Juries are also the one thing that my friend from a Roman law country, who knows what she's talking about w/r/t comparative constitutional study, says that she is jealous of common law for. Juries, grand and petit, are a *special, unique* feature of the Anglo-American legal tradition

panels of locals making decisions of truth and innocence or guilt is slow! they get it wrong sometimes! but this process is so ancient that it predates the idea of the king's justice. it's older in England than divine right or hereditary monarchy.

What are you even DOING over there

this would slap, actually

WHAT

we need, as a society, to make this shameful and clearly out of bounds again

very true

always, always grow the pie

I think having some minimums, rather than a distribution with a max number of each, would rule. Setting a cap on each and forcing everyone to pick a box (or putting them in one) is outright wrong

Seems odd to me to pre-set that rule. And it would probably be grounds for a successful lawsuit in the US—quotas are pretty specifically out of bounds here

That really doesn't sound standard for academic conferences, at least in North America and (I think) in the UK. Typically they are pretty strictly evaluated on the content of the proposed talk and how it fits the conference themes/tracks. Couldn't say about other kinds of conferences though

it's the smell of freedom

and the chemicals they treat the dash with