DF Thread Forum
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous Posting
Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.
Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
-
Desert Fox
- Posts: 18283
- Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm
Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Last edited by Desert Fox on Fri Jan 26, 2018 11:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Jay2716
- Posts: 239
- Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 6:41 pm
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Why would I pay someone else to do what I can bill for myself?
-
Jay2716
- Posts: 239
- Joined: Sat Dec 08, 2012 6:41 pm
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Also, lol at trusting someone else to make sure my motion to compel has consistent spacing after periods.
-
TLSModBot
- Posts: 14835
- Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:54 am
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Hey DF why don't you lead the way with some proofreading over your posting
-
SmokeytheBear
- Posts: 926
- Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:40 pm
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
that split infinitive made my teeth hurt.Capitol_Idea wrote:Hey DF why don't you lead the way with some proofreading over your posting
My firm has legal assistants do book reads on any and everything.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
Lincoln
- Posts: 1208
- Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 11:27 pm
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
My firm has a proofreading department, which is kind of the same thing.
-
sublime
- Posts: 17385
- Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:21 pm
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Same. Although people don't seem to really use them which I don't get.Lincoln wrote:My firm has a proofreading department, which is kind of the same thing.
-
foregetaboutdre
- Posts: 399
- Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2014 3:16 am
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Admin staff at my firm will proofread, but I think maybe justly or unjustly many of the attorneys don't "trust" their edits (even though its redlined etc..) and will continue to proof and bill (which is an incentive to keep proofing) to turn in something perfect.
Some of this I think is also because of some silly things like the files getting mixed up and shit in between edits etc... (even though everything is on a cloud service).
Some of this I think is also because of some silly things like the files getting mixed up and shit in between edits etc... (even though everything is on a cloud service).
Last edited by foregetaboutdre on Thu Oct 26, 2017 3:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
malibustacy
- Posts: 287
- Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2014 3:34 am
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Other than client confidentiality and conflict of interest concerns?
-
Desert Fox
- Posts: 18283
- Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
Mine doesn’t, which is nuts.Lincoln wrote:My firm has a proofreading department, which is kind of the same thing.
Last edited by Desert Fox on Fri Jan 26, 2018 11:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Desert Fox
- Posts: 18283
- Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
You can get around those issues.malibustacy wrote:Other than client confidentiality and conflict of interest concerns?
Last edited by Desert Fox on Fri Jan 26, 2018 11:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Desert Fox
- Posts: 18283
- Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
I don’t get the dislike of split infinitives.SmokeytheBear wrote:that split infinitive made my teeth hurt.Capitol_Idea wrote:Hey DF why don't you lead the way with some proofreading over your posting
My firm has legal assistants do book reads on any and everything.
Last edited by Desert Fox on Fri Jan 26, 2018 11:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
lolwat
- Posts: 1216
- Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 2:30 pm
Re: Why are lawyers the only professional writers arrogant enough to not use copy editors?
I always like having a second (or third) pair of eyes to make sure there aren't typos or grammatical errors, and that everything makes sense. But I wouldn't hire people to specifically do that. I get good results just sending it to another associate to review and edit... and they can bill for that, too. Win-win for everyone, except maybe in terms of cost to the client (although I'm sure firms would find ways to shift the cost of a copy editor to the client, anyway).
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
