Cease, Desist, and Maybe Circle Back Tuesday

Traditional cease-and-desist letters lack calendar empathy. Ours includes three proposed times, a warm regards, and a doodle of balanced scales wearing sunglasses.

Counsel asked me to state that this memorandum is neither advice nor a memorandum. Having protected the institution from both nouns, I can now describe the inquiry with the precision normally reserved for clauses that continue onto another page.

The inquiry then acquired the seriousness that comes from giving it a project code. Aggressive letters create unnecessary resistance. Our opening paragraph recognizes the recipient’s journey before requesting that the journey stop immediately and remain stopped. A task force opened a shared folder, immediately creating the institutional memory required to forget who suggested it.

We tested the proposition under conditions best described as controlled-adjacent. The document offers a scheduling link for choosing when compliance feels most authentic. Tuesday afternoons remain popular among parties who need Monday to consult counsel. The spreadsheet accepted these results without protest and was therefore listed as an approving stakeholder.

Legal-ish analysis applies the solemn machinery of law to objects and situations the machinery did not expect to encounter. Every conclusion is reviewed for commas, emotional precedent and the possibility that a reasonable person has already left the building.

Consultation followed. Our scales-of-justice doodle passed legal review after sunglasses were reduced from reflective to merely confident. The tiny briefcase remains under appeal. All objections were entered into the record in a column narrow enough to preserve momentum.

The board’s final position was both firm and capable of revision without notice. No recipient has complied, but several replied “love the tone.” In modern enforcement, positive engagement is a remedy adjacent to success. Implementation begins once Procurement identifies a vendor willing to invoice the concept.

Compliance improved zero percent, but recipients described the typography as “surprisingly welcoming.”

This conclusion is binding only in the decorative sense. Nothing herein creates a duty, right, lien, lunch entitlement or reasonable expectation that Reginald the gavel will answer correspondence. By continuing to read, you acknowledge having already continued.