#this is my first one unless you count telling my master's supervisor i would have a chapter done at the end of november last year

[apigeonisapigeon]

My November writing goal is to finish part 2 of Arson and Other Fires. (In other news because I just realized I forgot to say this here: I finished part 1 of AaoF. It's around 30k). Unfortunately I also... don't have that good of an idea of how long part 2 will be? So that's a fun extra challenge

[jeidafei]

D.Gray-Man Vol.26: Komui’s Lounge (Extended) 1/5

Featuring: Marie, Bak, Lavi, Wisely, Allen, Link

(T/N: We got 31 questions this time. It really is extended! I’ve broken it up into five parts for convenience of translating and scrolling.

Let’s start with the onslaught of the usual Kanda questions...)

Lavi: G’afternoon y’all! As always, welcome to the Komui’s-Lounge-where-Komui-doesn’t-show-up-again-this-time! And first up is...ME~~! (Pull crackers)

Link: Keep it down, Bookman Jr.

Bak: And now, the time is ripe. At long last, my debut has come! And I made it on the page before Komui, too! MUHAHAHAHAHA!!

Marie: I’m not very good at this kind of thing...but I’ll do my best.

Wisely: And here comes the Noah of the Demon Eye, Wisely~~!! Back for his second session! (Holds up two victory signs).

Allen: Wait a moment. There seems to be two deceased among us?

Lavi: Hey, I’m not even confirmed deceased yet!!!

Allen: Nobody’s saying it’s you, Lavi. Well, it’s actually you, anyway.

Lavi: Allen, you were just calling for me back in Vol.24′s lounge, didn’t you? What’s with all this darkness right from the get-go, meanie!?

Allen: I haven’t been able to eat at all, and I’m irritated. 

Link: (lays a hand on Allen’s shoulder) Just forget about everything in the main narrative for now, Walker. The freshness of this discussion lounge is fading quick, and now the author’s already using trial and error.

Allen: Reckless move on the author’s part.

Wisely: Even so, it seems the author didn’t intend to bring out Bookman Jr. at first, though. Just that there was a truly unsolvable issue... 

Lavi: Damn you, Hoshino...But yes, that’s what happened! The thing is, this time the most questions are directed at me! The fans are calling out to me! I heard their voices! How can I not be here for them! (heart)

Allen: Even though I can answer questions about you just fine.

Lavi: With messed-up answers, more like.

Link: Walker, here are some doughnuts, so would you cheer up already? And you, Bookman Jr, don’t get too carried away. We went over the word-count limit last two times, and both the editor and designer sent an e-mail to warn us to stay within the limit this time. All pointless talk is prohibited from all of you!

Allen, Lavi, Wisely: Roger~~

Marie: Haha...(wry grin) Having the Inspector here really is a help.

Bak: Oi, haven’t you lot been forgetting about me from the start......!?

Question 1: Kanda had a little pouch hanging from his neck when he returned to Marie and Lenalee. What was in that pouch?

Allen: You can always count on a question for Kanda, huh.

Lavi: Yeah, ain’t Yu gettin’ a little too popular? By the way, ain’t this supposed to start off with a question for me?

Wisely: Well, it’s because there’s also a wagonload of questions for Yu Kanda as ever. What a sinful lad...

Link: You there! No pointless chatter!

Bak: Huh...? He had a pouch? We disposed of those clothes Kanda was wearing after he swapped it in for the Order uniform at the Asian Branch, but there wasn’t any pouch.

Marie: Ah, that’s because I’m keeping it for him. The little drawstring pouch, right? Seems to be silver coins in there.

Allen: Money?!!! (clatter)

Lavi: Calm down, Allen!

Marie: There was this old lady who took care of Kanda’s every need back then, and she gave it to him, said it’s for travel expenses....sorry, that’s all I know.

Lavi: ........That so?

Allen: Kanda will definitely turn out like Master someday. (hmph!)

Marie: Looks like he barely used any of it, though.

(T/N: aight guys, now we know the true reason Allen decided to tag along with Kanda, right? right?)

Question 2: Is Kanda right-handed or left-handed?

Lavi: Yu agaaain?

Link: He’s ambidextrous, isn’t he?

Allen: Eh? Is that so?

Link: It’s something you’d notice right away.

Lavi: After all the time you spent fighting with him and you still didn’t know, Allen? Yu’s punches hurt like freakin’ hell no matter which fist he used, right?

Allen: Makes me sick just thinking about it.

Marie: Exactly, Kanda’s ambidextrous.

Bak: By the way, Alma was also ambidextrous, you know.

(T/N: damn, that stab in the heart when I have to go back and correct is into was...)

Wisely: By the way, over to the Noahs, the Millennium Count is ambidextrous.

Question 3: After the Second Exorcist sigil’s power deteriorated, Kanda now has hangover. Will he also be more vulnerable to illnesses like the cold? 

Lavi: Yu again...? Now I’m starting to think Hoshino is trolling behind this!

Allen: He’s an idiot, and idiots don’t catch colds! NEXT!

Wisely: Well, if he does catch colds more easily then it’s good news for us Noahs. But if he’s such an idiot, guess it can’t be helped.

Marie: Hey, watch it. (sweat)

Link: Stop fooling about and answer properly!

Bak: Allow me, current patriarch of the Chang clan, to enlighten you. Just because the sigil’s power has weakened, doesn’t mean Kanda’s body will become very weak as a result. Though his extraordinary regenerative ability will be impaired, the bodies of Second Exorcists are also designed for battle, so he’d probably still be far more sturdy than normal people. Even so, unless he keeps a balanced diet from now on, there’s a possibility he might fall ill. He eats nothing but soba, doesn’t he? That won’t do!

Question 4:  Those...flying needles?...that Howard Link was throwing about? What are they for? The Crows have had them in the past too, and I’m curious.

Link: Those are called Shibari (嘴針 lit. Beak Needle. T/N: “shibari” also sounds the same as “Shibari-bane”, the Crow’s binding feathers, but uses a different Kanji). Even amongst Crows, it’s a weapon reserved for the elite members. A single needle can unleash power equal to a hundred feathers (those binding feathers, flame feathers, confining feathers, etc. that Crows frequently use). The Shibari I have are the ones Master Zu used back in the day, so they’re an old model, but even now they still work very well. Though they can be a little unwieldy to carry about, in times you run out of feathers you can still fight just using Shibari. And for me right now, in particular, it’s also a way to save up on feathers, so it’s a very handy weapon.

Allen: Huh? What do you mean by “for me right now”?

Link: I have chocolate doughnuts, too, Walker.

Allen: WEE-HEE! (chomp!)

Wisely: Careful, boy...he’s tricking you with those doughnuts...

Link: Would you like some, too?

Wisely: WEE-HEE! (chomp!)

Lavi: I heard from Gramps, though. Looks like the Crows’ abilities are developed by the Chang Clan, right?

Bak: Aha. The Crow Unit was established by Grandfather Zu in his younger days. Even now, the Chang Clan is still responsible for manufacturing all the feathers, needles and other weapons the Crows use. 

Marie: I see. So this is why the Asian Branch Supervisor position is passed down the Chang bloodline. The Chang Clan must have been indispensable for the Central, right?

Bak: Well, I guess.

Allen: I’ve been wondering for a long time. Why are the Changs able to use such awesome magic?

Wisely: It will be a long story, so we’d better drop it for the sake of the word count.

Link: If it’s going to eat up precious space, then let’s leave it for now.

Question 5: Do Lavi and Bookman still remember their original names?

Lavi: YAAAAAAAAAY~~  ! Finally~~! The answer’s Nooooooooooo-peeeeee! From the time I became Gramp’s heir, my name was erased!

Allen: Hey Lavi, why must Bookmen discard their real names? Isn’t it painful?

Marie: You’re one who cherishes his name, huh, Allen.

Bak: Do you really have to go that far in order to be a recorder of alternate history?

Link: Now that you mention it, we’ve received many questions on the Bookmen’s fake aliases.

Lavi: While we’re a Junior, we have to change our names every time we change the place of our log. Because those names will become the title of our logs. Thus, the log for this Holy War will be titled “Lavi”. Makes it easy to search for logs this way. As for whether it’s painful to lose my real name...hmmm, well...frankly, I don’t really know. Since me becoming a Bookman was something that can’t be helped, too. By the way, Gramps is the one who named all the logs.

Wisely: Uh-hmmm. Come to think of it, the name Lavi seems to be...

Lavi: What?

Wisely: Nah, nuffink. (munch munch). Blimey, these doughnuts sure are delicious.

Allen: Hey! You’re eating too many!

Question 6: How did Lavi and Bookman earn money for expenses during travels? The Allen way?

Allen: What do you mean by my way?

Lavi: Means gambling, of course. Ain’t it?

Wisely: Swindling Mafia bosses then fleeing with winnings and the like?

Bak: Mafia!? (falsetto)

Marie: So that’s what you’ve been up to, Allen!? That’s no good! You’re still a kid, aren’t you? Lenalee would wail if she ever hears you’ve been doing such dangerous things.

Allen: Please, please don’t tell Lenalee! I beg you, Marie! (googly eyes).

Link: No matter how adorable a face you manage to make, Noise Marie won’t be able to see it, Walker. We’ll have you tell us all about this later in detail, so for now let’s return to Bookman Jr. 

Allen: Eeehhh!?

Lavi: Where were we? Oh, travel expenses, right? Well, members of the Bookman clan are everywhere and they help us out, so both me and Gramps don’t have to work for money.

Marie: You mean you have relatives all over the world?

Lavi: Yup! The whole clan comes together to support the Bookman as the clan’s leader, so Bookman can focus on his logs. 

Bak: I never knew the Bookman Clan is such a large-scale thing.

Lavi: Well, since everyone conceals their Bookman lineage and outwardly leads normal lives, it’s no surprise nobody knows.

Allen: Why do they have to hide?

Lavi:  Hm? It’s a secret!

>> Part 2 <<

[hunty-booboo]

Advanced Strategies: Card Counting Lesson Four

Wonging I already cited that during a really perfect scenario, a card counter could not need to play hands whilst the remember become under -three. While it is not usually possible to keep away from terrible decks whilst card counting, there are situations in which you are better off sitting out some arms or even leaving the desk totally. Any time you keep away from gambling hands in very poor counts you are doing what's referred to as "wonging out." Wonging may be an exceptionally beneficial method because it both increases your advantage and reduces your chance. For this next lesson we could pass over many of the most important facts approximately wonging  bat lo theo giai dac biet When to wong out.

I love this strategy, and admittedly in all likelihood use it too much. Even even though wonging helps you keep away from situations where the on line casino has the advantage, it isn't always a good concept to "wong". If you left a table each time the rely got even a bit bad, you'll in no way sit down around lengthy enough to play when the depend finally rose. For this reason maximum counters will wong handiest when the counts receives beneath a certain point. Because we're the usage of an unbalanced count number, this point will range relying on what number of decks you are playing with. So as opposed to wonging primarily based on the be counted, it will likely be less difficult to wong based totally on how a great deal the remember has dropped. I would individually propose wonging out of a shoe if the matter has dropped by means of a complete of 6. You can also want to paste round a bit longer if there are six or 8 decks, in addition to go away sooner in case you are gambling with only one or two decks. Always take into account that gambling in a poor remember will handiest hurt your bankroll.

When to wong in.

The flip aspect to sitting out when the matter goes down is to come right into a shoe when the count number goes up. This is referred to as "wonging in". Wonging in isn't always usually allowed, especially at two deck tables. This is due to the fact the on line casino knows that in case you handiest came into shoes that had proper counts, you'll constantly have an advantage over them.

So when need to you wong in? Well again it modifications a little primarily based at the quantity of decks. If you're gambling at a two or four deck shoe, it will commonly be worth it to come in at a rely of zero. At this factor you have a stable advantage and there may be a far higher threat that the be counted will increase to considerable tiers. If you are playing on a 6 or 8 deck shoe, you may come in at counts as low as -4. Again this will placed you in a very good position if the count number skyrockets, and allow you to avoid playing plenty of minimum bet arms.

The drawback to wonging in is that there may be best about a 25% threat that a shoe may be substantially high-quality. This way you may sit down and watch 4 or 5 shoes before playing a hand. While this could be boring, it's far the appropriate manner to play and could cause higher profit.

Now which you have heard of standards like wonging, lets test conditions that do not affect your counting. Apply your know-how shape this chapter to use these misconceptions on your benefit.

Heat When Card Counting

In counting circles, getting suspicion from the pit boss or camera surveillance is known as "warmth". Sometimes you may word warmth before it escalates into motion, however sometimes this just isn't feasible. In this phase we can communicate about the techniques on line casino's use to capture counters and the ways you may avoid those measures to play as a great deal as viable. One idea to keep in mind whilst discussing warmth is that casinos unfastened a lot greater from mistakenly throwing out those who are not counting. For this motive they may regularly no longer method you until they may be certain you are hiding some thing.

Pit bosses

Pit bosses have lots to deal with (no pun meant) and aren't actively trying to trap counters. They may know what counting is, however probably will not realize a counting gadget. Unless a scenario is extraordinarily atypical, a pit boss will not be the only that makes the selection to confront a counter. The one thing that pit boss can do is to alert the surveillance room. Pit bosses are instructed to search for precise situations and notify surveillance in the event that they occur. These occasions might encompass the following. Someone (usually a young male) who seems to be betting an awful lot higher than their appearance might advise. Someone who has been consistently making a bet the minimal after which spiking their guess, simplest to lower it once more soon after. Someone who's paying a long way to a lot interest to the cards on the desk (looking over the desk multiple times each hand). In the rare case that the pit boss definitely calls as much as the surveillance room, you may bet that they will be following you want a hawk.

Surveillance rooms

Most of the focal point of on line casino blackjack surveillance isn't clearly centered on locating card counters. For the maximum element they're watching the dealers. One corrupt dealer may want to fee the casino tons more then any counter could, and that they understand this. That being stated, there are still times wherein surveillance team of workers may be looking the tables for counters. How they are trying to seize counters commonly runs along these traces: They will pick a table, either at random or because they've a suspicion. They will count down the desk using Hi-Low and as they remember it down surveillance personnel will watch to peer if any players appear like "making a bet with the rely". Of direction it's far viable that a non-counter will take place to elevate and lower their wager with the depend, so that they may not take movement after handiest one shoe. However, in the event that they discover you following the count as soon as, they'll retain to monitor you. If after numerous shoes you've got continued to observe the be counted, on line casino surveillance can take certainly one of numerous moves.

In the worst case situation a surveillance supervisor will come immediately right down to your table and ask you to prevent gambling blackjack. If this takes place the nice route of action is to be well mannered and depart without delay. If they do not need to kick you out, they'll take a extra casual approach. This can encompass sending the pit boss over to speak to you, telling the dealer to begin dealing faster, or each. By doing this they're hoping to throw you off the depend and therefore put off your advantage. If you think this might be taking place to you I would once more suggest you to leave right now. If you're able to hold up with their distractions they'll handiest continue to position stress on you till you can not rely or are instructed to depart.

In maximum current casinos, once they assume you're a counter they will likely upload your face right into a facial popularity device. These structures are not ideal, but they can be very pesky. In my time playing I actually have every now and then been able to hide myself properly enough to evade these structures, however I've additionally failed a few instances as nicely. If the casino unearths you are counting after being requested to depart they may almost simply forcibly do away with you from the casino. This does now not mean you will lose any of your chips, but it's going to quite tons guarantee that any provider or bit boss at the casino could have a terrific study you and keep in mind you as a counter.

Methods to avoid suspicion while counting playing cards

There are numerous different strategies counters have come up with over the years to sidestep warmness. The first and simplest technique is to handiest play short classes. If you handiest play for approximately half an hour at a time, the danger that surveillance will even be counted down your desk is extremely small. If they do they may most in all likelihood only see you guess with the be counted for a part of a shoe and could no longer have sufficient evidence to take action. Pit bosses and sellers also are much less possibly to understand you if you play for quick durations of time, which helps plenty while the use of disguises later.

The second most important pass you can do to avoid warmth is called pocketing. As you would possibly have guessed, pocketing is the act of transferring chips from the desk for your wallet without everyone noticing. The reasons for this are easy. If you have got less chips at the desk, anyone from the supplier to the digital camera team will think you've got either gained less or misplaced more. Nothing is extra suspicious to a pit boss then someone with a thousand bucks at the table having a bet the ten dollar minimum.

Pocketing takes a while to master, but I will allow you to in on a touch alternate mystery. Say you've got a stack ten green chips ($250), if you take your hand and location it on top of the complete stack, you could elevate one or  chips off the top along with your palm. You can then casually move your hand under the table and switch the chips into your pocket. If executed properly, it is essentially impossible for every person to note this movement and over the years it may make your stacks appearance a lot smaller then they surely are.

One note of caution, if you pocket too much you can not have sufficient chips on the desk to double or cut up while you need to. If this happens, do no longer attain into your pocket to grab greater chips. You do now not need all of us understanding you have got been pocketing. Instead, simply whip out your wallet and placed down a few more bills. Not most effective will this save you humans shape knowing you are pocketing, however it's going to make you seem like a gambler who has run out of chips and needs to shop for in for greater.

Another way to avoid suspicion is to apply play variations. Dealers and pit bosses almost never recognise accurate basic approach, so play variations wont assist right here, however to surveillance personnel who probably recognize simple approach, these play variations will make you look like you do no longer realize what you're doing. Another step we have talked about earlier is to wong out. In some situations wonging can be suspicious, but most of the time wonging out will assist. If you've simply won a couple max bet hands, but the count number dropped, it is tons much less suspicious to go away the table then it's miles to live and min bet for the subsequent ten mins.

One final manner to avoid warmness is mechanically built into the Red Zen system. Imagine that plenty of black twos and sevens pop out. For the surveillance group of workers counting Hi-Low the remember has simply accelerated, however you are nonetheless betting the equal amount. Or consider the other state of affairs where an unusual amount of pink twos and sevens come out. The depend could very well have long gone down for the surveillance body of workers (if some tens come out as nicely) however for you the be counted remains about the identical. No matter how the state of affairs plays out, in case you are using Red Zen, it's far not going that the Hi-Low matter will in shape along with your count. This will add a huge quantity of doubt to all of us looking to seize counters. Remember, the ultimate component they want to do is kick out actual gamblers, so any doubt you could forged will move a protracted manner.

Card Counting: Heat vs Attention.

Heat is a bad shape of on line casino interest, however this doesn't imply all sorts of interest are heat. Often it's miles high-quality to move for one among  disguises. Either try to live as low at the radar as feasible, or actively purpose pit bosses and sellers to pay high quality interest to you. In the case of card counting, advantageous interest is basically anything that makes on line casino workforce suppose you are a "rich idiot". This can range from casually mentioning incorrect blackjack "facts" to appearing extraordinarily upset at the manner your game is going. Do not take it to this point which you harass the casino body of workers, but through all means lead them to feel a chunk uncomfortable.

Before going to the casino, learn greater approximately card counting. Everything a card counter wishes is within the ebook Modern Card Counting: Modern Card Counting. This ebook consists of lessons on the whole lot from basic approach to the usage of mathematical formulation to estimate your earnings and anticipated danger.

[raystart]

U.C. Santa Cruz Commencement Speech – 2019

I was honored to give the commencement speech at the University of California Santa Cruz, right down the road from the ranch. Rather than my usual talks about innovation and entrepreneurship I shared a few lessons learned after serving seven years as a public official on the California Coastal Commission. I told four stories about the conflict between money and power versus the common good.

I was invited to give the talk by Professor Sue Carter, now the provost of the college. In 2011 Professor Carter was in the first National Science Foundation I-Corps class. Last year, she testified in front of Congress about the program.

Bay Nature, the San Francisco regional nature magazine, did a great job in capturing the context of my commencement speech in this article.  Worth a read first, before you read below.

The speech is below.

—–

Congratulations to the graduates!

The talk starts at 27:00

If you can’t see the video click here

Today while we celebrate your college degree, it represents just the end of one part of your life and the beginning of the next.

You’ve just spent the last four years putting passion, energy and conviction into your friendships, politics, social justice, partying and – every once in a while – your classes.

Now your time in the classroom is over and your real education is about to begin.  Many of you will find yourselves colliding with a world driven – less by ideas, knowledge and the pursuit of truth – and more by money – ideology – and power.

So today, I’m going to offer you a glimpse of how the world outside of this esteemed institution really works. And offer some tips on how to be effective change agents for repairing the world.

It’s altogether fitting and proper that in a college named after Rachel Carson, to share four short stories of what happened when truth and justice faced money and power – for the seven years I served as a public official on the California Coastal Commission. The agency that regulates land use on all 1100 miles of the California Coast.

My first story is that the Smartest person in the room is almost never the most effective.

One of things I loved about being a coastal commissioner was how much I learned. Coming out of Silicon Valley and the tech world, I was a complete novice on how policy gets made. So, I had to read the Coastal Act, the Coastal Regulations, and enough law to understand the positions our staff took and what the applicants were contending. And each month I’d have to read through 100 staff reports to figure out how to vote. Deciding between the applicants, their lobbyists, the environmental community, the staff, the coastal act and the law.

Meanwhile, while I was reading everything, I noticed that one of the other commissioners was reading nothing, not the staff reports, not the coastal act, not the law.  In fact, all he could do was count to seven.

And that ability to count to seven made him the most effective commissioner.

Why? Because out of 12 commissioners, seven is the number needed to win a majority in a vote.

While I was the master of the facts and data, he was calling in favors, cajoling others, and building a coalition to get the majority of commissioners to see the world his way.

So, my first lesson is – You don’t need to be the smartest person in the room to be the most effective. Being effective means not just mastering the facts but – figuring out how to move your agenda forward.

My second story is about the power of Misdirection over the truth

Magicians use misdirection all the time: they sweep off their top-hat, you fixate on it, and all of a sudden, their assistant standing next to them disappears.

I got to watch a magic act unfold before my eyes when real estate developers made eight office buildings totaling ¼ million square feet — twice the size of a Wal-Mart — disappear. How?

The developers wanted to build office buildings in an area zoned for farmland. Traffic from this huge project would have filled local roads not designed for this density and would impact the public’s access to the beach. Given that on the face of it, this project violated all kinds of laws, how did these developers make it disappear – andget unanimous approval from the county’s Board of Supervisors?

Their solution was brilliant – and evil. They proposed that after building these eight office buildings, they would build a housing facility for developmentally disabled adults. They convinced the dedicated, deserving and passionate parents of this group that this project was the only hope these families would ever have to secure housing for their children (neglecting to tell them they had located the housing for the disabled in a tsunami inundation zone).

Naturally these parents became vociferous advocates for the project. They brought their disabled children to the hearings and did exactly what the developers had hoped – with not a dry eye in the house, no one could see the project anymore. The developer had moved the attention from a project that violated local and state zoning onto a small and deserving group of individuals. It was heartbreaking. And it was world-class misdirection.

The lesson here is that misdirection is designed to distract you from the truth. Obscuring a fact-based argument with a faith-based one is what demagogues do – in policy and politics.  See through it. Help others to see how this kind of misdirection distorts their perspectives.

My third story was about the day I learned to Follow the Money

The business model for real estate developers isn’t hard to understand – they buy farms and ranches then build houses and sell them off. And in California if you can build 1,500 houses on a 400-acre farm, that might be worth a billion dollars. Developers make their profit off the difference between the cost of the land and the net profit on the houses.

But one obstacle for California developers is that the Coastal Act says you can’t build on land that has been designated a Sensitive Habitat or wetland. So, if you’re a developer, having any land declared sensitive is a loss of potential revenue.  In fact, it can kill the project. However, … there is one loophole in those rules – if you’re a farmer you can plow under anything.

So as a consequence,real estate developers are great farmers. They buy-out family farms for prices that far exceed what the farmers could ever get from selling their crops. And then they lease the land back to them so they can continue to farm. The developers invest in equipment so farmers can plant multiple crops each year, till each and every inch of their fields, and ensure those fields are perfectly level so no water can collect on the fields.

When I first ran into this I thought, “Wow what a great deal. The developers are great for the environment, they’re helping farmers by making all these improvements.

It took me a year and lots of looking at puddles on farms for the dim lightbulb to go on over my head. Real estate developers couldn’t care less about farming or the crops.

The developers were keeping the farmers plowing the fields to make sure no sensitive habitat would appear.  And the day a developer got the zoning approvals, the bulldozers would show up to start building the houses that would bury the farm.

The lesson here was that when I was standing in the farm field, I wasn’t looking at a puddle – I was staring at a billion dollarsv- and I didn’t see it.

So when you hear or see something that is too good to be true – follow the money. It’s usually a long and winding road – but eventually you’ll find it.

My final story is: if you want to make change you have to learn to communicate and inspire others.

In all these lessons, I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention the namesake of your school – Rachel Carson. You all study her work your first year here. You know she was a marine biologist at theU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service – only the second woman in the job – and she served as editor-in-chief of all its publications.

Her 1962 book, Silent Spring, launched the modern environmental movement.

The book’s title evokes a spring when all the songbirds died. Ittold the story of the damage caused by indiscriminate use of pesticides, especially DDT, to control insects. It educated a mass audience, most who had never seen a scientific paper in their lives, about how these chemicals entered the food chain, accumulated in the tissues of animals and ultimately made their way up to humans.

DuPont and other chemical companies threatened Carson’s publisher as well as the New Yorker and Audubon Magazine unless their planned Silent Spring features were canceled but nevertheless, she persisted. The book was a moral call to arms for people to take personal action.

Rachel Carson wasn’t first to raise concerns about DDT, but her impact was to communicate scientific evidence in a way that the general public could understand – she used facts to inspire others to take action.

In naming this college the donors said, “Carson, like UC Santa Cruz, epitomizes love of the natural world, ethical judgment based on sound scientific principles, and the persistence and courage to create change.”

Change happens when you can educate and inspire others – when you can use facts to create faith in what’s possible.

For those of you who will continue in the sciences or research, the easy part will be to write papers for your peers. The harder part is how you’ll explain “inconvenient truths” to people who may not want to hear them. How will you rouse an audience to action?

Finally, why do public service?

My work on the Coastal Commission took four days of my week each month in public hearings – at times in exhausting 12-hour days. And I’ve sat on the boards of other local and national non-profits.

But why serve your community, state or country? For me, I volunteered my time because of a gift I received my first year in college.

On my first day of school in Michigan I met Michael Krzys, who one day would be the best man at my wedding.  As we got to know each other, I pretty quickly realized that I had met my match, someone with even more curiosity, creativity and a wry sense of humor.

But as I got to know Michael, there was another, completely foreign part of him I didn’t understand. It would take me another 30 years.

From the day I met him he had a commitment to public service that was deep, heartfelt, profound, unshakable and to me, mysterious and completely unfathomable. Even as a freshman, Michael already knew that his calling was to help others and to do so he was determined to become a public service lawyer.

It confused and unnerved me to know someone with so much certainty about the meaning and direction of his life.  It couldn’t have been more different from mine.

After our first year our lives took different paths. When they would touch again, it would be in ways neither of us could have predicted. 

I left school and joined the Air Force during Vietnam, and Michael and I kept in touch via letters – me telling him about adventures in the military, fighter planes, electronics and foreign countries. His letters to me explained that while he appreciated my dedication to national service, public service was the higher calling. Each of his letters ended with him reminding me that I was destined for a different career.

When I got back from Southeast Asia, Michael was in Law School and I was stationed nearby. Over dinner we’d argue about politics, talk about how to best save the world, and he’d tell me what he was learning that week in his law school classes.  I remember when he taught me the best way to understand an issue was to learn how to argue both sides of a case.

When I got out of the military, Michael was finishing up law school. A year later he and his new wife headed to the South to work for Georgia Legal Services.

I moved to Silicon Valley, and we kept up a sporadic correspondence, me trying to explain startups and Michael telling me about the world of civil rights and social justice for the poor.

If possible, it seemed like his excitement for what he was doing matched mine.  I just didn’t understand why he did it.

For entrepreneurs, understanding why people dedicate their lives to working for non-profits is hard to fathom. Why work for low pay, on something that wasn’t going to deliver a product that would change the world?

Today, each time I see the staffs of those non-profits I support, I get a glimpse of that same passion, commitment and sense of doing right that I first heard my freshman year decades ago.  For the best of them, it’s not a job, it’s a life-long calling. They remind me of what Michael might have become.

One fine California April day, three years in Silicon Valley and now into my second startup, I got a call from someone in Michigan who had been trying to track me down.

Michael and his wife were bringing some kids to camp, and he was killed in a head-on car accident with a drunk driver.  His wife and the kids survived.

It took me a long time, but as I got older, I realized that life was more than just about work, technical innovation and business. Michael and others worked to preserve and protect the values that made life worth living.  And while we were making things, they were the ones who were changing our society into a more just place to live.

There wasn’t a day that went by during my time on the Coastal Commission that I didn’t wonder what Michael Krzys would do. He was my model as a human being who found his own compass.

I always hoped that mine would point in the same direction…

Graduates, as you set out on your own extraordinary adventures, remember the measure of a life is not time or money. It’s the impact you make serving God, your family, community, and country.

Your report card is whether you leave the world a better place.

—

Carpe Diem. Seize the Day.

[ieltsformyself]

Questions and vocabulary about studing

The government wants to make it possible for most people to g onto higher education. (education at a university)

2. He went to Oxford University, but I don’t know which college he was at. (an independent institution which has its own teachers, students, and buildings)

3. I’m in the department of sociology. (one of the parts into which a university is divided)

4. You should start revising for your exam as soon as possible. Any delay will result in vital time being lost. (to read or study again something that you have learnt, especially when preparing for an exam)

5. The candidate paced nervously up and down waiting to be called for the interview. (a person who is taking an exam)

6. Unless you pull your socks up, you’ve got no chance of passing the exam. (to achieve necessary standard in an exam, test, etc.)

7. He is the dean of the Arts Faculty. (the head of a faculty [a group of related departments in a university])

8. The academic year begins in October. (the part of a year at university when students have classes and exams)

9. They’re advertising a lectureship in the Sociology Department. (the position of a lecturer)

10. I’ve just been appointed to the chair of/professorship of European History. (the position of a professor)

11. She’s giving a series of lectures on molecular biology. (to talk to a group of people on a particular subject)

12. All the students have to give a seminar paper at least once. (a talk which is given for a seminar)

13. She was my tutor at Durham. (a person who teaches a small group of students)

14. My dissertation is being supervised by professor Holroyd. (to work as a supervisor)

15. I’m not happy with the supervision I’m getting. (when you supervise someone)

16. I’m doing some research into animal behavior. (to study something carefully and in detail)

17. I’m a university student. (a person who is studying at a college or university)

18. I’m doing an undergraduate course. (a student who has not yet taken his or her first degree)

19. They have brought new computer facilities for the postgraduates in the department. (a student who is studying for a second degree at a university)

20. I’m planning to spend a year abroad before I go to university. (to attend universe y regularly as a student)

21. I got a place ace at Manchester University. (an opportunity to study at university)

22. I live in hall. (to live in a hall of residence [university building where some students live])

23. This course consists of six modules. (a part of a course [a complete series of lessons or classes])

24. I need another four credits to complete this course. (a part of a course that a student has completed and that appears on his / her record)

25. I have to take a Maths exam. (to take a written, spoken, or practical test of what you know or can do)

26. I have to hand in an essay on biology. (a short piece of writing on one subject)

27. You need to do well in your assignments as well as in the exam. (a piece of work that you are given to do by university teachers which counts towards your final degree)

28. I’m writing my thesis at the moment. (a long piece of writing on something which you have studied or researched, especially as part of a university degree)

29. I’ve got a degree in psychology. (a qualification gained by successfully completing an academic course at a university)

30. I’m majoring in English. (to study something as your main subject at college or University)

31. I’ve got a diploma in hotel management. (a qualification of a lower level than a degree)

32. I’m a graduate in engineering. (a person who holds a (first) degree from a university)

33. I graduated in History from Sussex University. (to receive an academic degree or diploma)

34. After graduation, I plan to do a postgraduate degree. (the time when you complete a university degree course)

35. I’ve got an upper second in politics from Surrey University. (grades for a university degree in Britain: first (class), (upper) second (class), third (class) e.g.: a first class honours degree)

36. I’ve got an MA (Master of Arts) in English literature. (a degree taken after a first degree in an arts subject)

37. MSc (Master of Science) (a degree taken after a first degree in a science subject)

38. BA (Bachelor of Arts) (a first university degree in an arts subject)

39. BSc (Bachelor of Science) (a first degree in a science subject)

40. PhD, Dphill (Doctor-of Philosophy) / (doctorate) (the highest university degree e.g. to get a PhD, to work for a doctorate)

41. I’m hoping to get a student grant. (money that is given (by the government) to help you for a university or college education)

42. She’s won a scholarship, to study music. (an amount of money that is given to a person who has passed an exam or won a competition in order to help pay for their studies)

43. He started university but dropped out after two years. (to leave university without finishing your studies)

44. I’ll have to read up on (informal) the third chapter for my exam. (to read a lot about something so that you learn about it)

45. I did (informal) Archaeology for two years at university. (to study a particular subject)

46. I’m afraid I don’t know much about that. It isn’t my field. (a general area of study or knowledge)

47. There are a lot of people with expertise in this field. (special knowledge or skill which a person has)

48. She specializes in family law. (to give most of your attention to one subject)

49. I’ve done a study of modern American society. (a piece of scientific research into a particular subject)

50. I’ve collected a lot of statistics relating to air pollution. (information about something in the form of numbers)

51. We are gathering data on graduates without jobs. (facts or information used in research)

52. Data collection has already finished; I’m doing the analysis now. (studying or thinking about the different parts or details of something in order to understand it better)

53. The theory needs to be tested by experiment. (a thorough test using scientific methods to discover how someone or something reacts under certain conditions)

54. Joule carried out / performed a series of simple experiments to test his theory. (to do a task or something)

What are you studying? Do you have higher education? What do you like about your studies? How often do you use English? What languages can you speak? What subject would you like to study at university? When does the academic year begin? Have you ever lectured at university? Can you tell me about it? Have you ever done a research? What was your research on? What’s your field of study? What do you find difficult about your field of study? What do you like about it? What subjects will you take when you go to university? Which courses are you doing this term? How do you find them? How’s your course going? How many modules does the course consist of? How many other credits do you need to complete this course? Do you think you’re going to do them successfully? Which exams do you usually find difficult? Do you need to do well in your assignments during the course? Do they count towards your final degree? Have you started writing your thesis? What’s it about? Do you have to give a seminar paper during the term? When have you got to hand in your essays? What marks did you use to get at university? Have you ever won a university scholarship? What are your future plans after graduation? What are you majoring in? Have you got any other diplomas or degrees? Which subject did you study at university? Are there many people with expertise in your field in the country? Can you tell me about the education system in your country? What types of school are there in your country? What different exams must students take in your country? What’s the reason you’re taking this exam? Are you studying now? Describe the course you are studying? What do you most dislike about your study / course? What are the best things about where you study?

[eiftody-blog]

What the #MeToo movement can teach us about gaslighting in our work environments

Gaslight - manipulate (someone) by psychological means into doubting their own sanity

No matter what you do, you seem to always be wrong.  No matter what you say, you always end up being the monster.  No matter how hard you try to make a positive impact at work, you always end up doing a terrible job.

‘No, go home now!  No, you have to stay to finish this project. No, I didn’t tell you to do it that way.  No, you did it all wrong.  No, I didn’t say that!’  If this in any way sounds familiar, you might be a victim of gaslighting.  

What does gaslighting look like in the real world?

I’m a Canadian and I have no political agenda writing this article, but as a perfect example of how a master of gaslighting others operates, think of Donald Trump - The system is rigged (unless I win).  My political opponents refuse to negotiate (when in fact I refuse to meet opponents at the negotiation table). Mexicans are rapists (when I have so many credible sexual harassment allegations against me).  

Not everyone is so adept at gaslighting as Donald Trump, but he is a classic example of what gaslighting looks like - muddy the waters with unrelated statistics, misdirect with non-sequitor (irrelevant) answers to accusations, accuse others of the exact thing you are in fact guilty of and change the subject or attack when credible charges are leveled at you.  

‘Hey, what about Bill Clinton?  Now that guy really abused women!’  ‘Russia is a ruse! Why isn’t anyone looking into Hillary Clinton and Uranium One?’

Why is gaslighting so effective?

First, a gaslighting message is direct and simple.  ‘He a screwup ...’, ‘She just can’t seem to learn.’, ‘He’s just not a leader.’, ‘She’s not a good fit for the team.’ These direct statements work on our brains’ natural tendency to believe simple messages.  According to the experts, this is referred to as cognitive fluency. Essentially, the easier it is for your brain to understand a message, the more true it sounds. Sadly, simplicity of message often overrides logic. Someone good at gaslighting doesn’t bother using logic at all.  It’s simply not as effective as having a very direct, simple lie.  If no one bothers to challenge the lie or confirm the truth, a simple lie told over and over will easily override a true, but complex logical arguement.

‘That’s fake news ...’

Second, gaslighting relies on the good manners and kindness of victims for the technique to work. People who like to victimize their colleagues count on their victims never fighting back. People who victimize others are counting on the fact that most decent people don’t want an issue to escalate into something highly emotional, embarrassing, and tactless.  Those disgusting people who like to terrorize others in the workplace rely on the fact no one will call them on their misdirection, false accusations, omissions and outright lies.  People who gaslight others are completely prepared to take the risk of embarrassing themselves publicly if they believe it means they can manipulate a situation in their favor.

Why do people gaslight others?  

They do it because they are losers.  They do it because they are selfish. They do it because they are lazy.  It’s just so much easier to get others to do your work.  It’s so much easier to steal the accomplishments of others. It’s so much easier to tear someone else down than it is to build up your own reputation.  

How can you confirm you’re not crazy and how do you handle someone who is gaslighting you?  

I think the best example of how to handle someone victimizing you is to look at the James Comey incident. According to his testimony before congress, Comey realized after speaking privately with Trump, that he was dealing with a dangerous liar. After leaving the meeting, he immediately made notes about what was said, including direct quotes.  These notes ended up being used as a justification (in addition to Trump firing Comey) to start an independent investigation of the Trump campaign’s connections to Russia.

Step 1 - Start documenting to confirm the truth

Not meeting expectations of your supervisor is not gaslighting.  Please see my article - What to do if you are overworked and stressed out to deal with this issue. What you’re looking for is repeated attempts to deceive. If you feel like you’re constantly being corrected, ridiculed and torn down by a colleague at work, it’s critical to determine if this is a communication problem or a gaslighting problem.  Start documenting everything.  Make a habit of writing down your accomplishments each day.  Keep every email. Make notes of conversations. Record meetings on your smart phone.  

If someone is trying to gaslight you, they are counting on no one keeping track of the facts. So step one is to keep great notes on everything.  It sounds like a lot of work but keeping track of what you’ve accomplished each day and jotting down notes after every meeting is really critical and really it only takes a few minutes a day to keep good records.  You should be doing this to keep track of your accomplishments for performance reviews anyway.  So if you’re not writing notes after meetings and listing your office accomplishments, you’d better start now!

When the charges made by your colleague don’t match your notes, emails and recordings, you can start re-assuring yourself that you aren’t crazy and in fact you need to start taking action to get yourself out of the current situation.

Step 2 - Get breathless

This next step is a lot harder.  You’ve got to start standing up for yourself. This sounds easy but believe me, it’s not.  Saying to someone who has been victimizing you, ‘No, you’re wrong. I have the email to prove you’re wrong.’ is very stressful and very unnatural for most decent, kind people. In my experience, outing your colleague directly like this usually ends in a showdown that can only be won with complete transparency and honesty and consistently standing up for yourself and others in the office.  I can’t stress this enough: once outing your colleague as a liar, falling short of complete commitment will end with your reputation torn to shreds and your career in the toilet.

Don’t underestimate the commitment of your colleague, they won’t give up easily.  While you are working trying to get your job done, your co-worker has nothing but time to plan your destruction and to undermine your credibility.  Remember, the reason your colleague behaves this way is NO ONE has ever called them out.  They are used to always getting their way and forcing others to submit to their inappropriate behavior.  Virtually everyone who has ever tried to stand up to your colleague in the past, eventually gave up!  Remember; they have a weak moral standard. They will use tactics you would never consider.  There is no bottom to their barrel. You cannot counter your colleague using the same tactics.  They are stronger, more immoral and more calculating than you.  Stick to your strategy; document everything, call out their bullshit whenever you hear it and broadcast their lies publically in front of as many witnesses as possible.  

Recently I watch Katy Turin on The Late Show.  Katy is now well known for following Trump’s campaign right from the announcement of his candidacy.  She said to Stephen Colbert, ‘We shouldn’t get so breathless about everything Donald Trump does or says or tweets.’  

Katy couldn’t be more wrong.  You can’t negotiate with someone exhibiting this kind of behavior.  You probably won’t be able to shame them into behaving reasonably either.  Almost certainly, this will be a long, slow, grinding campaign of truth and transparency.  Like many well-meaning, decent people, Katy doesn’t recognize how calculating Trump is. Trump is COUNTING on people to be decent and to call for calm and to try to be rational. Trump has no intention of being decent, calm, reasonable and certainly not rational. Trump knows that when you get tired of the constant fact checking, the constant clarifications, the embarrassing encounters, the demeaning comments, and threatening tweets, his version of facts will be the only version left standing.  Sorry Katy, if you want to have any hope of overcoming someone gaslighting you, being ‘breathless’ every single time you encounter a lie, omission, or misdirection is absolutely mandatory. Once you’ve become the target of this behavior, anything short of a tireless commitment to publicly outing and correcting every attempt at gaslighting guarantees your eventual reputational failure.

‘Sorry Paul, last week you said left. Now you say right. I’ll have to double-check your assumptions before we proceed.’

‘Wait Sara, last quarter you said we had no money for staff raises but now you want to increase your own bonus by 20%.  That makes no sense - staff and shareholders won’t stand for this when I make your plan public.’

‘John, I’m getting some mixed messages here.  I don’t understand your policy on overtime hours.  I’ve already met with HR about this issue and they don’t understand your policy either because it doesn’t match company policy.  Can you clarify your reasoning in writing to me and the HR department so there aren’t anymore misunderstandings?’

Yes, you have to be blunt, direct and HONEST.  Don’t hide the consequences or who you’ve talked to or what you intend to do if the dishonest, victimizing behaviour continues.  Your goal is difficult but straightforward; clearly demonstrate you aren’t going to take anymore shit and if the behavior continues, the situation is going to be called out and escalated immediately. In short, you’re going to act ‘breathlessly’ every time you are faced with gaslighting behavior.

What the #MeToo movement has taught us

The #MeToo movement has taught us an important lesson; silence is not a solution. Silence guarantees you remain under the thumb of your gaslighting colleague.  It also guarantees you will almost certainly have to compromise your own morals at some point just to keep your job (Think Salma Hayek’s recent confession of being coerced into doing a sex scene by Harvey Weinstein.  Think of Sarah Huckabee Sanders or Sean Spicer embarrassing themselves day after day in front of the world).  The #MeToo movement has taught us we have to take action when faced with being victimized.

I know my ‘solutions’ sound daunting, maybe impossible.   But the #MeToo movement has revealed to us one more important weapon in your quest for justice; if you are being victimized, other people around you are being victimized too.  Calling out gaslighting will eventually give others in the office the strength to make their stories public too. As more and more people become aware that they are part of the silent majority being victimized in silence, they too will eventually start speaking up and supporting moral behavior, common sense and common decency.

I’m Edward Alexander Iftody, founder of Edward Alexander Consulting and author of ‘Surviving Work’.

www.businesscommunicationcoaching.com

[ronlofland]

Trademark Investigations In The Age Of Social Media: When Can You “Friend” An Adversary?

I have often called my friend and colleague, Dave Kluft, the master of opposition research.  When we have a trademark case together, he can be counted upon to think deeply about our adversaries, see the world through their eyes, and uncover every small detail about them that could possibly be relevant to our case.  Most of us mere mortals, however, limit our investigations to working hours and use traditional methods.  Whether you are a Dave Kluft or a Julia Huston, when it comes to investigations, you need to know the rules of the road and avoid ethical pitfalls.

Needless to say, attorneys must turn square corners when investigating their adversaries.  While it has long been accepted that attorneys can sometimes use pretexts when there is no other realistic way to discover the information sought, such as hiring an investigator to pose as a person seeking to rent an apartment to test whether there is racial or ethnic discrimination among lessors, by and large the rules of professional conduct do not give clear guidance.  Thus, this activity is fraught with risk and must be approached cautiously.

Why would you want to investigate adversary in a trademark case?  The most common scenarios involve determining whether an adversary has established (or abandoned) rights in a mark, or seeking to uncover the details of a suspected infringement.

While this topic cannot be comprehensively addressed in a short blog post, here are some guideposts that I have derived from the rules of professional conduct, case law, and ethics opinions of various bar associations in the United States, New York, California and Massachusetts.

Tell the Truth (Unless You Have Researched the Issue Into the Ground and Have Determined That an Exception Applies)

Under the ethical laws of nearly every state, an attorney is prohibited from engaging in deception.  ABA Model Rule 4.1(a) states, “In the course of representing a client a lawyer shall not knowingly … make a false statement of material fact or law to a third person.”

Moreover, ABA Model Rule 4.3 states, “In dealing on behalf of a client with a person who is not represented by counsel, a lawyer shall not state or imply that the lawyer is disinterested. When the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that the unrepresented person misunderstands the lawyer’s role in the matter, the lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to correct the misunderstanding.”

Therefore, the safest investigation strategy is to avoid using any false pretenses whatsoever (including a false name or address when making a purchase of a potentially infringing product).  This applies to attorneys themselves, and any paralegals, in-house investigators, or outside investigators that they employ.  ABA Model Rule 5.3 provides, “A lawyer is responsible for conduct of [a nonlawyer employed or retained by or associated with the lawyer] that would be a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct if engaged in by a lawyer if . . . the lawyer orders or, with the knowledge of the specific conduct, ratifies the conduct involved.”  Thus, attorneys are responsible for knowing what their investigators are doing, as the recent Uber case so painfully demonstrates. In that case, the General Counsel’s request that Uber’s chief security officer “find out a little more about this plaintiff” resulted in an outside investigator calling 28 colleagues or acquaintances of the class action plaintiff and his counsel on false pretenses, presumably unbeknownst to the General Counsel.

That said, some states have carved out circumstances in which an attorney may use a pretext if it is necessary for an effective investigation.  For example, Oregon Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4(b) states that notwithstanding the prohibitions against dishonesty,

…it shall not be professional misconduct for a lawyer to advise clients or others about or to supervise lawful covert activity in the investigation of violations of civil or criminal law or constitutional rights, provided the lawyer’s conduct is otherwise in compliance with these Rules of Professional Conduct. ‘Covert activity,’ as used in this rule, means an effort to obtain information on unlawful activity through the use of misrepresentations or other subterfuge. ‘Covert activity’ may be commenced by a lawyer or involve a lawyer as an advisor or supervisor only when the lawyer in good faith believes there is a reasonable possibility that unlawful activity has taken place, is taking place or will take place in the foreseeable future.

Similarly, the New York County Lawyer’s Association Committee on Professional Ethics has issued Formal Opinion No. 737, providing that, while it is generally unethical for a non-government lawyer to knowingly utilize and/or supervise an investigator who will employ dissemblance in an investigation, it is ethically permissible in a small number of exceptional circumstances where the dissemblance by investigators is limited to identity and purpose and involves otherwise lawful activity undertaken solely for the purpose of gathering evidence.  Even in these cases, a lawyer supervising investigators who dissemble would be acting unethically unless: either (a) the investigation is of a violation of civil rights or intellectual property rights and the lawyer believes in good faith that such violation is taking place or will take place imminently or (b) the dissemblance is expressly authorized by law; and the evidence sought is not reasonably and readily available through other lawful means; and the lawyer’s conduct and the investigator’s conduct that the lawyer is supervising do not otherwise violate the New York Lawyer’s Code of Professional Responsibility or applicable law; and the dissemblance does not unlawfully or unethically violate the rights of third parties.

Even recognizing that courts and bar associations will often allow pretext investigations in appropriate circumstances, you need to know the law in your specific jurisdiction, and it is easy to go too far.  Pretexts involving plain vanilla sales transactions, where your investigator is impersonating a regular purchaser and interacts only with sales personnel, are the most likely to pass muster.  The weirder or more detailed your pretext, the riskier it is.  Pretexts involving fake job interviews, fake medical studies, and fake profiles of up-and-coming professionals, have all been found to be out of bounds.

As a practical matter, if you intend to use any kind of pretext in an investigation, it would be prudent to notify your organization’s general counsel and/or get a second opinion from an authoritative source.  Do not rely on the opinion of your investigator, and certainly do not turn a blind eye to what your investigator is doing or leave it to his or her discretion.

Moreover, if you are located in one state and are investigating an adversary in another state, you should assume that the rules of both jurisdictions will apply to your and your investigator’s conduct.

Given the risks inherent in pretext investigations, if it is possible to conduct your investigation without resorting to a pretext, it is the better practice to do so.

How Do the Ethical Rules Apply in the World of Social Media?

Given the amount of information available on social media, investigating your adversary is easier than ever.  But how deep can you dig without running afoul of the ethical rules?  As a general rule, it is permissible to view publicly available social media posts by and about your target.  If you are seeking access to private social media posts, however, such as by sending a “friend” request on Facebook, there are several restrictions to keep in mind.

First, if your target is represented by counsel in the matter at hand, stop!  You must not send a “friend” request or otherwise initiate contact with the target in these circumstances, either directly or through an investigator.  ABA Model Rule 4.2 provides that a lawyer shall not communicate “about the subject of the representation with a person the lawyer knows to be represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the lawyer has the consent of the other lawyer or is authorized to do so by law or a court order.”  All states have adopted some variation of this principle.

Second, if your target is unrepresented and you or your investigator sends a “friend” request to the target, it must not be made using a false name or under a false pretense.  Otherwise this violates the prohibition against making a false statement of material fact, cited above.

Third, even if your target is unrepresented and no false names or pretenses are used, the authorities in some jurisdictions will require you or your investigator to accompany a “friend” request with a disclosure of your role as an attorney for your client and/or an explanation of why you are sending the request.  This principle has been adopted by bar associations in Massachusetts, Philadelphia and San Diego; bar associations in Oregon and New York City have gone the other way.

The Bottom Line

Before undertaking an investigation that may result in contact with the intended target, you need to know the law in your jurisdiction as well as the jurisdiction where your target is located.   Even in jurisdictions where some pretext investigations have been allowed, you should proceed with caution and recognize that pretexting carries some level of risk.  To help manage the risk, you should ensure that the information is not available any other way, that no other ethical rules or laws are violated (such as tape-recording telephone conversations in states that require consent of both parties), that no false statements are made, and that your investigator is licensed and insured in the applicable states.

Editor’s Note: In-house counsel seeking more information about the ethics of conducting investigations are invited to attend our webinar on August 1, 2017.  One hour of CLE credit is available in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and California, and may be available in other states upon request.

  Source: http://ift.tt/2uVUWnx