\nThis is not satire. . . This guy is approaching levels of hardo not previously seen pic.twitter.com\/bZQ4tdeQwL<\/a><\/p>\n
\u2014 Paul Clement\u2019s Burner *PARODY* (@v80NonEquityPtr) July 23, 2026<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n
If posting year-end reviews on LinkedIn seems like eye-rollingly try hard behavior, wrap your head around posting year-end reviews FROM 15 YEARS AGO. <\/p>\n
Fire up Springsteen\u2019s \u201cGlory Days\u201d and let\u2019s break down this former associate\u2019s 2 years and 4 months as an absolute god of law.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe top junior associate with whom I have ever worked,\u201d one former supervisor stiltedly wrote. How do you trust an evaluation of writing skills from someone who waterboards the English language to avoid ending a sentence with a preposition? <\/p>\n
\n\u201cwrit[ing]\u2026 better than most partners,\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
That is not good writing. Deploying brackets to match tenses is an occasional necessity, but the less your sentences resemble equations the better. And if you\u2019re going to cut out the context anyway, just make it \u201cwriting \u2018better than most partners.’\u201d Because as is, he\u2019s introduced bracketing just to keep a direct quote that he\u2019s just going to redact with an ellipsis anyway. Speaking of the ellipsis, whenever someone throws in the three dots to glide past the middle of a quote, the reader\u2019s first instinct is \u201cso, what did he cut out?\u201d This is something Chief Justice Roberts infamously does whenever precedent doesn\u2019t suit his preferred policy outcome<\/a>.<\/p>\n
Anyway, the reviewer might have said \u201cwrites better than most partners\u201d and, apparently, didn\u2019t. It could be a comment from the firm curmudgeon that the associate \u201cwrites unnecessary, time-wasting emails better than most partners.\u201d We don\u2019t know. But as applied to LinkedIn self-promotion, it\u2019s a question the writer doesn\u2019t need to invite with brackets and ellipses.<\/p>\n
His closer, \u201cwill \u2018absolutely kill himself for a client[.]’\u201d forces us to contend with a bracketed period for some unholy reason. If he wanted to end with organic punctuation, he could rearrange the quotes in the sentence to end on \u201ca star, period.\u201d Because unless that senior writes reviews channeling Ulysses<\/em>, that statement was followed in the original by a\u2026 period! Yes, I understand the irony that my sentence ended with the word period and an exclamation point. This would land harder ending on that one anyway. <\/p>\n
Also, somewhere in this pileup of stacked quotations there is a \u201cwho\u201d clause and an \u201cis\u201d clause that never reconcile, and roughly four commas short of a functioning sentence. Which, admittedly, might still be writing \u201cbetter than most partners.\u201d <\/p>\n
Sorry, \u201cwrit[ing]\u2026 better than most partners.\u201d<\/p>\n
\n
The post Guy Posts His Obama-Era Biglaw Associate Reviews In Peak LinkedInMaxxing<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t‘You wrote good draft briefs 15 years ago? Say no more, you’re hired!’\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n Personally, I\u2019ve never understood LinkedIn. The original pitch was \u201cFacebook for resumes,\u201d a platform designed to keep you in touch with your most obnoxious professional contacts without having to see their vacation pictures. But lately, it mostly seems like AI-slop with headlines like \u201cWhat Last Week\u2019s Devastating Floods Taught Me About B2B Customer Acquisition.\u201d Sometimes I wish I cared more about LinkedIn, because many readers earnestly reach out through the platform and I\u2019m constantly behind on those messages. But then I log in and see a string of mini-thought leadership blogs about \u201cBuilding Teams To Succeed\u201d and I\u2019m once more at peace with letting two months of messages pile up.<\/p>\n
Anyway, it\u2019s safe to say the subject of this Twitter post is LinkedInMaxxing.<\/p>\n
If posting year-end reviews on LinkedIn seems like eye-rollingly try hard behavior, wrap your head around posting year-end reviews FROM 15 YEARS AGO. <\/p>\n
Fire up Springsteen\u2019s \u201cGlory Days\u201d and let\u2019s break down this former associate\u2019s 2 years and 4 months as an absolute god of law.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe top junior associate with whom I have ever worked,\u201d one former supervisor stiltedly wrote. How do you trust an evaluation of writing skills from someone who waterboards the English language to avoid ending a sentence with a preposition? <\/p>\n
\n\u201cwrit[ing]\u2026 better than most partners,\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
That is not good writing. Deploying brackets to match tenses is an occasional necessity, but the less your sentences resemble equations the better. And if you\u2019re going to cut out the context anyway, just make it \u201cwriting \u2018better than most partners.’\u201d Because as is, he\u2019s introduced bracketing just to keep a direct quote that he\u2019s just going to redact with an ellipsis anyway. Speaking of the ellipsis, whenever someone throws in the three dots to glide past the middle of a quote, the reader\u2019s first instinct is \u201cso, what did he cut out?\u201d This is something Chief Justice Roberts infamously does whenever precedent doesn\u2019t suit his preferred policy outcome<\/a>.<\/p>\n
Anyway, the reviewer might have said \u201cwrites better than most partners\u201d and, apparently, didn\u2019t. It could be a comment from the firm curmudgeon that the associate \u201cwrites unnecessary, time-wasting emails better than most partners.\u201d We don\u2019t know. But as applied to LinkedIn self-promotion, it\u2019s a question the writer doesn\u2019t need to invite with brackets and ellipses.<\/p>\n
His closer, \u201cwill \u2018absolutely kill himself for a client[.]’\u201d forces us to contend with a bracketed period for some unholy reason. If he wanted to end with organic punctuation, he could rearrange the quotes in the sentence to end on \u201ca star, period.\u201d Because unless that senior writes reviews channeling Ulysses<\/em>, that statement was followed in the original by a\u2026 period! Yes, I understand the irony that my sentence ended with the word period and an exclamation point. This would land harder ending on that one anyway. <\/p>\n
Also, somewhere in this pileup of stacked quotations there is a \u201cwho\u201d clause and an \u201cis\u201d clause that never reconcile, and roughly four commas short of a functioning sentence. Which, admittedly, might still be writing \u201cbetter than most partners.\u201d <\/p>\n
Sorry, \u201cwrit[ing]\u2026 better than most partners.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Personally, I\u2019ve never understood LinkedIn. The original pitch was \u201cFacebook for resumes,\u201d a platform designed to keep you in touch with your most obnoxious professional contacts without having to see their vacation pictures. But lately, it mostly seems like AI-slop with headlines like \u201cWhat Last Week\u2019s Devastating Floods Taught Me About B2B Customer Acquisition.\u201d Sometimes […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":158091,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-158090","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/xira.com\/p\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/GettyImages-1455365269-scaled-mrQjNV.jpg?fit=2560%2C1707&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/158090","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=158090"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/158090\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/158091"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=158090"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=158090"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=158090"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/abovethelaw.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2023\/10\/GettyImages-1455365269-300x200.jpg?resize=300%2C200&ssl=1\" "\\"\\"")