Faculty of Advocates, an office that can trace its origins back to 16th century.
But more to my point, Jolyon Maugham and Roddy Dunlop are Queen’s Counsel (QC), which has some qualifications for the title.
Even given that Dunlop wrote, “I’ve never interacted with him,” to call them strangers is to miss the point that they are fellow QCs, and Dunlop has professional reasons to be disappointed by Maugham’s behavior as a fellow QC.
I just cannot help remarking on the fact that being blocked by a stranger on Twitter can cause a self-styled professional advocate to say he was “hugely, irredeemably disappointed” (notwithstanding that he laid out the conditions under which his disappointment might be “redeemed” immediately prior to claiming it “irredeemable”).
In the immortal words of one David Chappelle, Esq., Twitter is not a real place.
Irony alert.
“First thing we do is, let’s block all the lawyers.”
-Fred Shakespeare, Joylon I, act 2
Well, yes, I see the point you’re both making, but then again there is a tradition in English based legal systems of collegiate behaviour. Advocates are supposed to put forward the strongest case lawfully possible on behalf of their clients. They’re supposed to be able to engage in robust debate. But at the end of the day they’re expected to be colleagues capable of working with each other from a position of mutual respect. Fox killer is demonstrating that he can’t do that; and it’s that, not the blocking per se, that other lawyers are finding disappointing.
Der Durchwanderer, it was a little funny that you called Roddy Dunlop “a self-styled professional advocate” when he is Dean of the Faculty of Advocates, an office that can trace its origins back to 16th century.
But more to my point, Jolyon Maugham and Roddy Dunlop are Queen’s Counsel (QC), which has some qualifications for the title.
Even given that Dunlop wrote, “I’ve never interacted with him,” to call them strangers is to miss the point that they are fellow QCs, and Dunlop has professional reasons to be disappointed by Maugham’s behavior as a fellow QC.