I had hoped for unparalleled blogfodder from the US Tax Court Judicial Conference, the first such reiteration of Camelot in seven years.

There’s so much, but it’s all off-the-record.

I’m overjoyed but frustrated.

Tax Court counsel’s tale of her explication of one of my blogposts to a Judge befogged by same is priceless, but my lips (and two-fingered typing) are forever sealed.

And all I can recount here is that I laughed with Judge Holmes, but the substance of our conversation must remain buried even deeper than Deep Background.

STJ Lewis (“That Magnificent Name”) Carluzzo and I both got the spelling of our shared name for the same reason, but the story must remain untold.

And Judge Wherry was very unwhimsical, although he appreciated my appreciation of a certain opinion of his; but his remarks I cannot repeat here.

Sorry, everybody, I know this is self-indulgent; I am no fan of name-droppers who allege they hobnob with the famous or prominent, but say nothing about their hobnobbery. And such of them who do tell tales I like even less.

Now off to dinner and the speech by Justice Scalia.

I promise, blogposts like this will only happen once every seven years.