|
nern posted:so, i did pretty well on the LSAT (167)
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2012 15:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 13:23 |
|
|
Direwolf posted:Also I got a (summer) job whoo Congrats!
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2012 16:24
|
|
|
Argh I want my grades. They're supposed to come out within the next couple days. Don't laugh at me if they're bad please.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2012 21:14
|
|
|
Baruch Obamawitz posted:Oh my god yes. It's been four loving years of feeling like I've got absolutely nothing done. There's no sense of closure; no sense of accomplishment. As soon as I finish an application, boom on to the next one, ad infinitum, until I leave the examining corps. That's pretty much just like a patent prep/pros job too, except instead of lording over lowly patent attorneys now you'll be groveling at the feet of patent examiners to try and get them to allow the lovely little incremental "improvement" that your client wants to patent.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2012 21:23
|
|
|
gret posted:That's pretty much just like a patent prep/pros job too, except instead of lording over lowly patent attorneys now you'll be groveling at the feet of patent examiners to try and get them to allow the lovely little incremental "improvement" that your client wants to patent. I dunno, I feel like I get enough variety with patent drafting, patent prosecution, clearance opinions, due diligence, portfolio analysis, litigation technical support, and various other stuff that my job has to beat the soul crushing boredom of citing the same prior art references against the same inventions day in and day out for years at a time. I mean, don't get me wrong, there are plenty of valid reasons to hate being an attorney, and in particular a patent prosecutor, but I'm pretty sure patent prosecution beats examination in the "feeling of boredom and futility" column.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2012 21:38
|
|
|
I guess depending on your firm and practice, you may also have to grovel at the feet of or take the abuse of in-house counsel or other clients. I've got an in-house counsel that went on a massive power trip after leaving a law firm with a reputation of abusing their associates.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2012 21:39
|
|
|
Soothing Vapors posted:167 isn't impressive with a good UGPA, let alone with a poo poo one. retake This. I have no idea why that guy thought 167 was good. Congrats on being below the bottom quarter for every legitimate law school.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2012 22:23
|
|
|
HiddenReplaced posted:This. I have no idea why that guy thought 167 was good. Congrats on being below the bottom quarter for every legitimate law school. A 167 was a legitimately good score. 10 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2012 22:32
|
|
|
HiddenReplaced posted:This. I have no idea why that guy thought 167 was good. Congrats on being below the bottom quarter for every legitimate law school. He's above the lower quartile for several T14s, if that's what you're saying. And he probably thought 167 was good because it's a 94th/95th percentile score, which your average person would think is a good score. He just doesn't realize that there are very few law schools that give you good job prospects and with his grades he needs to do better to have a good shot at them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2012 22:33
|
|
|
MoFauxHawk posted:He's above the lower quartile for several T14s, if that's what you're saying. It was not. If that had been what I was saying, that's what I would have said.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2012 23:28
|
|
|
From what I understand everyone crams for the bar in July. Unfortunately, I begin work in July; do you think its feasible to do the bulk of my studying in June and sort of coast in July?
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2012 23:29
|
|
|
HiddenReplaced posted:It was not. If that had been what I was saying, that's what I would have said. Then what does "below the bottom quarter" mean? That makes even less sense since below the bottom quarter would be even worse than below the lower quartile, and he's above the lower quartile for 5 T13s. Edit: Evilweasel, Berkeley's lower quartile was 162 in 2011, Penn's was 166, and Stanford's was 167, and I wasn't even including that one in my count. Obviously with his grades he can't get into those schools anyway, but that's not the point. MoFauxHawk fucked around with this message at 00:39 on Jan 11, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 00:33
|
|
|
MoFauxHawk posted:Then what does "below the bottom quarter" mean? That makes even less sense since below the bottom quarter would be even worse than below the lower quartile. He means the lowest T14 schools are not "legitimate law schools".
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 00:34
|
|
|
fougera posted:From what I understand everyone crams for the bar in July. Unfortunately, I begin work in July; do you think its feasible to do the bulk of my studying in June and sort of coast in July? It's really a June + July thing. If you cram in June you will forget everything by the end of July. Don't expect to do zero prep during July and pass. That said, lots of people work while doing bar prep. It's doable but tough and you will hate your life.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 00:35
|
|
|
HiddenReplaced posted:This. I have no idea why that guy thought 167 was good. Congrats on being below the bottom quarter for every legitimate law school. I went to a perfectly good law school and got a perfectly good law job with a 167 mister  Seriously though, retake it. I went seven years ago. Edit: maybe six.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 04:29
|
|
|
diospadre posted:It's really a June + July thing. If you cram in June you will forget everything by the end of July. Don't expect to do zero prep during July and pass. I worked pretty much full time in June, then took July off and passed without any problems. It wasn't really that hard. (Doing the reverse would have been terrible though.) VVVVVV: this was critical to my successful bar preparation. Kalman fucked around with this message at 04:41 on Jan 11, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 04:39
|
|
|
diospadre posted:It's really a June + July thing. If you cram in June you will forget everything by the end of July. Don't expect to do zero prep during July and pass. I STRONGLY recommend doing the bar prep videos on your own time by downloading them and playing them back faster.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 04:40
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:He means the lowest T14 schools are not "legitimate law schools". Good thing he went to Duke
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 04:52
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:T14 schools Georgetown sympathizer spotted.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 04:58
|
|
|
Direwolf posted:Good thing he went to Duke Evilweasel is correct, he gets me. As of the class of 2014, Duke is no longer a legitimate law school. Back me up here Sulecrist. Also, class of 2014 is the first class in like 6 years without a lawgoon in it. Coincidence? HiddenReplaced fucked around with this message at 05:05 on Jan 11, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 05:01
|
|
|
HiddenReplaced posted:Evilweasel is correct, he gets me. yeah our 1Ls are poo poo, I'm sad to say. the men are dumb and the women are dumpy. and their 25% LSAT is a shoddy-as 167. in my year, our bottom quartile held a bracing 168. class of 2011 had their balls in their mouth on test day I'm sure, but anyway they applied in goldener, saladier days.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 06:45
|
|
|
Sulecrist posted:saladier days. You don't make friends with salad.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 07:06
|
|
|
BigHead posted:I went to a perfectly good law school and got a perfectly good law job* with a 167 mister I also got a 167 (or was it a 168? I don't remember), went to the same law school, one year before bighead (I think Bighead is my evil twin) and I'm in a warmer place, but it is still the IE. Take it again!
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 07:29
|
|
|
sigmachiev posted:You don't make friends with salad. Maybe not at Berkeley.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 07:29
|
|
|
HiddenReplaced posted:Evilweasel is correct, he gets me. MoFauxHawk is, in fact, a 2014 representative at my prestigious institution, though I'll leave defending his year to him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 08:13
|
|
|
As the Pie King here, I have to say that I think my subjects/classmates here are really cool. And there's a lot of pretty girls, despite what everybody told me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 13:37
|
|
|
MoFauxHawk posted:As the Pie King here, I have to say that I think my subjects/classmates here are really cool. And there's a lot of pretty girls, despite what everybody told me. ...and that was how the Law Thread learned that President PIEKING was suffering from an irreversible, degenerative disease of the optic nerve
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 15:03
|
|
|
I feel like I've seen this chart before somewhere. http://abovethelaw.com/2012/01/the-value-of-the-ll-m-degree-still-low/
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 17:36
|
|
|
10-8 posted:I feel like I've seen this chart before somewhere. quote:Photo credit: some dude on TLS Jerks! Also, I laughed at the fact that comments are automatically hidden "for my protection". What, am I going to be hurt by inadvertently reading internet comments? Hahaha what is this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 18:05
|
|
|
I think they started doing that after a virus was embedded into a comment and infected a bunch of people who automatically loaded it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 18:11
|
|
|
Oh wow, I take back my snarkiness then.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 18:12
|
|
|
zzyzx posted:I think they started doing that after a virus was embedded into a comment and infected a bunch of people who automatically loaded it. Also the ATL comments are chock full of enough crazy racism and other bigotries that, more than this thread, make me wonder what profession I'm getting myself into.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 19:13
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:Also the ATL comments are chock full of enough crazy racism and other bigotries that, more than this thread, make me wonder what profession I'm getting myself into.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 19:30
|
|
|
Soothing Vapors posted:...and that was how the Law Thread learned that President PIEKING was suffering from an irreversible, degenerative disease of the optic nerve Hey, most people think I'm pretty harsh with this kind of thing, actually. Also gently caress ATL for crediting a TLS person. Whoever made that chart should contact them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 19:35
|
|
|
MoFauxHawk posted:
Who made the original flowcharts, anyway? Does anyone know?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 19:38
|
|
|
entris posted:Who made the original flowcharts, anyway? Does anyone know? Linguica?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 20:14
|
|
|
entris posted:Who made the original flowcharts, anyway? Does anyone know?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 20:17
|
|
|
What about the big gently caress-off flowchart?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 20:44
|
|
|
Heh the LLM flowchart made it onto TaxProf blog: http://taxprof.typepad.com/
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2012 22:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 13:23 |
|
|
entris posted:Heh the LLM flowchart made it onto TaxProf blog: http://taxprof.typepad.com/ Goons are changing the world man!
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2012 00:21
|
|
