A note I received from an inside source at the ADR Society's representative firm (Lyons, Tigers, Behrs, & Ohmi) read as follows:
RE: ADR Society v. Ricks
The ADR Society felt that from the looks of excitement, diversion, and general relish on your face during the negotiation intramural today, you had too much fun. They feel that the exercise wasn't supposed to be so entertaining, and that you should probably learn to better hide how much you really enjoyed the opportunity to get a taste of what real-world negation could feel like. They feel that you've intentionally inflicted emotional distress upon them by not reacting appropriately. You seemed to enjoy when you discovered that you're actually the type to go on the offensive and push to reach your "client's" objectives. You didn't seem to mind when you felt intimidated by the 2Ls that you faced in the second round (of the two) that clearly had a much more coherent game-plan than your own team. You seemed to have fun working together with your teammate, Spencer, who's from Payson, UT and is a very cool guy (but you know that already, why would I tell that to you? Oh well.) The judges, practicing attorneys from the area, could tell that you weren't highly experienced at this, but that your lack of experience didn't prevent you from acting like nothing was wrong and having "a blast." As your friend and informant, I'd recommend:
- That you not participate next year unless you intend on having fun with it again.
- If you should happen to have won the competition and be qualified to move on to the regional competition in Virginia Beach, I advise you to chill out and not enjoy it so much.
- That you not post anything about this on that weird blog of yours. I know no one reads it, but if word happened to get back to our client, you could get yourself into even more trouble.
- Go eat some cookies.
So, as you can see, I competed in the intramural negotiation competition today. It was really quite fun. Spencer and I represented a man that was being recruited by a fictional university for a business program (round 1), and then we also represented a union who represented TAs that were getting hosed on their monthly stipend and on the amount they had to work (round 2). Both pairs we faced off against were girls, the round 1 team were 1Ls like us, and the second round team were 2Ls. It's funny, but I was telling someone the other day that there is a visible difference between 1Ls and 2Ls/3Ls. You can just tell who has more time. The first round was the easier of the two fact patterns, but I felt like Spencer and I might have done a lot better in the second round. THe problem with that is that I feel like our opponents did better that second round as well. I don't know what exactly the judges were looking for, but based upon the feedback we got in the first round, I really doubt that Spencer and I will "win." I was surprised that I didn't get more flustered. I tend to have that problem when facing situations like this where there are a lot of unknown factors. It was tough, but quite fun.
(Yeah obviously it's tough to work all the stuff about my real-life experiences into these dumb fake cases. Whatever.) K, bye...... for real.