Today, I got a response from Avvo to yesterday’s post (and other posts) criticizing them. Below is the comment to that post.
Conrad from Avvo said,
December 5, 2010 @ 10:26 am
Charles – not every lawyer appreciates the transparency that Avvo has brought to the legal industry, yet this is exactly what consumers want and deserve. This is why we will not remove profiles from Avvo. Our commitment to transparency has made us the number one legal directory in the world.
I’m disappointed to read your recommendation responding to Avvo’s transparency with fabrications. I would strongly caution any lawyer against deliberately and proactively misrepresenting their background anywhere – on a resume, at a cocktail party or on Avvo. The professional ramifications of this highly unethical behavior are severe.
Finally, if you are having trouble accessing your account, emailcustomercare@avvo.com for assistance.
Regards,
Conrad Saam
First, I’d like to thank Conrad and Avvo for responding. However, they completely miss the point. They argue that their system provides transparency to consumers. To an extent, they’re right. However, to the extent that I, and others, believe that their ratings system is biased against solo and small firms, they’re wrong (to read my arguments concerning this bias just search “Avvo” in the search box on this blog). Moreover, there’s little transparency to a system that entices attorneys to “claim” their “profile” but doesn’t let them “unclaim” it.
Furthermore, Conrad claims that there could be severe ethical ramifications for my suggestion about how to game Avvo by spiking a profile by either deflating it to zero or inflating it to ten. I also find this contention disingenuous. If I load my own profile with nonsensical negative information, therefore lowering my score to zero and rendering my rating incredible, how is this an ethical violation? By making myself look ridiculous on a for profit and biased rating site like Avvo what ethical rules am I violating and how am I jeopardizing my license? Beats me.
As I’ve said numerous times, I don’t care if my profile is removed (or not) from Avvo. I just want to “unclaim” my profile. It’s disingenuous for Avvo to claim transparency when they don’t explain that once you “claim” your profile it’s impossible to “unclaim” it. This isn’t a level playing field for all attorneys and consumers using Avvo to find attorneys.
My advice to Avvo is simple: Allow attorneys to “unclaim” their profile. In my mind, whether or not I’m on Avvo is superfluous in light of the “claimed” profile indication, and Avvo’s refusal to permit attorneys to “unclaim” the profile.
AVVO Inside Out by Richard Rizk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYV_6VbpEv0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vVw8NCNPR4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkizZZJWDXw
Thanks for posting your Avvo info. on my website.
My key concern with Avvo, and no one associated with Avvo has answered this, is why do you not permit someone to “unclaim” their profile? I find the practice and Avvo’s inability to respond to that concern to be sleazy.
I still don’t think Avvo is worth the time and effort, which is why I’d like to “unclaim” my profile. As I’ve indicated before, I don’t care whether Avvo exists or not, and I don’t care if I’m on Avvo, I just want to “unclaim” my profile.
Sincerely,
Charles Krugel
Charles: I raised this issue with AVVO ( See part 3). Conrad did not directly address this issue.
Richard Rizk, Attorney at Law
Chuck Krugel’s response: I saw the video. It’s a B.S. contention that I own 90% of my profile but can’t “unclaim” it. Personally, I’d rather have a “0” zero rating that makes me look ridiculous on Avvo than a mediocre rating that doesn’t distinguish me from anyone else or the people who have 10s. I raised the issue of spiking my rating to 0, i.e., intentionally putting ridiculous and nonsensical information on my Avvo profile to deflate my rating to 0. Conrad responded by saying that doing so would have ramifications against my license though he wasn’t specific how it would. However, since I’m locked out of my profile, and don’t have the time or energy to expend to mess with their whole process, I’m letting this go. If Avvo should crticize me for anything and thus lower my rating, it should be because I was a sucker for claiming my profile in the first place. Still, Avvo’s claim/unclaim practice is sleazy and unprofessional, and they refuse to respond to any inquiry regarding that.
I commented earlier and wanted to add this – I’m surprised what AVVO is doing passes the ethics of the State Bars. I rank low because i don’t want to work on AVVO’s business (recruiting lawyers to give me reviews, who will then have low scores themselves, and have to recruit others, all so AVVO can profit from your hard work). An asshole lawyer a few years back asked for an endorsement, and told me i had to claim my profile first. He conveniently left out the fact that I’d be given a computer generated low rating.
Why can’t I create an LLC that ranks lawyers, and have it give me the designation of best lawyer in the USA, 100 out of 100. You know what would happen? The State Bar ethics attorneys would warn me to take it off my website or face disciplinary action. These guys need to be sued again. There should be more than a handful of causes of action.
EXTREME WARNING:
I also take stern objection to Avvo.com’s biased, self-serving and commercially motivated attorney rating system.
See the following examples:
Mark S. Britton
Avvo, Inc., Founder
Avvo Rating, Superb 9.2
http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/98101-wa-mark-britton-28995.html
Martindale.com – Unrated
http://www.martindale.com/Mark-S-Britton/1758324-lawyer.htm
Joshua M. King,
Avvo, Inc., In-House Counsel
Avvo Rating, Superb 10.0
http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/98104-wa-joshua-king-32609.html
Martindale.com – Not Available
Lisa Bloom
Avvo Legal Advisory Board
The Bloom Firm, LA
Avvo Rating, Superb 10.0
http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/91367-ca-lisa-bloom-132501.html
Martindale.com – Unrated
http://www.martindale.com/Lisa-Bloom/125519-lawyer.htm
Deborah L. Rhode
Avvo Legal Advisory Board
Stanford Law School
Avvo Rating, Superb 10.0
http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/94305-ca-deborah-rhode-74804.html
Martindale.com – Unrated
http://www.martindale.com/Deborah-L-Rhode/446027-lawyer.htm
Further, Joshua M. King materially misrepresented that he is an attorney admitted to practice in Washington State.
He holds himself out as Vice-President and General Counsel of Avvo, Inc., 705 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 600, Seattle, WA 98104, Office: 206-734-4113.
However, according to the Washington State Bar Association, Joshua M. King’s membership status is “Voluntarily Resigned.”
See https://www.mywsba.org/LawyerDirectory/LawyerProfile.aspx?Usr_ID=32468
Accordingly, Mr. King is strictly prohibited from practicing law in Washington State in any capacity, including as General Counsel of of a corporation located in Washington State.
The Unauthorized Practice of Law is an extremely serious crime in Washington State, See RCW 2.48.180, Unlawful Practice a Crime — Cause for
Discipline — Unprofessional Conduct @ http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=2.48.180
As discussed, Avvo, Inc. is in flagrant violation of the DC Bar’s Cease and Desist order to Avvo, Inc.
See, DC Bar website, Important Notice to DC Bar, @ http://www.dcbar.org/inside_the_bar/bar_news/shellMobile.cfm?filename=membership_AVVO
and, The Washington Post, Web Directory Of Attorneys Upsets D.C. Bar, March 9, 2009 @
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/08/AR2009030801530_pf.html
Further, The Internet website (www.Avvo.com), where the Company (Avvo, Inc.) and its officers (Mark S. Britton and Joshua M. King) engage in unscrupulous, unethical, and illegal conduct, including violation of various federal and state criminal statutes, including, but not limited to, Theft under RCW 9A.56.030, see http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9a.56.030 for “web scraping” and Unauthorized Practice of Law (see above).
Further, Avvo, Inc.’s actions and unauthorized listings are in violation of various other federal and state statutes, including, but not limited to, the NY Code, Article 2, Internet Security and Privacy Act, see http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/STT/2