As the uproar mounted, Barnes began his much-needed apology tour, writing law firms a mercifully non-rambling mea culpa that concluded with a key announcement:

I take this issue very seriously. It has become clear to me that I need to take some time to reflect on my comments. To that end, I have decided to take an extended leave of absence from BCG Attorney Search to reflect on my actions, and I will no longer be making submissions on behalf of our candidates. I am very, very sorry for any offense this article has caused.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3602901&forum_id=2#33217155)

But it also seems like he writes his screeds while high on cocaine and other drugs.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3602901&forum_id=2#33217535)

Do you think he's actually stepping down as a result of this? Really doesn't seem like a big deal tbh.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3602901&forum_id=2#33218105)

Edit: Nvm. Lol.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3602901&forum_id=2#33217177)

For a guy whose business is based on building relationships with prospective laterals and the law firms that might hire them, Barnes just keeps going out of his way to make public statements that only seem to alienate everyone he’d theoretically hope to attract. He’s waxed philosophic about whether or not poor black people can have the work ethic required for Biglaw and told attorneys to avoid anything that might suggest they aren’t a white, heterosexual male. One could imagine a charitable reading where he’s just decrying the ugly yet persistent biases of law firm hiring, but he never seems to make those connections as much as he gives them further currency.

Perhaps he thinks that once he crosses the 9,000-word threshold, no one is going to bother to read up to the point where he starts going into how important it is to provide a phrenology map in your résumé or whatever his bugaboo of the week happens to be.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3602901&forum_id=2#33217295)

i've said this before, but the guy probably gets coked out of his gourd before writing these rants.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3602901&forum_id=2#33217195)

here is the passage that finally brought him down:

“If you have not noticed by now, most legal recruiters are women, and most are quite attractive and fit. This is because they are in positions that involve public relations—sort of like an on-air television newscaster. There is nothing wrong with the fact that most law firms put people like this in these positions because they are the public face of the law firm. What is problematical, though, is that some of these people can also—occasionally—be a little ditzy and not have the other sorts of qualifications that would make them qualified for the job. Not only do they sometimes have more beauty and fewer brains, but they also may have more beauty and less interest in people, less ability to connect with people, and similar negative characteristics. This means they expect people to treat them as if they are special and sometimes are more focused on themselves than their jobs.

It is not uncommon for recruiting coordinators to use their workspaces as a hunting ground for mates—and it works. Many recruiting coordinators marry (or get married to) associates and partners inside of the law firm. This is what happens when attractive and successful people are put in confined spaces 10 hours a day. Once a legal recruiting coordinator gets close to an associate or partner in the firm, the recruiting coordinator may start playing favorites—and often does. People who are close to the associate or partner may get special treatment when applying to the firm, for example. If there is tension in the job of the associate or partner (i.e., getting fired, getting a bad performance review, or leaving), this can affect the performance of the recruiting coordinator a great deal.”

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3602901&forum_id=2#33217198)

This article is offensive and sexist, and Harrison Barnes, you should be ashamed to have published this.

This article is extremely sexist, not to mention full of overbroad, inaccurate statements offered without any supporting evidence. Qualified candidates should know better than to take advice from anyone spouting this sort of nonsense.

If this article is any evidence of how you treat and regard these professionals, then perhaps that is the reason you don’t receive the feedback or responsiveness you’d like, not because of their own skills or attributes.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3602901&forum_id=2#33217289)

It's stupid as hell to write this, because it's basically telegraphing you do a shitty job, firms ignore your overtures and your pitched candidates, and you are clearly just bitter about it.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3602901&forum_id=2#33217288)

Good move jackass.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3602901&forum_id=2#33217994)

also he's prolly rich as fuck and now gets to hit up all sorts of hot biglaw hiring coordinators on the pretext of "apologizing" or whatever

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3602901&forum_id=2#33218189)

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/harrison-barnes-2016-extension-free-agent/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3602901&forum_id=2#33218440)