Detroit lawyer DD should not be representing criminal defendants.
DD left this comment on this post:
“I agree with these guest posts you really don’t get anything expect for me content you don’t agree with or matches up with your site.”
One of a criminal-defense lawyer’s core competencies is the ability to string together a series of letters into what we in the business call “words,” and then to string those words together into “sentences” with what is known as “meaning.” (It is helpful also to be able to string those sentences together into paragraphs, but that’s the advanced course.)
Writing a meaningful sentence is a matter of a) having an idea; and b) converting that idea to written words in a way that the reader gets a close approximation of the idea. Converting ideas to written words is much the same as translating them to spoken words, except it’s easier because the writer has more opportunities than the speaker to edit.
You can see why getting ideas and converting them to words might be important to professionals whose job is advocating for clients’ freedom. If the criminal-defense lawyer has no idea, she’s a gelatinous cube. If she has an idea but can’t translate it to words, she might as well have no idea. In the criminal courthouse, pantomime alone seldom carries the day.
“[Y]ou really don’t get anything expect for me content you don’t agree with of matches up with your site”? Other than “except” for “expect,” which could be mere dyslexia, and excusable, I don’t know where to begin translating this.
Most of us start converting ideas to words at about age one, and practice every day from then on. There are lots of lawyers who don’t write well, but anyone who can’t form an intelligible sentence has no business representing human beings whose freedom is on the line.
So, judging from his comment, DD should find other work.
DD probably paid someone to leave that comment for him under his name; he’s still responsible for it. And the lack of judgment he has displayed by allowing someone to post unintelligible comment spam under his name renders him equally unfit to have human beings’ freedom in his hands.
(How’s the outsourcing working out for you, David? I’ll offer you The Popehat Deal: apologize for the comment spam and provide emails or other documentation identifying the marketeer he hired who produced the comment spam and proving their responsibility for this, and I’ll change your name in this post. “Because lawyers who hire bad marketeers have bad judgment, but bad marketeers are vermin, and ought to be stomped.”)
[Update: DD took advantage of The Popehat Deal. He apologized, and forwarded me this email from Jared Pomranky at Net Profit Marketing, who was handling his marketing at the time:
From: Jared Pomranky <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 11:33 AM
Subject: Re: link
It was in November of 2012 so it very well could have been us. The sentence doesn't seem inline with our work, however, as we don't outsource our work to other countries and we don't support comment spam. Any marketers that work for me are native English speakers in the U.S. and if they are going to comment on any blogs, they're instructed to read the blog and add to the conversation. That clearly didn't happen here and it's going to be addressed. I can kind of see where they were going with the comment but it looks like it was rushed and not reviewed before posting.
The comment was never approved so it didn't get posted. The only thing that is posted is the blog post and there's not much we can do about that besides having other pages rank higher than that page for your name. I did several searches and couldn't find that page within the first 3 pages.
I think the blog post was a little over the top but if you're going to take him up on the Popehat Deal of throwing the marketer under the bus, you can probably just forward him this email. I stand by our work and will own up to our mistakes.
Net Profit Marketing
Internet Marketing for Your Bottom Line
For a guy who "stands up to his work and will own up to his mistakes," Pomranky is a weaselly bullshitter.
Either you do spam comments or you don't—and commenting on blogs to market lawyers, which he admits, is spamming comments.
Either the comment was posted at his behest or it wasn't—"it very well could have been" is not owning up.
And when DD's (very common) name was in this post it popped up on the first page of a search for "[DD] lawyer,” and in the fifth position of a search for “[DD] Detroit lawyer”—typical searches that a potential client would conduct. So when Pomranky writes, “I did several searches and couldn’t find that page within the first 3 pages,” he’s either lying or doesn’t know enough about his business to conduct the sort of search that matters to a lawyer marketing himself online.
Beware. Be very ware.]