Mr. Matlock wrote::lol:
Maybe I'm waaaaaayyy out in right field on this one, since it hasn't been already brought up, but just how many people each year do you think this "Third Time's a Charm Wait List Policy" of yours would affect? I'm going to go out on a limb and open up the over/under at 5.
These are missile baffles:
Missile baffles: lolwut? I understand what they do, but how are they relevant? Wait. Better question, is it possible that missile baffles are more relevant than the entirety of the rest of this thread? I think so.
PDaddy wrote:To the poster who says he “differs” about my numbers (3.62/162) being adequate for the elite schools. You are an idiot. There are URM’s with both lower LSAT’s and GPA’s getting into top-10 schools, and doing very well. There are splitters of all backgrounds with 3.9/158 or 3.2/170 getting into the top-10 schools, and kicking ass. You sound ridiculous.
I never said your numbers are inadequate, my comprehension-challenged friend, nor did I claim that splitters and URMs do not fare well at top schools. As both splitter and part Native American, that would seem to run counter to my own interests, would it not? If I were you, I'd be much more careful about throwing around labels like "idiot" in the future, lest they be shown to be more applicable to yourself. Please note the bold text in the specific post to which you refer; I said you displayed a sense of being entitled to admission throughout your comments in this thread, not that your numbers are inadequate for top schools. That said, you've taken the entitlement lunacy to a whole new level in your last tirade.
PDaddy wrote:I also know that, had I been applying in 2004 with my numbers, I could have been at Harvard.
Really? Really? Your history of being WLed at fine (yet lesser) institutions leads me to believe that you would not be admitted to Harvard in any cycle. I'm sorry you feel as though you've been treated unfairly by the admissions process. However, your story, aside from the remarkable tenacity displayed in refusing to accept "maybe" as an answer for three years, seems no more remarkable than that of any other applicant. Like vanwinkle said, there's some reason they don't want you. If it's not the numbers, as you've opined, it must be the application. I hope it works out better for you this cycle, I really do.
clintonius wrote:What a truly fantastic read for an insomniac newbie. Not there are any lessons to be learned that I hadn't picked up from, y'know, existing in a world where human relations and logic play any part. But still, bravo.
Do yourself a favor and stay away from this thread. OP's scorn for logic is infectious and there are no lessons to be learned here aside from those telling rational people to stay the hell out of pointless arguments on message boards.
Edit: Fix't unintentional alternate meaning