Clarification re: list membership

[Volokh, Eugene]

        Just a brief clarification:  The list is aimed primarily at law
professors and others who are highly knowledgeable on constitutional law,
largely not to keep matters confidential but to make sure that the posts are
of high quality.  I on occasion make exceptions to this general approach,
for instance for academics in allied disciplines, highly knowledgeable
practitioners (Marty Lederman is obviously the equal of any of us in
knowledge and erudition), and some others, including on occasion some
journalists who write on related topics.  I wanted to clarify this so that
people would not be misled.

        Eugene


> On the subject of journalistic use -- I appreciate Mr. Mauro's view, which
> I think is the proper one.  I admit to some confusion as to how
> journalists
> are reading a discussion list that is identified as being for con law
> professors.  In this particular case, I think the fact that the quotes
> were
> not attributed lessens the breach.  Personally, I have treated the
> conversation here as I would if we were all together in a room -- which
> means, for example, that if A says something possibly negative about
> person
> B, who's not present, you don't go to B and say "A said such and such
> about
> you."  But you might say, "Here's what's being said about you.  You might
> want to respond."
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/private/conlawprof/attachments/20000805/f4a5e9ce/attachment.htm