NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
somewhatwayward
Posts: 1446
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby somewhatwayward » Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:07 pm

nick417 wrote:
pianoguy7 wrote:This was clearly a mistake, posting on this forum, let's call it a lapse in judgement. With the exception of a handful of posters this was a complete shit-show. I expected some silly responses but in 5 pages perhaps 4 posts were of value. I understand that people are hurting in this economy and in the law field especially, it is not a novel idea. I was looking for opinions between the schools I listed and in pharmaceutical law however, I received the same ineffectual rants found on every hate-law-blogs. The fact that no one who works in pharmaceutical law could post is actually encouraging as they actually likely have jobs and therefore don't need to troll on website to get a sense of fulfillment.

Thanks to tarp especially for giving me some useful info, I'll certainly take it to heart.



Have you ever looked at reviews for products on Amazon.com or hotel reviews on Expedia? All you see is pages of negativity telling you how awful the hotel is or the product. However, if you actually buy the product or stay at the hotel, you realize that it isn't that bad. This web site is the reviews for products and hotels. ONLY people who have negative experiences post reviews. People who have good experiences usually don't post reviews. For some reason these people think they have a duty to inform everyone of their terrible experiences and trash everything. Honestly, don't waste your time responding to these negative, ignorant people. According to their logic, ALL post high school is a waste of time. I have friends who graduated with bachelors degrees who have debt and can't find jobs. You go to law school for the experiences of learning law, which is a skill, that can be used in life. I personally I enjoy law, reading case law, and arguing the merits regarding a piece of law. That is why I am going to law school. I understand you came here looking for advice, and unfortunately I do not know anything about pharmaceutical law (I do work at a Intellectual Property Firm and I know about patents and such, and pharmaceutical companies are loaded with patents). I suggest looking elsewhere for advice, all you are going to get here is angry reviews from ignorant people who think they have a duty to trash on EVERYTHING, like people who write reviews for products on Amazon.com or hotels on expedia.com.


wut? I will admit that what some people said in this thread was rude and not constructive (although that was after OP and tarp kept insisting that it was wise to go to these third-tier schools and rack up a lot of debt when you have an advanced science degree that could net you a lot of $ working right now). But did you actually read the advice from the people who weren't being douches? There might be some tough love in there but only because we see lots of stubborn people coming in here all the time who are unaware of the bait-and-switch game most law schools play and unaware of the realities of legal hiring, and when we point to those things, they refuse to acknowledge the cold hard statistics. Some people are messing around and being douchey (I mean, this is the Internet), but a lot of people are trying to be helpful. I try to be helpful in 99% of my posts even when it is like talking to a brick wall. We have gotten some portion of people to "see the light" over the years. They generally choose to retake the LSAT (best option) or choose the school with the big scholarship in the area where they plan to work (second best).

From my perspective, even if people do rebuff us and refuse to listen, at least they have the information. Maybe it will sink in later. But, unlike the people choosing to go to law school three or more years ago, there is no way people going now can claim they didn't know about the tough odds facing them.

User avatar
Icculus
Posts: 1421
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:02 am

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby Icculus » Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:14 pm

nick417 wrote:
pianoguy7 wrote:This was clearly a mistake, posting on this forum, let's call it a lapse in judgement. With the exception of a handful of posters this was a complete shit-show. I expected some silly responses but in 5 pages perhaps 4 posts were of value. I understand that people are hurting in this economy and in the law field especially, it is not a novel idea. I was looking for opinions between the schools I listed and in pharmaceutical law however, I received the same ineffectual rants found on every hate-law-blogs. The fact that no one who works in pharmaceutical law could post is actually encouraging as they actually likely have jobs and therefore don't need to troll on website to get a sense of fulfillment.

Thanks to tarp especially for giving me some useful info, I'll certainly take it to heart.



Have you ever looked at reviews for products on Amazon.com or hotel reviews on Expedia? All you see is pages of negativity telling you how awful the hotel is or the product. However, if you actually buy the product or stay at the hotel, you realize that it isn't that bad. This web site is the reviews for products and hotels. ONLY people who have negative experiences post reviews. People who have good experiences usually don't post reviews. For some reason these people think they have a duty to inform everyone of their terrible experiences and trash everything. Honestly, don't waste your time responding to these negative, ignorant people. According to their logic, ALL post high school is a waste of time. I have friends who graduated with bachelors degrees who have debt and can't find jobs. You go to law school for the experiences of learning law, which is a skill, that can be used in life. I personally I enjoy law, reading case law, and arguing the merits regarding a piece of law. That is why I am going to law school. I understand you came here looking for advice, and unfortunately I do not know anything about pharmaceutical law (I do work at a Intellectual Property Firm and I know about patents and such, and pharmaceutical companies are loaded with patents). I suggest looking elsewhere for advice, all you are going to get here is angry reviews from ignorant people who think they have a duty to trash on EVERYTHING, like people who write reviews for products on Amazon.com or hotels on expedia.com.


Says the 0L with zero experience in law school, OCI, or the job market. Many people here have actually been successful. Most of the 'negativity' you refer to comes out when people are looking to make disastrous life decisions by going 100K+ in debt for a school that gives less than a coin's flip chance of getting any legal job whatsoever, not just a higher paying legal job. I am paying sticker at a T14 and OCI worked out for me. I gambled, but I knew going in it was a gamble, I had plans to drop out if my first semester grades sucked, or I struck out, and I did everything I could to get myself to a school that offered me a significantly better chance of employment (took the LSAt three times, put off applying for a year to make sure I had the best chance of admittance, etc.) so not everyone here has had a bad experience. But that does not mean we should support an uninformed 0L's decision to most likely financially ruin him or herself. And as one who got lucky with an OCI job there are still days I wake up and wonder if it was worth it because even at a market paying job $200K is a shitload of debt to have without a house to live in.

Not to mention, you 0Ls just assume that with hard work you'll end up at the top of your class. This could not be further from the truth. The curve can be a killer and most people do not end up at the top of the class because of it. In one class the prof told us that the difference between the highest and lowest exam grade was 10 points...in a class of 65. This means that a two point difference could be the difference between an A (close to the top of the class) and a B+ (median). But I'm sure you have done all your research and know everything you need to know. The problem is people come here for advice, get good advice, it is the opposite of the advice they want, so people get pissed at us and call us elitist assholes. I would love for some of you guys to come back after OCI or at graduation and let us know we were wrong. Seriously, would love it since I hate to see people get screwed over. But my guess is most of you won't.

ETA: + 1 to everything Romo said.

Edit: Just to add, I am not attacking all 0Ls who come here and look for advice, but I see too many instances where 0Ls come here and speak authoritatively about issues that they don't have any experience or fully understand.
Last edited by Icculus on Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
reasonable_man
Posts: 2200
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 5:41 pm

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby reasonable_man » Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:17 pm

romothesavior wrote:Actually Nick, most of the people on this site, including those ITT, went or are going to good law schools, did fairly well, and obtained good outcomes from it. I've never understood the notion that TLS is full of bitter folks. Your analogy is terrible. Most of us are pretty pleased with how things are going. And you don't have to go to one of these schools know they have terrible, pathetic job prospects. We have these things called facts and data.

And you want firsthand info? reasonable man, who as the name would suggest is one of the most reasonable people on TLS, went to a TTT and is a pretty successful attorney. If you want firsthand knowledge of the TTT job scene and what their grads are up to, there are few better than him.

But no, keep shielding yourself from the data and deflecting all reasonable criticism because we're all just a bunch of whiny bitter people right? Just like all those writers from the NYT and WSJ writing about law school being a terrible investment. Or Brian Tamanaha and Paul Campos. Couple of bitter losers who couldn't hack it, right? Enjoy that cocoon you've enveloped yourself in.


Exactly. I work in an amazing office over-looking the Hudson on the top floor of a historic landmark building. I earn a nice salary and have interesting work. To get here, I had to kill myself and I also had to get VERY lucky, because my outcome is the extreme exception not the rule for a TTT graduate. I have watched as kids that graduated with me did not find jobs, did not succede and 4 to 5 years later are still struggling to figure out a way to have a career and service their loans. There is nothing wrong with these kids - they are good people and hard workers. Things just didn't pan out for them and a lot of it is because the vast majority of well-paying jobs are not available to them because of the name on their degree. I have argued cases before the Appellate Division. I have written components of briefs for the Supreme Court of the United States of America. I have argued 10 dozen summary judgment motions and deposed (not kidding) over 100 witnesses. Yet, 2 years ago I was rejected from an old white shoe firm where two partners sought me out (they had worked with me in another setting) and begged me to apply because they needed a young attorney with a lot of real litigation experience. Even with the backing of 2 partners, I was not hired. The reason given; my law school was not one that the firm felt comfortable with hiring from. While I am actually very happy that this job never panned out (because honestly - I love my current firm), it still stings to know that I was rejected only because of what school I attended.

The other side of this is knowing what these TTT schools do to pad their numbers. When I graduated (according to the stats that are now available on LS transparency - but were not available back when I graduated), my exit salary from LS was in the top 1% of graduats from my LS. My school badgered me for my exit data and my 9-month post grad salary data because the school knew it was favorable. Phone calls, facebook messages, letters - it was crazy. Do you suppose the school chased after the unemployed/underemployed grads in the same way?? Absolutely not.

People on this site aren't angry (go to JD Underground for those) and they aren't elitist (LSN for those guys). The people here (the mainstay posters) are people that have really taken the time to learn about the process from start to finish and when they say "retake" or "dont attend" they aren't saying that to be vindictive, they are saying it as a well researched warning to newbies that may not realize how bad of a decision they are in the process of blindly making.

User avatar
Icculus
Posts: 1421
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:02 am

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby Icculus » Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:19 pm

somewhatwayward wrote: We have gotten some portion of people to "see the light" over the years. They generally choose to retake the LSAT (best option) or choose the school with the big scholarship in the area where they plan to work (second best).


I was one of these people. I showed up here with a 165 LSAT and a 2.79 GPA and asked for some advice. Some people were assholes but almost everyone gave me good advice and I listened. I PM'd people like Romo to get opinions once I applied and got opinions on where I should end up and whether I should take certain scholarships over a T14 acceptance. This website is actually a great tool and asset if used properly. It sucks for people who just want confirmation of their opinion. And if your skin is not thick enough to deal with a few douche bag responses on a message board I'm not sure how you'll deal with the real world.

Ti Malice
Posts: 1955
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 2:55 am

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby Ti Malice » Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:24 pm

nick417 wrote:
pianoguy7 wrote:This was clearly a mistake, posting on this forum, let's call it a lapse in judgement. With the exception of a handful of posters this was a complete shit-show. I expected some silly responses but in 5 pages perhaps 4 posts were of value. I understand that people are hurting in this economy and in the law field especially, it is not a novel idea. I was looking for opinions between the schools I listed and in pharmaceutical law however, I received the same ineffectual rants found on every hate-law-blogs. The fact that no one who works in pharmaceutical law could post is actually encouraging as they actually likely have jobs and therefore don't need to troll on website to get a sense of fulfillment.

Thanks to tarp especially for giving me some useful info, I'll certainly take it to heart.



Have you ever looked at reviews for products on Amazon.com or hotel reviews on Expedia? All you see is pages of negativity telling you how awful the hotel is or the product. However, if you actually buy the product or stay at the hotel, you realize that it isn't that bad. This web site is the reviews for products and hotels. ONLY people who have negative experiences post reviews. People who have good experiences usually don't post reviews. For some reason these people think they have a duty to inform everyone of their terrible experiences and trash everything. Honestly, don't waste your time responding to these negative, ignorant people. According to their logic, ALL post high school is a waste of time. I have friends who graduated with bachelors degrees who have debt and can't find jobs. You go to law school for the experiences of learning law, which is a skill, that can be used in life. I personally I enjoy law, reading case law, and arguing the merits regarding a piece of law. That is why I am going to law school. I understand you came here looking for advice, and unfortunately I do not know anything about pharmaceutical law (I do work at a Intellectual Property Firm and I know about patents and such, and pharmaceutical companies are loaded with patents). I suggest looking elsewhere for advice, all you are going to get here is angry reviews from ignorant people who think they have a duty to trash on EVERYTHING, like people who write reviews for products on Amazon.com or hotels on expedia.com.


You are an utter fool. This site skews heavily toward people who have had excellent outcomes. Most of the regular posters attend or have attended a T14 or landed substantial money at a regional or local school that places well in the area in which they wish to practice. Incredibly, these people also understand basic math and statistics, which allows anyone with a functioning brain stem to perceive the dire state of the legal market.

I'm sorry that you (evidently) made the idiotic choice of attending a crappy law school for a lot of money. Maybe you'll get lucky. You certainly won't be able to say you weren't warned.

User avatar
Sheffield
Posts: 411
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:07 am

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby Sheffield » Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:26 pm

If you want some positive input. At best, T14 students can only scarf up 5,600 jobs, leaving nearly +14,000 employment opportunities for everyone else. Happy day, eh?

Ti Malice
Posts: 1955
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 2:55 am

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby Ti Malice » Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:27 pm

romothesavior wrote:Actually Nick, most of the people on this site, including those ITT, went or are going to good law schools, did fairly well, and obtained good outcomes from it. I've never understood the notion that TLS is full of bitter folks. Your analogy is terrible. Most of us are pretty pleased with how things are going. And you don't have to go to one of these schools know they have terrible, pathetic job prospects. We have these things called facts and data.

And you want firsthand info? reasonable man, who as the name would suggest is one of the most reasonable people on TLS, went to a TTT and is a pretty successful attorney. If you want firsthand knowledge of the TTT job scene and what their grads are up to, there are few better than him.

But no, keep shielding yourself from the data and deflecting all reasonable criticism because we're all just a bunch of whiny bitter people right? Just like all those writers from the NYT and WSJ writing about law school being a terrible investment. Or Brian Tamanaha and Paul Campos. Couple of bitter losers who couldn't hack it, right? Enjoy that cocoon you've enveloped yourself in.


Oops, should have just read this before posting. And all of the ones after it.

User avatar
Crowing
Posts: 2636
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 4:20 pm

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby Crowing » Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:40 pm

The anti-TLS arguments are always the same. It starts out with "TLSers are just bitter people who struck out and are projecting their personal frustrations on everybody else" then when you point out that the regular posters here are actually doing quite well the counterclaim is "well TLSers are just elitist" or even more incredibly "you guys are just trying to dissuade people from going to law school because you're afraid of competition for grades/jobs/etc."

User avatar
Icculus
Posts: 1421
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:02 am

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby Icculus » Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:45 pm

Crowing wrote:The anti-TLS arguments are always the same. It starts out with "TLSers are just bitter people who struck out and are projecting their personal frustrations on everybody else" then when you point out that the regular posters here are actually doing quite well the counterclaim is "well TLSers are just elitist" or even more incredibly "you guys are just trying to dissuade people from going to law school because you're afraid of competition for grades/jobs/etc."


Why is it so hard for people to understand we're actually trying to help?

Ti Malice
Posts: 1955
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 2:55 am

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby Ti Malice » Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:49 pm

Icculus wrote:
Crowing wrote:The anti-TLS arguments are always the same. It starts out with "TLSers are just bitter people who struck out and are projecting their personal frustrations on everybody else" then when you point out that the regular posters here are actually doing quite well the counterclaim is "well TLSers are just elitist" or even more incredibly "you guys are just trying to dissuade people from going to law school because you're afraid of competition for grades/jobs/etc."


Why is it so hard for people to understand we're actually trying to help?


Confirmation bias is a bitch.

User avatar
Crowing
Posts: 2636
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 4:20 pm

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby Crowing » Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:56 pm

Icculus wrote:
Crowing wrote:The anti-TLS arguments are always the same. It starts out with "TLSers are just bitter people who struck out and are projecting their personal frustrations on everybody else" then when you point out that the regular posters here are actually doing quite well the counterclaim is "well TLSers are just elitist" or even more incredibly "you guys are just trying to dissuade people from going to law school because you're afraid of competition for grades/jobs/etc."


Why is it so hard for people to understand we're actually trying to help?


Well admittedly some posters are kinda dicks about the way they deliver this information and some people just tunnel vision onto those comments while ignoring the fact that opinions aside there are plenty of concrete statistics out there that clearly demonstrate the reality of the current legal market without leaving much open to interpretation.

User avatar
Icculus
Posts: 1421
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:02 am

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby Icculus » Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:06 pm

Crowing wrote:
Icculus wrote:
Crowing wrote:The anti-TLS arguments are always the same. It starts out with "TLSers are just bitter people who struck out and are projecting their personal frustrations on everybody else" then when you point out that the regular posters here are actually doing quite well the counterclaim is "well TLSers are just elitist" or even more incredibly "you guys are just trying to dissuade people from going to law school because you're afraid of competition for grades/jobs/etc."


Why is it so hard for people to understand we're actually trying to help?


Well admittedly some posters are kinda dicks about the way they deliver this information and some people just tunnel vision onto those comments while ignoring the fact that opinions aside there are plenty of concrete statistics out there that clearly demonstrate the reality of the current legal market without leaving much open to interpretation.


I know when I first got here I got the retake mantra, but people weren't to douchey about it. I think part of the problem is when I was here two-three years ago there was far less info out there so it really was east to be misinformed. Now I think there is more info, people have seen the stats here and elsewhere, and ask anyway. While the answer is delivered harshly it is backed up.

vinnnyvincenzo
Posts: 150
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 12:05 pm

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby vinnnyvincenzo » Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:12 pm

Icculus wrote:
Crowing wrote:The anti-TLS arguments are always the same. It starts out with "TLSers are just bitter people who struck out and are projecting their personal frustrations on everybody else" then when you point out that the regular posters here are actually doing quite well the counterclaim is "well TLSers are just elitist" or even more incredibly "you guys are just trying to dissuade people from going to law school because you're afraid of competition for grades/jobs/etc."


Why is it so hard for people to understand we're actually trying to help?


I wont say that the advice given is wrong (cause its not), but OP asked which school should he/she go to not whether or not it was worth it to go at all to any of those schools. Let me give you a different real life example. When I asked someone whether I should drink scotch or vodka and they got all high and mighty and told me I shouldnt drink alcohol at all and provided statistics on the pit falls of consuming alcohol, I told them to go fuck themselves. The advice may have been right but it was unwarranted and when people give you advice that you dont ask for you tend to not give a shit about their opinions, perhaps getting hostile in the process.

User avatar
somewhatwayward
Posts: 1446
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby somewhatwayward » Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:19 pm

vinnnyvincenzo wrote:
Icculus wrote:
Crowing wrote:The anti-TLS arguments are always the same. It starts out with "TLSers are just bitter people who struck out and are projecting their personal frustrations on everybody else" then when you point out that the regular posters here are actually doing quite well the counterclaim is "well TLSers are just elitist" or even more incredibly "you guys are just trying to dissuade people from going to law school because you're afraid of competition for grades/jobs/etc."


Why is it so hard for people to understand we're actually trying to help?


I wont say that the advice given is wrong (cause its not), but OP asked which school should he/she go to not whether or not it was worth it to go at all to any of those schools. Let me give you a different real life example. When I asked someone whether I should drink scotch or vodka and they got all high and mighty and told me I shouldnt drink alcohol at all and provided statistics on the pit falls of consuming alcohol, I told them to go fuck themselves. The advice may have been right but it was unwarranted and when people give you advice that you dont ask for you tend to not give a shit about their opinions, perhaps getting hostile in the process.


Come on, man. That's a terrible analogy. The worst you get from drinking alcohol is a bad hangover the next day and you're out 20 bucks or whatever. If you screw up and go to a law school with poor employment prospects and you go into massive debt to do so, your life is basically ruined if you aren't in that lucky half who gets a job. Frankly, lucky half is overstating it because a lot of those jobs don't pay enough to service massive debt.

ETA: the scary thing is the new government repayment program, PAYE (pay as you earn), is income-based in that you pay a certain percentage of your disposable income (although they take it right out of your pay check, like your wages are being garnished essentially) but there is no end date, and the interest keeps growing as you go....so basically 15% of your disposable income is garnished for the rest of your life bc interest will grow faster than the amount you are paying. I mention this to illustrate why paying too much for a low chance of a good job literally follows you for the rest of your life.

User avatar
Crowing
Posts: 2636
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 4:20 pm

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby Crowing » Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:28 pm

somewhatwayward wrote:
vinnnyvincenzo wrote:
Icculus wrote:
Crowing wrote:The anti-TLS arguments are always the same. It starts out with "TLSers are just bitter people who struck out and are projecting their personal frustrations on everybody else" then when you point out that the regular posters here are actually doing quite well the counterclaim is "well TLSers are just elitist" or even more incredibly "you guys are just trying to dissuade people from going to law school because you're afraid of competition for grades/jobs/etc."


Why is it so hard for people to understand we're actually trying to help?


I wont say that the advice given is wrong (cause its not), but OP asked which school should he/she go to not whether or not it was worth it to go at all to any of those schools. Let me give you a different real life example. When I asked someone whether I should drink scotch or vodka and they got all high and mighty and told me I shouldnt drink alcohol at all and provided statistics on the pit falls of consuming alcohol, I told them to go fuck themselves. The advice may have been right but it was unwarranted and when people give you advice that you dont ask for you tend to not give a shit about their opinions, perhaps getting hostile in the process.


Come on, man. That's a terrible analogy. The worst you get from drinking alcohol is a bad hangover the next day and you're out 20 bucks or whatever. If you screw up and go to a law school with poor employment prospects and you go into massive debt to do so, your life is basically ruined if you aren't in that lucky half who gets a job. Frankly, lucky half is overstating it because a lot of those jobs don't pay enough to service massive debt.


Idk conceptually I kinda agree with him. I don't think most posters would be brazen enough to insist to someone making a decision between TTTs irl to retake or not go - at some point there's not much more to do than respect the right of people to make their own (poor) decisions. Some people legitimately come here clueless and can benefit a lot from more general advice. But overall the relevant information is all over the place, and if somebody posts multiple times about how they absolutely will not retake or reconsider, then I don't view it as my job or right to continue pushing them about it. I'd just respond to their specific question and leave it at that. But obviously a lot of people here don't feel that way.

User avatar
hephaestus
Posts: 2385
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 4:21 pm

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby hephaestus » Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:32 pm

I regularly tell people in real life to retake or don't go. You have to be real with people. I don't want my friends/aquantinces/random Internet people to ruin their lives by lining the pockets of an unscrupulous dean.

vinnnyvincenzo
Posts: 150
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 12:05 pm

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby vinnnyvincenzo » Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:34 pm

somewhatwayward wrote:
vinnnyvincenzo wrote:
Icculus wrote:
Crowing wrote:The anti-TLS arguments are always the same. It starts out with "TLSers are just bitter people who struck out and are projecting their personal frustrations on everybody else" then when you point out that the regular posters here are actually doing quite well the counterclaim is "well TLSers are just elitist" or even more incredibly "you guys are just trying to dissuade people from going to law school because you're afraid of competition for grades/jobs/etc."


Why is it so hard for people to understand we're actually trying to help?


I wont say that the advice given is wrong (cause its not), but OP asked which school should he/she go to not whether or not it was worth it to go at all to any of those schools. Let me give you a different real life example. When I asked someone whether I should drink scotch or vodka and they got all high and mighty and told me I shouldnt drink alcohol at all and provided statistics on the pit falls of consuming alcohol, I told them to go fuck themselves. The advice may have been right but it was unwarranted and when people give you advice that you dont ask for you tend to not give a shit about their opinions, perhaps getting hostile in the process.


Come on, man. That's a terrible analogy. The worst you get from drinking alcohol is a bad hangover the next day and you're out 20 bucks or whatever. If you screw up and go to a law school with poor employment prospects and you go into massive debt to do so, your life is basically ruined if you aren't in that lucky half who gets a job. Frankly, lucky half is overstating it because a lot of those jobs don't pay enough to service massive debt.

ETA: the scary thing is the new government repayment program, PAYE (pay as you earn), is income-based in that you pay a certain percentage of your disposable income (although they take it right out of your pay check, like your wages are being garnished essentially) but there is no end date, and the interest keeps growing as you go....so basically 15% of your disposable income is garnished for the rest of your life bc interest will grow faster than the amount you are paying. I mention this to illustrate why paying too much for a low chance of a good job literally follows you for the rest of your life.


It might not be a good analogy, but the overall point is valid. OP asked something and rather than answer it people berate him/her. I'm just arguing that people get hostile because people don't give them the advice they asked for.

FYI, there are definitely a lot of worse outcomes from drinking then just a hangover and lighter wallet. Go to an AA meeting and you'll hear some real shitty stories about people's ruined lives.

timbs4339
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby timbs4339 » Mon Feb 18, 2013 4:53 pm

vinnnyvincenzo wrote:It might not be a good analogy, but the overall point is valid. OP asked something and rather than answer it people berate him/her. I'm just arguing that people get hostile because people don't give them the advice they asked for.

FYI, there are definitely a lot of worse outcomes from drinking then just a hangover and lighter wallet. Go to an AA meeting and you'll hear some real shitty stories about people's ruined lives.


It's a poor analogy because there's another parallel analogy where you absolutely would tell the person not to make that choice, i.e. should I saw off my leg with a knife or a saw. Or should I take 12 shots of whisky or 12 shots of rum in the next five minutes. It's all contextual, and when 80% of people coming out of the school either 1) don't get jobs as lawyers, 2) don't get jobs paying nearly enough to service 150K or 200K in debt, it looks more like the hypos I mentioned.

Now I can actually envision a scenario where it does make sense to attend say, St. John's on full scholly with low stips and if you want to practice small law, PD, or DA. Just like I could imagine a scenario where it makes sense to saw off your leg. But most people don't have the above conditions.

Ti Malice
Posts: 1955
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 2:55 am

Re: NYLS v. St. John's v. Seton Hall v. Drexel v. Pace

Postby Ti Malice » Mon Feb 18, 2013 5:56 pm

somewhatwayward wrote:Come on, man. That's a terrible analogy. The worst you get from drinking alcohol is a bad hangover the next day and you're out 20 bucks or whatever. If you screw up and go to a law school with poor employment prospects and you go into massive debt to do so, your life is basically ruined if you aren't in that lucky half who gets a job. Frankly, lucky half is overstating it because a lot of those jobs don't pay enough to service massive debt.


Well said. The severity of the mistake's probable consequences is why people aren't willing to set aside their consciences and coolly advise someone as to which of the potentially life-ruining choices is the better one. A more apt (if still inexact) analogy would be to consider the response you should offer if someone asks you whether he should drink this quart of motor oil or that can of paint thinner.

ETA: There I go making unnecessary posts again. Well said, timbs.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest