You certainly raise a valid point. I found info on how the Minnesota state bar views the matter here: http://www.courts.state.mn.us/lprb/05bbarts/bb0205.html ht

You certainly raise a valid point. I found info on how the Minnesota state bar views the matter here: http://www.courts.state.mn.us/lprb/05bbarts/bb0205.html http://www.courts.state.mn.us/lprb/05bbarts/bb0205.html It's not that I miss the import of what you're saying, it's that I am suggesting that making a sound determination of the ethics of the situation is not an insurmountable obstacle. If it turns out that it's a bad idea, that's okay. Not every good act plays out as we intend. I think it is worth reiterating your point that Arrington is a lawyer, and that said it seems fair to presume he's acting in good faith with knowledge of these issues. [edited for clarity]