# Pro bono bullshit **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 9, 2010, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132 "2010-09-09T02:43:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 33
**Author:** ![elninost0rm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ed655f/32.png) [@elninost0rm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elninost0rm)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/641 "2010-09-20T14:35:24Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > OK, let’s try a slightly different tack. > > **Rand Rover** : let’s discuss the range of representation zeal you can give to a client. I know you’re not a litigator, but presumably it’s still fair to say that you represent the interests of clients, yes? > > Now, there undoubtedly exists bar, some minimum level of competency, below which your performance should not fall. Let’s call that spot X. > > There’s also a spot at which a client would be able to successfully make a case against you for malpractice. Let’s call that spot Y. > > I assume you don’t contend that X and Y are the same point – that is, you acknowledge that you may fail to deliver a minimum quality of service (X), but owing to the difficulties of proof in a malpractice case, not be liable for malpractice, because the plaintiff in the malpractice action would require more egregious malpractice (Y) to make his case. Yes? > > Although it is obvious where I’m going, let’s stop there. Do you concur with what I’ve said so far in this post? Anything can be solved with math. ---
**Author:** ![purplehorseshoe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/purplehorseshoe/32/2996_2.png) [@purplehorseshoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/purplehorseshoe)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/642 "2010-09-20T14:45:32Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > > [@elucidator](#): > > > > Well, it takes a real commitment and years of effort. A mere snotty attitude just isn’t going to get it. Have you any shreds of empathy or humanity lingering? If you came across a cold, wet puppy in the rain, looking up at you with sorrowful brown eyes, would you drop kick it across the street if somebody was willing to give you a nickel? > > > > If you can’t say yes without a moments hesitation…you probably don’t have the stuff. > > It also takes a dedicated core of idiots that keep coming back even though I’ve completely shut down every single argument they’ve made. Not mine, you haven’t. You started this thread to say, essentially, “I’d rather spend time with my daughter than do something that’s ethically and morally, but not necessarily legally, required.” Then you spend … _how much time_ reading the posts and writing lengthy responses of your own? … instead of spending that same time with your daughter. How do you respond to _that_ argument? Is the third time the charm, or are you going to ignore me yet again? (Kinda like you’re ignoring your daughter to stay in this thread…) ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/643 "2010-09-20T14:49:24Z")
Muffin, yes, the preamble to the rules do use the word “reponsibility” a lot. Please answer yes or no: does the preamble itself impose that responsibility? ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/644 "2010-09-20T14:53:17Z")
Bricker, I concur. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/645 "2010-09-20T14:56:42Z")
Purpledumbass: yes, participating in this thread has taken a herculean effort that has strained my marriage and my work in addition to my relationship with my child. But the fight against ignorance must go on. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/646 "2010-09-20T14:58:09Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Bricker, I concur. Great. Now, let’s talk about that range of representation that falls between X and Y. Providing service to a client minimally above point Y, such that a malpractice suit simply isn’t feasible or winnable, is still service below that level of professional responsibility contemplated by the rules. Yet it has no penalty. So I’m curious to hear if you would maintain that there is no requirement to provide service about point Y, since there is no penalty associated with providing that level of service. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/647 "2010-09-20T15:11:16Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Muffin, yes, the preamble to the rules do use the word “reponsibility” a lot. Please answer yes or no: does the preamble itself impose that responsibility? So here we have the body of the statutes that do include a reporting requirement but do not include a pro bono requirement because it is too messy to assign a penalty to lawyers who fail to perform pro bono services. That leaves an ambiguity as to whether or not lawyers have a responsibility to provide pro bono services despite there being no penalty should they not perform such services. The preamble and the commentary settle this ambiguity by clearly setting out that lawyers do have a responsibility to provide pro bono services despite there not being a rule that assigns a penalty. The preamble and commentary provide the context that is necessary to ensure that there is no ambiguity as to whether or not lawyers have a responsibility to provide pro bono services. Any interpretation of what is and what is not in the statutes must be construed in light of the preamble and commentary. Now since you are supposed to be a lawyer, you should know how preambles and commentaries are used to provide context when settling statutory ambiguities. Your question of whether there is a imposition is a truly stupid question, for as I have repeated told you, the statute makes no such requirement. What you have been unable to understand is that the responsibility to perform pro bono services exists, but is not imposed. The preamble and the commentary serve to remind lawyers that there is indeed a professional responsibility to provide pro bono services – the same way that the little pouch over the shoulder of my robe serves as a reminder – despite there not being a penalty for failing to meet one’s professional responsibility. Your truly do not get what being a lawyer is about. Bottom line: you have failed in meeting your responsibility to provide pro bono services. ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/648 "2010-09-20T15:21:25Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > > [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > > > Bricker, I concur. > > Great. > > Now, let’s talk about that range of representation that falls between X and Y. Providing service to a client minimally above point Y, such that a malpractice suit simply isn’t feasible or winnable, is still service below that level of professional responsibility contemplated by the rules. Yet it has no penalty. > > So I’m curious to hear if you would maintain that there is no requirement to provide service about point Y, since there is no penalty associated with providing that level of service. In other words, “do just enough at your job to not get fired, but not an inch more than that.” ---
**Author:** ![LurkMeister](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/3da27b/32.png) [@LurkMeister](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LurkMeister)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/649 "2010-09-20T16:17:04Z")
> [@Bosstone](#): > > In other words, “do just enough at your job to not get fired, but not an inch more than that.” Sounds like the people I used to work with, who seemed to spend more time visiting each others cubicles and gossiping, or talking to their friends on the phone, than they did actually working. And since it was a government office, “enough at your job not to get fired” was a joke anyway. ---
**Author:** ![purplehorseshoe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/purplehorseshoe/32/2996_2.png) [@purplehorseshoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/purplehorseshoe)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/650 "2010-09-20T17:14:45Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Purpledumbass: yes, participating in this thread has taken a herculean effort that has strained my marriage and my work in addition to my relationship with my child. But the fight against ignorance must go on. At your daughter’s expense? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Second\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@The\_Second\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Second_Stone)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/651 "2010-09-20T18:23:50Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Purpledumbass: yes, participating in this thread has taken a herculean effort that has strained my marriage and my work in addition to my relationship with my child. But the fight against ignorance must go on. Educating the public on the legal system and a lawyer’s responsibilities is part of a lawyer’s responsibilities. Doing it without pay is pro bono work. Neglecting family do that pro bono work: altruistic. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/652 "2010-09-20T19:09:03Z")
What is neglecting one’s family in order to spend time being laughed at on some message board, then? ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/653 "2010-09-20T19:13:43Z")
Masochism combined with stupidity. ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/654 "2010-09-20T19:20:07Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > And my counter to this argument is: the rules do make ASPIRING to do pro bono a requirement. And yet, you do not \*aspire to \*pro bono work. You do, in face, \*\*depise \*\*pro bono work. So, your word is worth the lying tongue you spit it out with. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > I keep reading out of admiration for his persistence in maintaining the pretense about who he really is, and out of astonishment that so many people here still think he’s actually an adult. ISTR that people have mentioned meeting \*\*Rand \*\*in person. I realize it’s hard to swallow, but there actually are grown adults in professions requiring post graduate work who are _this fucking childish_. > [@Quint](#): > > So **Rand Rover** do you feel similar about marriage vows as you do to your profession’s code of conduct? If someone is repeatedly unfaithful to their spouse but never gets caught is that OK? I realize the two situations are not completely analogous… The better analogy is that he should aspire to be a loving and caring husband and father. But if he really belittles his wife all day and constantly screams at his daughter, apparently that would be fine, and he’d still be a good husband and father, because he didn’t actually \*swear \*to do those things. He’s just supposed to \*aspire \*to them. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/655 "2010-09-20T19:34:17Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > ISTR that people have mentioned meeting \*\*Rand \*\*in person. Dear sweet Og, whatever would possess a person to do that? ---
**Author:** ![Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8edcca/32.png) [@Superfluous\_Parentheses](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superfluous_Parentheses)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/656 "2010-09-20T19:35:49Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > I keep reading out of admiration for his persistence in maintaining the pretense about who he really is, and out of astonishment that so many people here still think he’s actually an adult. Well, I think this thread convinced me he actually IS a lawyer (and hence, an adult). No teenager would keep up a 13 page rant about being asked to do a measly 20 hours a year of pro bono work. You have to be an actual fully grown moron to do that. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/657 "2010-09-20T20:14:06Z")
It’s only convinced me he picked up some jargon at the dinner table from a tax-attorney parent who likes to let off steam once in a while. Randy’s threads are really just failed submissions to “$&%\*&# My Dad Says”. ---
**Author:** ![Shot\_From\_Guns](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ccd318/32.png) [@Shot\_From\_Guns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shot_From_Guns)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/658 "2010-09-20T21:10:37Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Dear sweet Og, whatever would possess a person to do that? When you’re coordinating Doper meet ‘n’ greets publicly on the forum, it’s a little hard to say “Everybody’s welcome \*except \ ***Rand Rover**.” ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/659 "2010-09-20T21:24:28Z")
> [@Shot\_From\_Guns](#): > > > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > > > Dear sweet Og, whatever would possess a person to do that? > > When you’re coordinating Doper meet ‘n’ greets publicly on the forum, it’s a little hard to say “Everybody’s welcome \*except \ ***Rand Rover**.” One might cancel the whole event if Rand Rover expressed interest in appearing. I’m not saying this happened, I’m just saying it MIGHT have happened, because no one wants to do pro bono work converting Rand Rover into a normal human being. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2010, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132/660 "2010-09-20T21:25:47Z")
[quote=“Rand\_Rover, post:605, topic:553132”] Nope. That comparison sucks. A better comparison would be I agree to babysit a kid for a year, and the parents say “It would be nice if you took the kid out for ice cream every once in a while.” As it turns out, I don’t think ice cream is good for the child, so I never take him out for ice cream. I haven’t broken my baby-sitting contract or any promise I made to anyone. [quote] What part of the word “professional reswponsibility” don’t you understand? Its not a professional REQUIREMENT, you won’t lose your license. But it is a responsibility. You can continue to ignore your responsibility (it sounds like you ignored it when you swore your oath) but it seems odd that you think its reasonable to complain that people are harassing you for ignoring your responsibility (and it doesn’t sound like a LOT of harassment). > [@](#): > > Wrong. Libertarian thought is based on free exchange, i.e., the honor system. That’s not an honor system, that is an exchange system. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132.md?page=32) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pro-bono-bullshit/553132.md?page=34)