7 ms·

How do the judges know that you are supporting the EFF and not the other way around? Does it have to be a suit or could you wear a t-shirt to indicate which sid

by rada 12y ago

How do the judges know that you are supporting the EFF and not the other way around? Does it have to be a suit or could you wear a t-shirt to indicate which side you are on?

mjgoins 12y ago
In the deeply twisted world of lawyers, anyone not wearing business clothes isn't a real person.
- happyscrappy 12y ago
  It is not just lawyers. Pick any two people at random and have them choose who they would trust, Stallman or some guy in a suit.
  - akerl_ 12y ago
    In a shocking turn of events, presentation choices play an important role in first impressions :)
    - seanp2k2 12y ago
      ...which is why, even though it's stupid, it makes a difference in your favor if you dress up to go to traffic court. Sometimes they care, sometimes they don't, but it's not usually worth the extra risk if you already own a suit, or even a dress shirt and khakis.
  - ZanyProgrammer 12y ago
    Which is ironic considering how ultra casual tech dress codes are in the Bay Area.
    - Bahamut 12y ago
      The casual dress code is still a dress code - tech is generally biased against those who dress up, which is not any different from those who stick to more traditional formal dress codes except that casual is cheaper to shop for, is more comfortable, and easier to maintain. That doesn't make anyone who adheres to one or the other dress code any better.
      - pm90 12y ago
        > That doesn't make anyone who adheres to one or the other dress code any better. Ironically, that is exactly what tech was advocating for in the first place.
      - iopq 12y ago
        It's not a dress code. It's just not adhering to another dress code. There's a difference. You don't just wear a suit RANDOMLY. Any random thing you wear is casual. Literally millions of different styles are casual, and there's like maybe five different styles of suits?
        Retric 12y ago
        Casual dress code does not include a clown costume, so it's far more constrained than your suggesting. As to suits it's one of those fractal breakdowns with a lot of varity if you get specific enough. EX: You could say fat vs skinny ties, but the there is a wide range of patterns wich fit a wide range of shirt colors. Not just Red tie on white shirt. Personally I like semi formal dress codes simply because they have a default and require minimal thought. Where casual has a lot of 'hidden' rules.
        scrollaway 12y ago
        You're wrong. When I go out, I personally feel more comfortable in good looking, "business-casual" sort of clothes. That's generally a brown vest, some black pants and slightly fancy shirt, all of which I got for a total of 20 quid at a charity shop back in the UK. And yet, that set of clothes which probably costs less as a whole than the gaming shirt my buddy was wearing at the time got me an off-hand remark of "dressing up too fancy for a geek". I'm very much a geek at heart and the guy knew it... but don't mistake the shirt-and-jeans culture for a "wear what you like" culture. It's a "wear what I like" culture, and the "what I like" is shirt and jeans.
        krschultz 12y ago
        Really? Wear a suit to your next startup interview and see what the negative reaction is. I worked at a company where anything other than jeans was frowned upon. You know what, in August I'd rather not wear jeans. Dress pants are way more comfortable (hint, they breath better).
  - iopq 12y ago
    Stallman, duh. He looks like a real hacker. I'd never trust a guy in a suit to code anything.
    - krapp 12y ago
      Looking like a real hacker !== really hacking
  - drawkbox 12y ago
    True but on the flipside, me personally I trust someone that isn't in a suit (maybe not as hacker look like Stallman) more than someone in a suit. I think it is a generational thing, dressing up to me is mostly getting into your sheep B.S. clothing to make whatever you are doing look better. I have also been working in the game industry where suits usually mean you aren't a good fit or it is someone to probably not trust i.e. publisher/salesman. I think for court you should put on your best, but in most cases I distrust the suit more than I trust it.
    - 01Michael10 12y ago
      I am not so sure it's generational as I assume you are on the younger side... Forty-five here and I don't trust people in suits to much (or really religious people).
    - meric 12y ago
      Sometimes I'd like to rebel a bit and dress in a suit to a tech meet up where everyone else is in T-shirts and shorts. :)
- rayiner 12y ago
  Wearing a suit is a sign of respect to the court, and there's a rational justification for the convention. Courts, you see, and federal courts in particular, don't really have any power. They have a few marshals, but by and large they're not directly in charge of the people with the guns. Courts have power only because everyone agrees to abide by their authority. Wearing a suit, standing when a judge enters the room, addressing the judge as "your Honor," is all part of a ritual where we acknowledge the solemnity of the proceeding and collectively reinforce the binding authority of the court and its judgments. The details of the ritual are, of course, arbitrary. What matters is that everyone partakes in the ritual. The practical significance is this: if the judge rules against the government in this case, the executive branch will have a choice to follow the order or not. It is indeed a choice--the executive branch has all the guns, after all. The price of ignoring the order is a loss of moral authority and public support. The purpose of the ritual surrounding the proceedings is to make this expensive. You want people to be offended and feel violated that anyone would ignore authority that they collectively sanctioned by engaging in this ritual.
  - afarrell 12y ago
    Aside from Andrew Jackson and the trail of tears, do you know of any other examples of the federal executive branch not following judicial order?
    - rayiner 12y ago
      A few: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lyle-denniston/gingrich-supreme-court_b_1017418.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lyle-denniston/gingrich-suprem.... A few more times, e.g. with Japanese internment, the court has capitulated and decided in a way that aligned with what was going to happen anyway. Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_switch_in_time_that_saved_nine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_switch_in_time_that_saved_n....
      - rmxt 12y ago
        I can't shake the thought that all of these came about because of the executive's direct lack of respect for the judiciary, not because of any perception by any executive office that the general population lacks respect for the court. The latter seems to be the takeaway point with these pieces of evidence for past transgressions. I really doubt that more instances of FDR-like behavior will or won't come about because of slight shifts in courtroom decorum. To make a value judgement here: I think it's a perfectly reasonable thing if courts became more accessible to the general population. Whether it be through relaxed attire, language, or physical layouts -- discarding some of the cultural detritus of rituals of years past wouldn't bring the court system to it's knees because of a lack of respect. Rather, it would show the general population that judicial on-goings aren't some esoteric world that they need to think sacred. (Because really, why should they? The courts are for and by the people.) Accessibility would in turn bring understanding, and understanding would turn the current atmosphere of detachment (re: general public from the courts) into a more meaningful respect.
- corford 12y ago
  Suit jacket, smart dark jeans and an EFF t-shirt then :)
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
diafygi 12y ago
The government only has lawyers, so pretty much everyone in the audience (save for the occasional law student) is by default in support of the EFF. All we need you to do is show up 30 minutes before, wear a suit, be quiet, and watch.
JustGotHere 12y ago
The EFF should sell ties.
- schoen 12y ago
  Thanks for the suggestion, I'll pass it along to our membership director.

by rada 12y ago

How do the judges know that you are supporting the EFF and not the other way around? Does it have to be a suit or could you wear a t-shirt to indicate which side you are on?

mjgoins 12y ago

In the deeply twisted world of lawyers, anyone not wearing business clothes isn't a real person.

happyscrappy 12y ago
It is not just lawyers. Pick any two people at random and have them choose who they would trust, Stallman or some guy in a suit.
- akerl_ 12y ago
  In a shocking turn of events, presentation choices play an important role in first impressions :)
  - seanp2k2 12y ago
    ...which is why, even though it's stupid, it makes a difference in your favor if you dress up to go to traffic court. Sometimes they care, sometimes they don't, but it's not usually worth the extra risk if you already own a suit, or even a dress shirt and khakis.
- ZanyProgrammer 12y ago
  Which is ironic considering how ultra casual tech dress codes are in the Bay Area.
  - Bahamut 12y ago
    The casual dress code is still a dress code - tech is generally biased against those who dress up, which is not any different from those who stick to more traditional formal dress codes except that casual is cheaper to shop for, is more comfortable, and easier to maintain. That doesn't make anyone who adheres to one or the other dress code any better.
    - pm90 12y ago
      > That doesn't make anyone who adheres to one or the other dress code any better. Ironically, that is exactly what tech was advocating for in the first place.
    - iopq 12y ago
      It's not a dress code. It's just not adhering to another dress code. There's a difference. You don't just wear a suit RANDOMLY. Any random thing you wear is casual. Literally millions of different styles are casual, and there's like maybe five different styles of suits?
      - Retric 12y ago
        Casual dress code does not include a clown costume, so it's far more constrained than your suggesting. As to suits it's one of those fractal breakdowns with a lot of varity if you get specific enough. EX: You could say fat vs skinny ties, but the there is a wide range of patterns wich fit a wide range of shirt colors. Not just Red tie on white shirt. Personally I like semi formal dress codes simply because they have a default and require minimal thought. Where casual has a lot of 'hidden' rules.
      - scrollaway 12y ago
        You're wrong. When I go out, I personally feel more comfortable in good looking, "business-casual" sort of clothes. That's generally a brown vest, some black pants and slightly fancy shirt, all of which I got for a total of 20 quid at a charity shop back in the UK. And yet, that set of clothes which probably costs less as a whole than the gaming shirt my buddy was wearing at the time got me an off-hand remark of "dressing up too fancy for a geek". I'm very much a geek at heart and the guy knew it... but don't mistake the shirt-and-jeans culture for a "wear what you like" culture. It's a "wear what I like" culture, and the "what I like" is shirt and jeans.
      - krschultz 12y ago
        Really? Wear a suit to your next startup interview and see what the negative reaction is. I worked at a company where anything other than jeans was frowned upon. You know what, in August I'd rather not wear jeans. Dress pants are way more comfortable (hint, they breath better).
- iopq 12y ago
  Stallman, duh. He looks like a real hacker. I'd never trust a guy in a suit to code anything.
  - krapp 12y ago
    Looking like a real hacker !== really hacking
- drawkbox 12y ago
  True but on the flipside, me personally I trust someone that isn't in a suit (maybe not as hacker look like Stallman) more than someone in a suit. I think it is a generational thing, dressing up to me is mostly getting into your sheep B.S. clothing to make whatever you are doing look better. I have also been working in the game industry where suits usually mean you aren't a good fit or it is someone to probably not trust i.e. publisher/salesman. I think for court you should put on your best, but in most cases I distrust the suit more than I trust it.
  - 01Michael10 12y ago
    I am not so sure it's generational as I assume you are on the younger side... Forty-five here and I don't trust people in suits to much (or really religious people).
  - meric 12y ago
    Sometimes I'd like to rebel a bit and dress in a suit to a tech meet up where everyone else is in T-shirts and shorts. :)
rayiner 12y ago
Wearing a suit is a sign of respect to the court, and there's a rational justification for the convention. Courts, you see, and federal courts in particular, don't really have any power. They have a few marshals, but by and large they're not directly in charge of the people with the guns. Courts have power only because everyone agrees to abide by their authority. Wearing a suit, standing when a judge enters the room, addressing the judge as "your Honor," is all part of a ritual where we acknowledge the solemnity of the proceeding and collectively reinforce the binding authority of the court and its judgments. The details of the ritual are, of course, arbitrary. What matters is that everyone partakes in the ritual. The practical significance is this: if the judge rules against the government in this case, the executive branch will have a choice to follow the order or not. It is indeed a choice--the executive branch has all the guns, after all. The price of ignoring the order is a loss of moral authority and public support. The purpose of the ritual surrounding the proceedings is to make this expensive. You want people to be offended and feel violated that anyone would ignore authority that they collectively sanctioned by engaging in this ritual.
- afarrell 12y ago
  Aside from Andrew Jackson and the trail of tears, do you know of any other examples of the federal executive branch not following judicial order?
  - rayiner 12y ago
    A few: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lyle-denniston/gingrich-supreme-court_b_1017418.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lyle-denniston/gingrich-suprem.... A few more times, e.g. with Japanese internment, the court has capitulated and decided in a way that aligned with what was going to happen anyway. Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_switch_in_time_that_saved_nine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_switch_in_time_that_saved_n....
    - rmxt 12y ago
      I can't shake the thought that all of these came about because of the executive's direct lack of respect for the judiciary, not because of any perception by any executive office that the general population lacks respect for the court. The latter seems to be the takeaway point with these pieces of evidence for past transgressions. I really doubt that more instances of FDR-like behavior will or won't come about because of slight shifts in courtroom decorum. To make a value judgement here: I think it's a perfectly reasonable thing if courts became more accessible to the general population. Whether it be through relaxed attire, language, or physical layouts -- discarding some of the cultural detritus of rituals of years past wouldn't bring the court system to it's knees because of a lack of respect. Rather, it would show the general population that judicial on-goings aren't some esoteric world that they need to think sacred. (Because really, why should they? The courts are for and by the people.) Accessibility would in turn bring understanding, and understanding would turn the current atmosphere of detachment (re: general public from the courts) into a more meaningful respect.
corford 12y ago
Suit jacket, smart dark jeans and an EFF t-shirt then :)
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

diafygi 12y ago

The government only has lawyers, so pretty much everyone in the audience (save for the occasional law student) is by default in support of the EFF. All we need you to do is show up 30 minutes before, wear a suit, be quiet, and watch.

JustGotHere 12y ago

The EFF should sell ties.

schoen 12y ago
Thanks for the suggestion, I'll pass it along to our membership director.