Guide to the legal profession: Difference between revisions

A [[legal almanac]] scores over the traditional ream of A4 printer paper in one key regard: ''durability''. Because it has is no other practical ''use'', you may stuff two or three of them under your screen without fear of having to disassemble your workstation later because you are in a rush and the last sod to use the printer didn’t restock the paper supply. On the other hand, a ream as a monitor prop is a ''private stash''. A physical almanac is ''prospective recycling''.

In 2019, from nowhere, publishers were forced into bouts of panicked defensive [[virtue-signalling]] when their “rigorous selection methodology” — largely “recommending your buddies as a prank and then voting for each other” — was found to be doctrinally wanting by humourless [[Critical theory|critical legal theorist]]s.<ref>Or perhaps practitioners, ''posing'' as humourless critical legal theorists, who were disappointed not to have been included.</ref>  

But publishers are nothing if not resourceful: the new “Chambers [[Diversity & inclusion|Diversity & Inclusion]]” is an exclusive guide to the  intersectionally-marginised global elite.<ref>https://diversity.chambers.com/ “Diversity and inclusion is at the very heart of what we do and who we all are. We are all, in that regard, the same, yet at the same time we screen our people to make sure [[D&I]] is a fundamental part of their, and therefore our, DNA.”</ref>

But the trouble didn’t stop with a couple of beanish [[snowflakes]]. The [[Covid]] pandemic prompted legal almanac publishers to go digital, demonstrating exactly the same [[category error]] the [[Critical theory|critical theorist]]s made, which was to assume that people want professional guides in order to ''read'' them.