Any risk in telling a school you're unhappy with them? Forum

[Regionality]

Anyway folks, I'm not really looking for your approval or disapproval for if I have a legitimate complaint or not...I'm interested if there is risk in sending the letter and what the risk might be and what the best approach would be.

I like the advice of waiting on it for a while, sending a snail-mail letter, staying professional, perhaps rewording any reference to LSN/TLS data so it doesn't sound authoritative, merely speculative, wording it as positive advice/suggestions rather than complaints/whining. Thanks to all those that gave positive, meaningful advice. Thanks to those as well who said I shouldn't send it (and for the various reasons you put forward) I appreciate that advice as well and will take it into consideration...though I have a feeling that I do believe too strongly is speaking up to just sit on these thoughts w/o saying anything.

For anyone who feels I am acting self-entitled, all I can say is I think if you knew me you wouldn't think this. I got into schools above their 75%ile and got no money from some of them and didn't feel I was mistreated...the gripe is in the details, so just keep that in mind.

With that being said, barring any new, compelling thoughts, I'm ending my contribution to this thread.

/thread

[trialjunky]

I don't feel I deserved it, I feel like it was dumb and seemingly unfair of them to do it this way. Would you not feel mistreated if you saw these data? I'm legitimately interested...you wouldn't feel upset? If not, why?

What part of you do NOT DESERVE anything, dont you understand? God, you have some serious self-entitlement issues. A scholarship is a priveldge that just wasn't extended to you and I can guarentee if they were reading this they're happy as hell that they didn't waste their money. They told you that you were nominated for a scholarship not that you received one.

Also, checking out the numbers for people who HAVE gotten scholarships doesnt say much about what you should or shouldnt get. You don't have their whole packet. You dont know what school they came from, what their LORs were like, what their PS was about and how well it was written or anything else their packet was made up of. Stop worrying about other people and what they got...just Keysia Cole it and let it go.

[SaintClarence27]

[

I got waitlisted to Minnesota with a 3.6/167, so no, I wouldn't feel the same way. There are a lot of variables - when you applied in the cycle, for instance. I made it a point to only worry about the schools that wanted me there, and I'm happy with where I've ended up. As for #1, I meant nontraditional, not URM - though I wouldn't be surprised if that were a URM that clicked the wrong box on LSN.

[Sias]

Anyway folks, I'm not really looking for your approval or disapproval for if I have a legitimate complaint or not...I'm interested if there is risk in sending the letter and what the risk might be and what the best approach would be.

Unfortunately there is going to be a direct correlation between amount of risk and legitimacy of complaint here. The less legitimate your complaint is, the higher the risk. This is true in most cases, and why I initially asked for details before contributing anything.

I think that myself and several other posters have done an excellent job demonstrating that your complaints are ill-founded. Any letter referencing these complaints is going to carry some risk, and you need to ask yourself, "Is this worth it?" Personally, I think that the answer is unequivocally "no" in this case, but the decision rests with you and you alone. However, before you do anything, read this article about the Stern student who sent his would-be professor a complaint. If you can't fathom the similarities then there's nothing left to say except bonne chance.

http://deadspin.com/5477230/nyu-busines ... il-flaming

[trialjunky]

Subject: Any risk in telling a school you're unhappy with them?

I don't feel I deserved it, I feel like it was dumb and seemingly unfair of them to do it this way. Would you not feel mistreated if you saw these data? I'm legitimately interested...you wouldn't feel upset? If not, why?

What part of you do NOT DESERVE anything, dont you understand? God, you have some serious self-entitlement issues. A scholarship is a priveldge that just wasn't extended to you and I can guarentee if they were reading this they're happy as hell that they didn't waste their money. They told you that you were nominated for a scholarship not that you received one.

Also, checking out the numbers for people who HAVE gotten scholarships doesnt say much about what you should or shouldnt get. You don't have their whole packet. You dont know what school they came from, what their LORs were like, what their PS was about and how well it was written or anything else their packet was made up of. Stop worrying about other people and what they got...just Keysia Cole it and let it go.

What part of "I don't feel I deserved" it made you say "What part of you do not deserve anything don't you understand"?

I don't get that...I don't think I deserve anything...I think it was pretty stupid and unfair how they did it. What part of thinking something is stupid and unfair leads you to believe I thought I deserved it?

If I thought I was owed it that would be a whole different story. But based on the information I have seen, I do think it was very offputting how they handled their admissions process, a process that was very different from any other school I applied to and very different from most stories I have heard through friends and TLS.

Disagree?

If you've got something to say, you should just say it. What's the point of pm'ing if your going to reiterate your pity party?

[Regionality]

Subject: Any risk in telling a school you're unhappy with them?

I don't feel I deserved it, I feel like it was dumb and seemingly unfair of them to do it this way. Would you not feel mistreated if you saw these data? I'm legitimately interested...you wouldn't feel upset? If not, why?

What part of you do NOT DESERVE anything, dont you understand? God, you have some serious self-entitlement issues. A scholarship is a priveldge that just wasn't extended to you and I can guarentee if they were reading this they're happy as hell that they didn't waste their money. They told you that you were nominated for a scholarship not that you received one.

Also, checking out the numbers for people who HAVE gotten scholarships doesnt say much about what you should or shouldnt get. You don't have their whole packet. You dont know what school they came from, what their LORs were like, what their PS was about and how well it was written or anything else their packet was made up of. Stop worrying about other people and what they got...just Keysia Cole it and let it go.

What part of "I don't feel I deserved" it made you say "What part of you do not deserve anything don't you understand"?

I don't get that...I don't think I deserve anything...I think it was pretty stupid and unfair how they did it. What part of thinking something is stupid and unfair leads you to believe I thought I deserved it?

If I thought I was owed it that would be a whole different story. But based on the information I have seen, I do think it was very offputting how they handled their admissions process, a process that was very different from any other school I applied to and very different from most stories I have heard through friends and TLS.

Disagree?

If you've got something to say, you should just say it. What's the point of pm'ing if your going to reiterate your pity party?

Are you fucking kidding me? You posted a PM in this thread? I PMed you because I wanted to discuss this with you and you alone, and because what I was writing WAS redundant, I didn't want to bore everyone else with what they would probably view as the same discussion, but I took specific issue with you accusing me of something you have no idea about. Go away.

edit: Remind me if I ever meet you in real life to never have a private discussion with you because you are not trustworthy and have no sense of respect.

[SaintClarence27]

Subject: Any risk in telling a school you're unhappy with them?


What part of "I don't feel I deserved" it made you say "What part of you do not deserve anything don't you understand"?

I don't get that...I don't think I deserve anything...I think it was pretty stupid and unfair how they did it. What part of thinking something is stupid and unfair leads you to believe I thought I deserved it?

If I thought I was owed it that would be a whole different story. But based on the information I have seen, I do think it was very offputting how they handled their admissions process, a process that was very different from any other school I applied to and very different from most stories I have heard through friends and TLS.

Disagree?

If you've got something to say, you should just say it. What's the point of pm'ing if your going to reiterate your pity party?

Are you fucking kidding me? You posted a PM in this thread? I PMed you because I wanted to discuss this with you and you alone, and because what I was writing WAS redundant, I didn't want to bore everyone else with what they would probably view as the same discussion, but I took specific issue with you accusing me of something you have no idea about. Go away.

edit: Remind me if I ever meet you in real life to never have a private discussion with you because you are not trustworthy and have no sense of respect.

In fairness, I don't think that was something that *should* have been sent PM.

[d34d9823]

Are you fucking kidding me? You posted a PM in this thread? I PMed you because I wanted to discuss this with you and you alone, and because what I was writing WAS redundant, I didn't want to bore everyone else with what they would probably view as the same discussion, but I took specific issue with you accusing me of something you have no idea about. Go away.

edit: Remind me if I ever meet you in real life to never have a private discussion with you because you are not trustworthy and have no sense of respect.

Typically, when we get crazy trolls and they get shouted down by everybody, they start harassing people in PMs. Your PM wasn't quite as crazy, but I would still put it in that whole "troll harassing" bucket. I would have posted it too. If you want people to take you seriously, stop acting entitled and stop trying to make everyone agree with you.

[Matthies]

1) There are no URM's on that list
2) There are some with same LSAT/worse GPA
3) Yes, some are 1 point LSAT higher with worse GPA
4) Yes, some are slightly higher in both, but it still seems extreme to give them full scholly's

I don't feel I deserved it, I feel like it was dumb and seemingly unfair of them to do it this way. Would you not feel mistreated if you saw these data? I'm legitimately interested...you wouldn't feel upset? If not, why?

This may come off condescending, I'll do my best to say it so it does not, as that is not anyway my intent, but the internet is tricky in this way. This whole law school process would lead you think, looking at those numbers, it might be "unfair or that you were mistreated." The truth is, you weren't, but you have reason to think you were.

Let me explain the present education system has taught kids to think this way: numbers = success. You work hard, get good grades, you get what you deserve. That's how its likely worked throughout your educational history (which may likely be most of your adult history so far) best grades in middle school, got you the most stars. Best grades in high school got you AP. Best SAT got you into a school where kids with lower SATs did not. Best little league team got the trophy everyone else got a pizza party becuase they were special too!

Thing is, in the real world outside that of education up to UG, it does not work like that. We post all these numbers on TLS/LSn and people start to think people are just numbers. I have a 68.93% chance of getting into this law school because my numbers twin did last year. Or 46% of the class of 2009 got OCI jobs making 160k so I have a good shot as well.

Thing is after UG who the individual is matters more than what numbers he's got. Sure there are trends but there are many other things that go to making up a LS class and who to give money to. Maybe they had too many people from your state, school, county, with the same last name. Who the hell knows, the point is, and we can easily over look this here with "stats" through around everywhere. LS have a very limited number of seats, and like to think its all about numbers or not, those seats go to 'people," individuals, not JUST numbers.

Here comes the condescending part, this is a good lesson in life. He who has the best numbers does not always win. In real life everyone does not get a star for trying their hardest. You don't get a pizza party for loosing the game. How to I know this, cause I'm older than you, no other reason other than that and seeing how the real world looks at "numbers twins" it looks at them as individuals, and they win or lose based on more than just their score on a 3 hour multiple choice test or if they were VP of some club. When I was 21-22 I thought the exact same way, on paper I'm the perfect candidate. But that's not how people are judged outside of school, and law school is less like any other school you went to.

I'm not saying you don't have a gripe right now, but look back on this in five years out of school and I think you'll agree what you thought was a slight is more how the world actually works and less about them treating you unfairly. Bottom line, given your complaint, I would not write it, or as a boss one told me write it as angry as you want it to be, make your point, talk about how you were mistreated, sit on it for a week, re-read it, then delete it and go on with your life.

[Regionality]

1) There are no URM's on that list
2) There are some with same LSAT/worse GPA
3) Yes, some are 1 point LSAT higher with worse GPA
4) Yes, some are slightly higher in both, but it still seems extreme to give them full scholly's

I don't feel I deserved it, I feel like it was dumb and seemingly unfair of them to do it this way. Would you not feel mistreated if you saw these data? I'm legitimately interested...you wouldn't feel upset? If not, why?

This may come off condescending, I'll do my best to say it so it does not, as that is not anyway my intent, but the internet is tricky in this way. This whole law school process would lead you think, looking at those numbers, it might be "unfair or that you were mistreated." The truth is, you weren't, but you have reason to think you were.

Let me explain the present education system has taught kids to think this way: numbers = success. You work hard, get good grades, you get what you deserve. That's how its likely worked throughout your educational history (which may likely be most of your adult history so far) best grades in middle school, got you the most stars. Best grades in high school got you AP. Best SAT got you into a school where kids with lower SATs did not. Best little league team got the trophy everyone else got a pizza party becuase they were special too!

Thing is, in the real world outside that of education up to UG, it does not work like that. We post all these numbers on TLS/LSn and people start to think people are just numbers. I have a 68.93% chance of getting into this law school because my numbers twin did last year. Or 46% of the class of 2009 got OCI jobs making 160k so I have a good shot as well.

Thing is after UG who the individual is matters more than what numbers he's got. Sure there are trends but there are many other things that go to making up a LS class and who to give money to. Maybe they had too many people from your state, school, county, with the same last name. Who the hell knows, the point is, and we can easily over look this here with "stats" through around everywhere. LS have a very limited number of seats, and like to think its all about numbers or not, those seats go to 'people," individuals, not JUST numbers.

Here comes the condescending part, this is a good lesson in life. He who has the best numbers does not always win. In real life everyone does not get a star for trying their hardest. You don't get a pizza party for loosing the game. How to I know this, cause I'm older than you, no other reason other than that and seeing how the real world looks at "numbers twins" it looks at them as individuals, and they win or lose based on more than just their score on a 3 hour multiple choice test or if they were VP of some club. When I was 21-22 I thought the exact same way, on paper I'm the perfect candidate. But that's not how people are judged outside of school, and law school is less like any other school you went to.

I'm not saying you don't have a gripe right now, but look back on this in five years out of school and I think you'll agree what you thought was a slight is more how the world actually works and less about them treating you unfairly. Bottom line, given your complaint, I would not write it, or as a boss one told me write it as angry as you want it to be, make your point, talk about how you were mistreated, sit on it for a week, re-read it, then delete it and go on with your life.

Legit. Thank you for this.

[trialjunky]

Are you fucking kidding me? You posted a PM in this thread? I PMed you because [strike]I wanted to discuss this with you and you alone, and because[/strike] what I was writing WAS and IS redundant, I didn't want to bore everyone else with what they would probably view as the same discussion, I just wanted to bore the fuck out of you instead but I took specific issue with you and almost everyone else accusing me of something [strike]you have no idea about[/strike] I;ve shared on the internet. Go away. <-- YOURE the one pming me BS

edit: Remind me if I ever meet you in real life to never have a private discussion with you because you are not trustworthy and have no sense of respect.

Remind me if I ever meet you in real life to give you a bib and a pacifier

[webbylu87]

While I can sympathize with the thoughts expressed by a lot of people in this thread who think sending the letter is a bad idea, I find it odd that many who have accused the OP of immaturity or a sense of entitlement cannot seem to communicate their point of view in a legitimate, mature way themselves. Points may be valid, but I find it strange that when someone speaks to the OP in such a tone, they find it to be further proof of the OP's "immaturity" when he/she responds in kind. But hey, the internet is serious business. TLS is what it is.

OP, the decision to send the letter is your own. I know and have been affected by what you are referring to and have been irked by it myself. I will not be sending a letter though because of the exact thoughts expressed by Matthies. (Thanks again, Matthies, for great insight.)

[Iconoclast]

1) There are no URM's on that list
2) There are some with same LSAT/worse GPA
3) Yes, some are 1 point LSAT higher with worse GPA
4) Yes, some are slightly higher in both, but it still seems extreme to give them full scholly's

I don't feel I deserved it, I feel like it was dumb and seemingly unfair of them to do it this way. Would you not feel mistreated if you saw these data? I'm legitimately interested...you wouldn't feel upset? If not, why?

First, if you don't think you deserved a scholarship more than the people you listed, then what exactly is UNFAIR about it? It makes absolutely no sense to say both that you thought it is unfair for them to get a scholarship while you didn't, and then to follow it up by saying that you don't feel like you deserved it.

Second, you list GPA and LSAT numbers. Aside from that, you don't know a damn thing about the people you listed. Maybe the guy with the same LSAT and a GPA slightly lower than yours served in Afganistan and was awarded a silver star for gallantry in combat? What if a chick with a lower LSAT and lower GPA went to school after being homeless for a couple years and started a shelter in her neighborhood after she got back on her feet? Maybe one of those "extreme" decisions on a full scholarship with slightly better numbers than yours had more to do with the fact that the person awarded the scholarship was an olympic athlete who shits more ability and personality every day than you'll ever have?

So... why wouldn't I feel upset when looking at those numbers? Primarily because I understand that there is no possible way for me to judge my comparative worth against other candidates that I have never met. Add in the fact that I don't feel entitled to anything other than a fair consideration for my application fee, then you have your answer. You can sit there and scream all day long about how you don't feel a sense of entitlement... but your posts here show something very different.

You didn't get picked for the kickball team. Deal with it. And if you're going to cry and whine about it, don't be surprised when people tell you to just shut the hell up.

[Regionality]

1) There are no URM's on that list
2) There are some with same LSAT/worse GPA
3) Yes, some are 1 point LSAT higher with worse GPA
4) Yes, some are slightly higher in both, but it still seems extreme to give them full scholly's

I don't feel I deserved it, I feel like it was dumb and seemingly unfair of them to do it this way. Would you not feel mistreated if you saw these data? I'm legitimately interested...you wouldn't feel upset? If not, why?

First, if you don't think you deserved a scholarship more than the people you listed, then what exactly is UNFAIR about it? It makes absolutely no sense to say both that you thought it is unfair for them to get a scholarship while you didn't, and then to follow it up by saying that you don't feel like you deserved it.

Second, you list GPA and LSAT numbers. Aside from that, you don't know a damn thing about the people you listed. Maybe the guy with the same LSAT and a GPA slightly lower than yours served in Afganistan and was awarded a silver star for gallantry in combat? What if a chick with a lower LSAT and lower GPA went to school after being homeless for a couple years and started a shelter in her neighborhood after she got back on her feet? Maybe one of those "extreme" decisions on a full scholarship with slightly better numbers than yours had more to do with the fact that the person awarded the scholarship was an olympic athlete who shits more ability and personality every day than you'll ever have?

So... why wouldn't I feel upset when looking at those numbers? Primarily because I understand that there is no possible way for me to judge my comparative worth against other candidates that I have never met. Add in the fact that I don't feel entitled to anything other than a fair consideration for my application fee, then you have your answer. You can sit there and scream all day long about how you don't feel a sense of entitlement... but your posts here show something very different.

You didn't get picked for the kickball team. Deal with it. And if you're going to cry and whine about it, don't be surprised when people tell you to just shut the hell up.

You ever see one of those "Ally" Bank commercials where they mistreat kids? There's one that just came on where some cute kid is sitting there staring at Mr. Suit. Then a new kid comes in a second later and is offered a delicious looking chocolate ice cream cone...he takes it, enjoys it, and stares at the other kid who is CLEARLY feeling used and abused. That is definitely unfair.

Did either of those kids deserve the chocolate cone in the first place? Nope, neither of them really did anything to deserve it. In fact, the second kid supposedly just got it because he arrived after the first kid, representing the "incentives" banks use to gain new customers while ignoring their existing ones.

Neither kid deserved the ice cream. Neither of them paid for it or worked for it. But the ice cream was definitely given out unfairly, and the first kid felt like he was treated unfairly.

People seem to be forgetting that I am talking about this from a consumer's point of view, not from a legal right's point of view. I know I don't deserve anything. Deserving something implies it is legally, morally or otherwise due to you. I still think it's unfair.

Get the difference?

[d34d9823]

Neither kid deserved the ice cream. Neither of them paid for it or worked for it. But the ice cream was definitely given out unfairly, and the first kid felt like he was treated unfairly.

People seem to be forgetting that I am talking about this from a consumer's point of view, not from a legal right's point of view. I know I don't deserve anything. Deserving something implies it is legally, morally or otherwise due to you. I still think it's unfair.

Get the difference?

We get the difference. What rubs me the wrong way is that you think you know better than the adcoms, who do it for a living, and presumably have much more information and experience than you do.

[Sias]

1) There are no URM's on that list
2) There are some with same LSAT/worse GPA
3) Yes, some are 1 point LSAT higher with worse GPA
4) Yes, some are slightly higher in both, but it still seems extreme to give them full scholly's

I don't feel I deserved it, I feel like it was dumb and seemingly unfair of them to do it this way. Would you not feel mistreated if you saw these data? I'm legitimately interested...you wouldn't feel upset? If not, why?

First, if you don't think you deserved a scholarship more than the people you listed, then what exactly is UNFAIR about it? It makes absolutely no sense to say both that you thought it is unfair for them to get a scholarship while you didn't, and then to follow it up by saying that you don't feel like you deserved it.

Second, you list GPA and LSAT numbers. Aside from that, you don't know a damn thing about the people you listed. Maybe the guy with the same LSAT and a GPA slightly lower than yours served in Afganistan and was awarded a silver star for gallantry in combat? What if a chick with a lower LSAT and lower GPA went to school after being homeless for a couple years and started a shelter in her neighborhood after she got back on her feet? Maybe one of those "extreme" decisions on a full scholarship with slightly better numbers than yours had more to do with the fact that the person awarded the scholarship was an olympic athlete who shits more ability and personality every day than you'll ever have?

So... why wouldn't I feel upset when looking at those numbers? Primarily because I understand that there is no possible way for me to judge my comparative worth against other candidates that I have never met. Add in the fact that I don't feel entitled to anything other than a fair consideration for my application fee, then you have your answer. You can sit there and scream all day long about how you don't feel a sense of entitlement... but your posts here show something very different.

You didn't get picked for the kickball team. Deal with it. And if you're going to cry and whine about it, don't be surprised when people tell you to just shut the hell up.

You ever see one of those "Ally" Bank commercials where they mistreat kids? There's one that just came on where some cute kid is sitting there staring at Mr. Suit. Then a new kid comes in a second later and is offered a delicious looking chocolate ice cream cone...he takes it, enjoys it, and stares at the other kid who is CLEARLY feeling used and abused. That is definitely unfair.

Did either of those kids deserve the chocolate cone in the first place? Nope, neither of them really did anything to deserve it. In fact, the second kid supposedly just got it because he arrived after the first kid, representing the "incentives" banks use to gain new customers while ignoring their existing ones.

Neither kid deserved the ice cream. Neither of them paid for it or worked for it. But the ice cream was definitely given out unfairly, and the first kid felt like he was treated unfairly.

People seem to be forgetting that I am talking about this from a consumer's point of view, not from a legal right's point of view. I know I don't deserve anything. Deserving something implies it is legally, morally or otherwise due to you. I still think it's unfair.

Get the difference?

Easily the worst analogy / counter argument I have ever seen. I would edit and delete that post immediately--nothing but humiliation can come of it.

[Regionality]

1) There are no URM's on that list
2) There are some with same LSAT/worse GPA
3) Yes, some are 1 point LSAT higher with worse GPA
4) Yes, some are slightly higher in both, but it still seems extreme to give them full scholly's

I don't feel I deserved it, I feel like it was dumb and seemingly unfair of them to do it this way. Would you not feel mistreated if you saw these data? I'm legitimately interested...you wouldn't feel upset? If not, why?

First, if you don't think you deserved a scholarship more than the people you listed, then what exactly is UNFAIR about it? It makes absolutely no sense to say both that you thought it is unfair for them to get a scholarship while you didn't, and then to follow it up by saying that you don't feel like you deserved it.

Second, you list GPA and LSAT numbers. Aside from that, you don't know a damn thing about the people you listed. Maybe the guy with the same LSAT and a GPA slightly lower than yours served in Afganistan and was awarded a silver star for gallantry in combat? What if a chick with a lower LSAT and lower GPA went to school after being homeless for a couple years and started a shelter in her neighborhood after she got back on her feet? Maybe one of those "extreme" decisions on a full scholarship with slightly better numbers than yours had more to do with the fact that the person awarded the scholarship was an olympic athlete who shits more ability and personality every day than you'll ever have?

So... why wouldn't I feel upset when looking at those numbers? Primarily because I understand that there is no possible way for me to judge my comparative worth against other candidates that I have never met. Add in the fact that I don't feel entitled to anything other than a fair consideration for my application fee, then you have your answer. You can sit there and scream all day long about how you don't feel a sense of entitlement... but your posts here show something very different.

You didn't get picked for the kickball team. Deal with it. And if you're going to cry and whine about it, don't be surprised when people tell you to just shut the hell up.

You ever see one of those "Ally" Bank commercials where they mistreat kids? There's one that just came on where some cute kid is sitting there staring at Mr. Suit. Then a new kid comes in a second later and is offered a delicious looking chocolate ice cream cone...he takes it, enjoys it, and stares at the other kid who is CLEARLY feeling used and abused. That is definitely unfair.

Did either of those kids deserve the chocolate cone in the first place? Nope, neither of them really did anything to deserve it. In fact, the second kid supposedly just got it because he arrived after the first kid, representing the "incentives" banks use to gain new customers while ignoring their existing ones.

Neither kid deserved the ice cream. Neither of them paid for it or worked for it. But the ice cream was definitely given out unfairly, and the first kid felt like he was treated unfairly.

People seem to be forgetting that I am talking about this from a consumer's point of view, not from a legal right's point of view. I know I don't deserve anything. Deserving something implies it is legally, morally or otherwise due to you. I still think it's unfair.

Get the difference?

Easily the worst analogy / counter argument I have ever seen. I would edit and delete that post immediately--nothing but humiliation can come of it.

Actually, it wasn't an analogy. It was an example highlighting the difference between deserving something and feeling something was conducted unfairly.

Oh, and mr. altruistic advice, thanks for the oh-so-considerate advice to take down my post when clearly you reposted it already. I REALLY appreciate all that you are doing for me. Not that I would take it down, but you're so kind and warm and caring.

It is now officially obvious that your insults and condescension, supposedly laced in altruism and kindness, is actually just you being an ass and getting an ego trip from anonymous lambasting.

[blurbz]

While I can sympathize with the thoughts expressed by a lot of people in this thread who think sending the letter is a bad idea, I find it odd that many who have accused the OP of immaturity or a sense of entitlement cannot seem to communicate their point of view in a legitimate, mature way themselves. Points may be valid, but I find it strange that when someone speaks to the OP in such a tone, they find it to be further proof of the OP's "immaturity" when he/she responds in kind. But hey, the internet is serious business. TLS is what it is.

OP, the decision to send the letter is your own. I know and have been affected by what you are referring to and have been irked by it myself. I will not be sending a letter though because of the exact thoughts expressed by Matthies. (Thanks again, Matthies, for great insight.)

I'm not going to lie, I'm glad I'm going to school with you next year.

[Sias]

True that the quotation went against my own advice. But to be fair, I would've been happy to edit my post to remove it for you.

Edit: Dude good advice is good advice, regardless of how it was got. Think of it as being violently pushed out of the way of an oncoming truck. Yeah, a gentle push probably would've felt better, but in the end you're still better off than if you hadn't received the push at all.

[Regionality]

BUT SERIOUSLY FOLKS, I'm done with this thread. It has ceased to be useful and has turned unpleasant.

As for WebbyLu, I WISH I were going to school with you...but dean Pless just said the class was full and waitlisters were looking very unlikely to get in

[Iconoclast]

You ever see one of those "Ally" Bank commercials where they mistreat kids? There's one that just came on where some cute kid is sitting there staring at Mr. Suit. Then a new kid comes in a second later and is offered a delicious looking chocolate ice cream cone...he takes it, enjoys it, and stares at the other kid who is CLEARLY feeling used and abused. That is definitely unfair.

Did either of those kids deserve the chocolate cone in the first place? Nope, neither of them really did anything to deserve it. In fact, the second kid supposedly just got it because he arrived after the first kid, representing the "incentives" banks use to gain new customers while ignoring their existing ones.

Neither kid deserved the ice cream. Neither of them paid for it or worked for it. But the ice cream was definitely given out unfairly, and the first kid felt like he was treated unfairly.

People seem to be forgetting that I am talking about this from a consumer's point of view, not from a legal right's point of view. I know I don't deserve anything. Deserving something implies it is legally, morally or otherwise due to you. I still think it's unfair.

Get the difference?

I still don't think you get it.

You are comparing yourself to the kid who didn't get the ice cream. That kid feels cheated because the decision to give the other kid the ice cream was capricious and arbitrary. Sure, he didn't have to give that kid the ice cream... but if he is going to give it to that other kid, then he needs to give it to you also. Otherwise it is unfair.

But the problem with your argument is that this isn't a commercial. The decision about who to give ice cream wasn't capricious and arbitrary, it was made based on an evaluation using criterion that you are not privy to. And unlike the commercial, the kids applying for the scholarship/admissions were not all equally deserving of the ice cream.

[dvd]

`

[webbylu87]

While I can sympathize with the thoughts expressed by a lot of people in this thread who think sending the letter is a bad idea, I find it odd that many who have accused the OP of immaturity or a sense of entitlement cannot seem to communicate their point of view in a legitimate, mature way themselves. Points may be valid, but I find it strange that when someone speaks to the OP in such a tone, they find it to be further proof of the OP's "immaturity" when he/she responds in kind. But hey, the internet is serious business. TLS is what it is.

OP, the decision to send the letter is your own. I know and have been affected by what you are referring to and have been irked by it myself. I will not be sending a letter though because of the exact thoughts expressed by Matthies. (Thanks again, Matthies, for great insight.)

I'm not going to lie, I'm glad I'm going to school with you next year.

Aw, thanks!

[Regionality]

You ever see one of those "Ally" Bank commercials where they mistreat kids? There's one that just came on where some cute kid is sitting there staring at Mr. Suit. Then a new kid comes in a second later and is offered a delicious looking chocolate ice cream cone...he takes it, enjoys it, and stares at the other kid who is CLEARLY feeling used and abused. That is definitely unfair.

Did either of those kids deserve the chocolate cone in the first place? Nope, neither of them really did anything to deserve it. In fact, the second kid supposedly just got it because he arrived after the first kid, representing the "incentives" banks use to gain new customers while ignoring their existing ones.

Neither kid deserved the ice cream. Neither of them paid for it or worked for it. But the ice cream was definitely given out unfairly, and the first kid felt like he was treated unfairly.

People seem to be forgetting that I am talking about this from a consumer's point of view, not from a legal right's point of view. I know I don't deserve anything. Deserving something implies it is legally, morally or otherwise due to you. I still think it's unfair.

Get the difference?

I still don't think you get it.

You are comparing yourself to the kid who didn't get the ice cream. That kid feels cheated because the decision to give the other kid the ice cream was capricious and arbitrary. Sure, he didn't have to give that kid the ice cream... but if he is going to give it to that other kid, then he needs to give it to you also. Otherwise it is unfair.

But the problem with your argument is that this isn't a commercial. The decision about who to give ice cream wasn't capricious and arbitrary, it was made based on an evaluation using criterion that you are not privy to. And unlike the commercial, the kids applying for the scholarship/admissions were not all equally deserving of the ice cream.

I agree completely. BUT, I still don't feel I deserved the ice cream/scholarship. I just think the ice cream/scholarship was given out unfairly. Maybe the second kid coming into the commercial had just run a marathon and needed some sugar, I don't know...and I FULLY admit that I don't know all of the information about these applicants...and I have included this in my hypothetical letter all the time, requesting to be corrected if I was wrong. But just because I don't have ALL the information an adcom is privy to doesn't mean I shouldn't write something saying that on the surface it seems unfair. The practices of Iowa admissions seem SO different from other law schools based on the information I can gather that it may warrant someone saying something.

Besides, my biggest complaint has always been about telling me I was nominated for something (ie. probably getting something...this is what they told me in the very beginning), then being ignored/strung along, then being told I got nothing, then being made aware that (maybe, according to internet sources) that waitlisters got scholarships, then being made aware that they gave out tons of money to people whose numbers were very similar to mine (but yes, maybe they cured cancer)....

It seems unfair.

[trialjunky]

You ever see one of those "Ally" Bank commercials where they mistreat kids? There's one that just came on where some cute kid is sitting there staring at Mr. Suit. Then a new kid comes in a second later and is offered a delicious looking chocolate ice cream cone...he takes it, enjoys it, and stares at the other kid who is CLEARLY feeling used and abused. That is definitely unfair.

Did either of those kids deserve the chocolate cone in the first place? Nope, neither of them really did anything to deserve it. In fact, the second kid supposedly just got it because he arrived after the first kid, representing the "incentives" banks use to gain new customers while ignoring their existing ones.

Neither kid deserved the ice cream. Neither of them paid for it or worked for it. But the ice cream was definitely given out unfairly, and the first kid felt like he was treated unfairly.

People seem to be forgetting that I am talking about this from a consumer's point of view, not from a legal right's point of view. I know I don't deserve anything. Deserving something implies it is legally, morally or otherwise due to you. I still think it's unfair.

Get the difference?

^^ I literally between this and the waterman post, my co-workers are looking at me like I'm crazy. I would ask if youre really serious but sadly I think you are. All I can say is wow...are you sure law school is right for you?

smh