Honor Societies?

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
ganja
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 1:39 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby ganja » Fri May 10, 2013 7:32 pm

Btw, I'm trying to get into Miami with a 3.81 and barely cracking 150 so I know where you're coming from.. the struggle

User avatar
LexLeon
Posts: 400
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 11:03 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby LexLeon » Sat May 11, 2013 4:01 pm

stillwater wrote:despite what boomer sympathizers like LexLeon say, law school admissions is a numbers game. LSAT and GPA. lets see 'em, end of story. that is how things work. you want a bump from softs? you better be a rhodes scholar, have won an olympic gold medal or cured cancer. otherwise, no one cares. LOL at more robust candidate. numbers, period.


If admissions is merely a numbers game, why do you see 175/4.0s waitlisted and 176/3.9's rejected?

Maybe you'll respond with "Oh, well they must be felons;" but in that case you'll already have violated your maxim of "numbers...end of story."

If you really believe that (the best) law schools don't seek interesting, philanthropic, and effective leaders, you are incredibly misinformed (and clearly have not communicated with admissions officers at the best schools).

Numbers are not all, or even nearly all, that matter to the best schools; and even a cursory glance at Lawschoolnumbers.com or some profiles on this website should make that clear to you.

User avatar
mephistopheles
Posts: 1947
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 11:43 am

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby mephistopheles » Sat May 11, 2013 4:54 pm

LexLeon wrote:
stillwater wrote:despite what boomer sympathizers like LexLeon say, law school admissions is a numbers game. LSAT and GPA. lets see 'em, end of story. that is how things work. you want a bump from softs? you better be a rhodes scholar, have won an olympic gold medal or cured cancer. otherwise, no one cares. LOL at more robust candidate. numbers, period.


If admissions is merely a numbers game, why do you see 175/4.0s waitlisted and 176/3.9's rejected?

Maybe you'll respond with "Oh, well they must be felons;" but in that case you'll already have violated your maxim of "numbers...end of story."

If you really believe that (the best) law schools don't seek interesting, philanthropic, and effective leaders, you are incredibly misinformed (and clearly have not communicated with admissions officers at the best schools).

Numbers are not all, or even nearly all, that matter to the best schools; and even a cursory glance at Lawschoolnumbers.com or some profiles on this website should make that clear to you.


YP, bro

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 22806
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Sat May 11, 2013 5:09 pm

LexLeon wrote:
stillwater wrote:despite what boomer sympathizers like LexLeon say, law school admissions is a numbers game. LSAT and GPA. lets see 'em, end of story. that is how things work. you want a bump from softs? you better be a rhodes scholar, have won an olympic gold medal or cured cancer. otherwise, no one cares. LOL at more robust candidate. numbers, period.


If admissions is merely a numbers game, why do you see 175/4.0s waitlisted and 176/3.9's rejected?

Maybe you'll respond with "Oh, well they must be felons;" but in that case you'll already have violated your maxim of "numbers...end of story."

If you really believe that (the best) law schools don't seek interesting, philanthropic, and effective leaders, you are incredibly misinformed (and clearly have not communicated with admissions officers at the best schools).

Numbers are not all, or even nearly all, that matter to the best schools; and even a cursory glance at Lawschoolnumbers.com or some profiles on this website should make that clear to you.

It's your "(the best)" caveat that's pertinent here. Admissions is a numbers game unless you're talking HYS, where they can afford to look beyond the numbers (because all their applicants have awesome numbers). Most of the people in this thread don't appear to be aiming for HYS (not a criticism; I sure couldn't get in there), so it's a numbers game. I guess I could buy that softs are weighted about 3% of an app; they also can break ties. But that doesn't mean that for all intents and purposes for 95% of applicants, it's anything other than a numbers game.

Besides, even if it weren't a numbers game, doing an activity purely for the sake of getting it on your resume for your law school app is not really the way to show you're an interesting, philanthopic, effective leader.

User avatar
North
Posts: 4040
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 7:09 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby North » Sat May 11, 2013 6:05 pm

LexLeon wrote:If admissions is merely a numbers game, why do you see 175/4.0s waitlisted and 176/3.9's rejected?

Maybe you'll respond with "Oh, well they must be felons;" but in that case you'll already have violated your maxim of "numbers...end of story."

If you really believe that (the best) law schools don't seek interesting, philanthropic, and effective leaders, you are incredibly misinformed (and clearly have not communicated with admissions officers at the best schools).

Numbers are not all, or even nearly all, that matter to the best schools; and even a cursory glance at Lawschoolnumbers.com or some profiles on this website should make that clear to you.

Take a look at these charts and come back when you understand that numbers are, at the VERY LEAST, "nearly all" that matters to law schools. AdComms lie, dude. All the time.

User avatar
stillwater
Posts: 3811
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:59 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby stillwater » Sat May 11, 2013 6:18 pm

North wrote:
LexLeon wrote:If admissions is merely a numbers game, why do you see 175/4.0s waitlisted and 176/3.9's rejected?

Maybe you'll respond with "Oh, well they must be felons;" but in that case you'll already have violated your maxim of "numbers...end of story."

If you really believe that (the best) law schools don't seek interesting, philanthropic, and effective leaders, you are incredibly misinformed (and clearly have not communicated with admissions officers at the best schools).

Numbers are not all, or even nearly all, that matter to the best schools; and even a cursory glance at Lawschoolnumbers.com or some profiles on this website should make that clear to you.

AdComms lie, dude. All the time.

User avatar
LexLeon
Posts: 400
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 11:03 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby LexLeon » Mon May 13, 2013 3:59 pm

North wrote:
LexLeon wrote:If admissions is merely a numbers game, why do you see 175/4.0s waitlisted and 176/3.9's rejected?

Maybe you'll respond with "Oh, well they must be felons;" but in that case you'll already have violated your maxim of "numbers...end of story."

If you really believe that (the best) law schools don't seek interesting, philanthropic, and effective leaders, you are incredibly misinformed (and clearly have not communicated with admissions officers at the best schools).

Numbers are not all, or even nearly all, that matter to the best schools; and even a cursory glance at Lawschoolnumbers.com or some profiles on this website should make that clear to you.

Take a look at these charts and come back when you understand that numbers are, at the VERY LEAST, "nearly all" that matters to law schools. AdComms lie, dude. All the time.


I think it's more likely that you're mistaken than that admissions officers lie to the extent you suggest. Consider this:

Above The Law has provided its own ranking of schools that doesn't consider the GPAs and LSAT scores of students in the classes at those schools. In the ranking, the four schools that are "best" according to USNWR are "best" according to ATL. These are four of the best schools that I alluded to above; I think they are four of the objectively best schools, human beings' rankings aside.

[A. Nony Mouse was astute enough to recognize my qualification with regard to speaking about only the best schools.]

What you can now see is true about the best schools--their quality stands alone, aside from the numbers of the students they accept, as excellent--I claim is true about the best students. The best students, who are sought by the best schools, are excellent as people, aside from their GPAs and LSAT scores, which merely reflect the fact.

Just like looking at the data you present may suggest that schools care primarily about numbers, looking at the USNWR ranking would suggest that the best schools are the best because of the numbers of they students they admit. Obviously, that's false. (It was obviously false to me anyway, but now the ATL rankings also strongly suggest it.)

Numbers are neither necessary nor sufficient for entry to any of the best schools, precisely because numbers are not what matter to them over and above they quality of person they admit.

User avatar
stillwater
Posts: 3811
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:59 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby stillwater » Mon May 13, 2013 4:10 pm

LexLeon wrote:
North wrote:
LexLeon wrote:If admissions is merely a numbers game, why do you see 175/4.0s waitlisted and 176/3.9's rejected?

Maybe you'll respond with "Oh, well they must be felons;" but in that case you'll already have violated your maxim of "numbers...end of story."

If you really believe that (the best) law schools don't seek interesting, philanthropic, and effective leaders, you are incredibly misinformed (and clearly have not communicated with admissions officers at the best schools).

Numbers are not all, or even nearly all, that matter to the best schools; and even a cursory glance at Lawschoolnumbers.com or some profiles on this website should make that clear to you.

Take a look at these charts and come back when you understand that numbers are, at the VERY LEAST, "nearly all" that matters to law schools. AdComms lie, dude. All the time.


I think it's more likely that you're mistaken than that admissions officers lie to the extent you suggest. Consider this:

Above The Law has provided its own ranking of schools that doesn't consider the GPAs and LSAT scores of students in the classes at those schools. In the ranking, the four schools that are "best" according to USNWR are "best" according to ATL. These are four of the best schools that I alluded to above; I think they are four of the objectively best schools, human beings' rankings aside.

[A. Nony Mouse was astute enough to recognize my qualification with regard to speaking about only the best schools.]

What you can now see is true about the best schools--their quality stands alone, aside from the numbers of the students they accept, as excellent--I claim is true about the best students. The best students, who are sought by the best schools, are excellent as people, aside from their GPAs and LSAT scores, which merely reflect the fact.

Just like looking at the data you present may suggest that schools care primarily about numbers, looking at the USNWR ranking would suggest that the best schools are the best because of the numbers of they students they admit. Obviously, that's false. (It was obviously false to me anyway, but now the ATL rankings also strongly suggest it.)

Numbers are neither necessary nor sufficient for entry to any of the best schools, precisely because numbers are not what matter to them over and above they quality of person they admit.


metrics indicating employment outcomes (ATL) and those indicating the statistical strength of incoming student bodies (USNWR to a large degree) do nothing to corroborate your claim that admissions aren't numbers-based.

User avatar
North
Posts: 4040
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 7:09 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby North » Mon May 13, 2013 5:15 pm

LexLeon wrote:
North wrote:
LexLeon wrote:If admissions is merely a numbers game, why do you see 175/4.0s waitlisted and 176/3.9's rejected?

Maybe you'll respond with "Oh, well they must be felons;" but in that case you'll already have violated your maxim of "numbers...end of story."

If you really believe that (the best) law schools don't seek interesting, philanthropic, and effective leaders, you are incredibly misinformed (and clearly have not communicated with admissions officers at the best schools).

Numbers are not all, or even nearly all, that matter to the best schools; and even a cursory glance at Lawschoolnumbers.com or some profiles on this website should make that clear to you.

Take a look at these charts and come back when you understand that numbers are, at the VERY LEAST, "nearly all" that matters to law schools. AdComms lie, dude. All the time.


I think it's more likely that you're mistaken than that admissions officers lie to the extent you suggest. Consider this:

Above The Law has provided its own ranking of schools that doesn't consider the GPAs and LSAT scores of students in the classes at those schools. In the ranking, the four schools that are "best" according to USNWR are "best" according to ATL. These are four of the best schools that I alluded to above; I think they are four of the objectively best schools, human beings' rankings aside.

[A. Nony Mouse was astute enough to recognize my qualification with regard to speaking about only the best schools.]

What you can now see is true about the best schools--their quality stands alone, aside from the numbers of the students they accept, as excellent--I claim is true about the best students. The best students, who are sought by the best schools, are excellent as people, aside from their GPAs and LSAT scores, which merely reflect the fact.

Just like looking at the data you present may suggest that schools care primarily about numbers, looking at the USNWR ranking would suggest that the best schools are the best because of the numbers of they students they admit. Obviously, that's false. (It was obviously false to me anyway, but now the ATL rankings also strongly suggest it.)

Numbers are neither necessary nor sufficient for entry to any of the best schools, precisely because numbers are not what matter to them over and above they quality of person they admit.

Lol okay dude.

Harvard:
Image

I want you to guess what the sole input is for this graph.

Is it:

(A) EXCELLENCE

or

(B) NUMBERS

User avatar
Dany
Posts: 11580
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:00 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby Dany » Mon May 13, 2013 5:20 pm

:lol:

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 22806
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Mon May 13, 2013 5:25 pm

LexLeon wrote:I think it's more likely that you're mistaken than that admissions officers lie to the extent you suggest. Consider this:

Above The Law has provided its own ranking of schools that doesn't consider the GPAs and LSAT scores of students in the classes at those schools. In the ranking, the four schools that are "best" according to USNWR are "best" according to ATL. These are four of the best schools that I alluded to above; I think they are four of the objectively best schools, human beings' rankings aside.

[A. Nony Mouse was astute enough to recognize my qualification with regard to speaking about only the best schools.]

What you can now see is true about the best schools--their quality stands alone, aside from the numbers of the students they accept, as excellent--I claim is true about the best students. The best students, who are sought by the best schools, are excellent as people, aside from their GPAs and LSAT scores, which merely reflect the fact.

Just like looking at the data you present may suggest that schools care primarily about numbers, looking at the USNWR ranking would suggest that the best schools are the best because of the numbers of they students they admit. Obviously, that's false. (It was obviously false to me anyway, but now the ATL rankings also strongly suggest it.)

Numbers are neither necessary nor sufficient for entry to any of the best schools, precisely because numbers are not what matter to them over and above they quality of person they admit.

My other point was that paying attention to what the "best" schools want in applicants is pretty pointless if your numbers are not competitive for those schools to start with. People can advise me about the qualities NASA wants in an astronaut all I like but it serves no purpose because I suck at math and science.

User avatar
ManOfTheMinute
Posts: 1562
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 12:54 am

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby ManOfTheMinute » Mon May 13, 2013 5:29 pm

A. Nony Mouse wrote:
LexLeon wrote:I think it's more likely that you're mistaken than that admissions officers lie to the extent you suggest. Consider this:

Above The Law has provided its own ranking of schools that doesn't consider the GPAs and LSAT scores of students in the classes at those schools. In the ranking, the four schools that are "best" according to USNWR are "best" according to ATL. These are four of the best schools that I alluded to above; I think they are four of the objectively best schools, human beings' rankings aside.

[A. Nony Mouse was astute enough to recognize my qualification with regard to speaking about only the best schools.]

What you can now see is true about the best schools--their quality stands alone, aside from the numbers of the students they accept, as excellent--I claim is true about the best students. The best students, who are sought by the best schools, are excellent as people, aside from their GPAs and LSAT scores, which merely reflect the fact.

Just like looking at the data you present may suggest that schools care primarily about numbers, looking at the USNWR ranking would suggest that the best schools are the best because of the numbers of they students they admit. Obviously, that's false. (It was obviously false to me anyway, but now the ATL rankings also strongly suggest it.)

Numbers are neither necessary nor sufficient for entry to any of the best schools, precisely because numbers are not what matter to them over and above they quality of person they admit.

My other point was that paying attention to what the "best" schools want in applicants is pretty pointless if your numbers are not competitive for those schools to start with. People can advise me about the qualities NASA wants in an astronaut all I like but it serves no purpose because I suck at math and science.


And that's why the shuttle program no longer exists

User avatar
stillwater
Posts: 3811
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:59 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby stillwater » Mon May 13, 2013 5:29 pm

North wrote:Lol okay dude.

Harvard:
Image

I want you to guess what the sole input is for this graph.

Is it:

(A) EXCELLENCE

or

(B) NUMBERS


that green outlier must have been TRULY EXCELLENT as a person

User avatar
Dr. Dre
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby Dr. Dre » Mon May 13, 2013 8:07 pm

excellent = numbers

User avatar
LexLeon
Posts: 400
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 11:03 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby LexLeon » Mon May 13, 2013 11:27 pm

You broskis and broskettes are missing my point!

According to my idea, we should expect to see that the people with the greatest numbers have the highest rates of acceptance as the best schools.

Why, you ask?

The most excellent people happen to be the most intelligent people who happen to be the people who have the highest numbers.

The correlation and causation conflation is a rudiment of informal logic, of which all of you broskettes and broskis are aware.

Do you see, then, that data like the above graph don't count as a strike against my idea?

I thank Stillwater for noting the outlier on the above graph, who perhaps demonstrates my point and that the maxim "numbers...end of story" cannot be the only important maxim.

User avatar
Dr. Dre
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby Dr. Dre » Mon May 13, 2013 11:35 pm

LexLeon wrote:
According to my idea,




stopped reading

User avatar
Yukos
Posts: 1774
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:47 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby Yukos » Tue May 14, 2013 12:23 am

LexLeon wrote:You broskis and broskettes are missing my point!

According to my idea, we should expect to see that the people with the greatest numbers have the highest rates of acceptance as the best schools.

Why, you ask?

The most excellent people happen to be the most intelligent people who happen to be the people who have the highest numbers.

The correlation and causation conflation is a rudiment of informal logic, of which all of you broskettes and broskis are aware.

Do you see, then, that data like the above graph don't count as a strike against my idea?

I thank Stillwater for noting the outlier on the above graph, who perhaps demonstrates my point and that the maxim "numbers...end of story" cannot be the only important maxim.


I hope for your sake you're trolling.

User avatar
North
Posts: 4040
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 7:09 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby North » Tue May 14, 2013 12:24 am

LexLeon wrote:You broskis and broskettes are missing my point!

According to my idea, we should expect to see that the people with the greatest numbers have the highest rates of acceptance as the best schools.

Why, you ask?

The most excellent people happen to be the most intelligent people who happen to be the people who have the highest numbers.

The correlation and causation conflation is a rudiment of informal logic, of which all of you broskettes and broskis are aware.

Do you see, then, that data like the above graph don't count as a strike against my idea?

I thank Stillwater for noting the outlier on the above graph, who perhaps demonstrates my point and that the maxim "numbers...end of story" cannot be the only important maxim.

I know dude.

You're right.

It's like those salmon that have to jump up stream to get to their nests.

Where it seems OBVIOUS that the ones that get up stream get there because they can jump the farthest.

BUT ACTUALLY

It's because they're THE MOST EXCELLENT SALMON.

User avatar
Dany
Posts: 11580
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:00 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby Dany » Tue May 14, 2013 12:35 am

Dany wrote: :lol:

User avatar
Dr. Dre
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby Dr. Dre » Tue May 14, 2013 12:35 am

Dany wrote:
Dany wrote: :lol:

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby guano » Tue May 14, 2013 1:04 pm

LexLeon wrote:You broskis and broskettes are missing my point!

According to my idea, we should expect to see that the people with the greatest numbers have the highest rates of acceptance as the best schools.

Why, you ask?

The most excellent people happen to be the most intelligent people who happen to be the people who have the highest numbers.

The correlation and causation conflation is a rudiment of informal logic, of which all of you broskettes and broskis are aware.

Do you see, then, that data like the above graph don't count as a strike against my idea?

I thank Stillwater for noting the outlier on the above graph, who perhaps demonstrates my point and that the maxim "numbers...end of story" cannot be the only important maxim.

wait, so, what you're really saying is that schools accept the most excellent people, and that the most excellent people have the highest numbers?
If I recall my "A=B" and "B=C" so "A=C" correctly, that means that schools accept the people with the highest numbers

so we all agree that schools accept the students with the best numbers.

User avatar
Dr. Dre
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 7:10 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby Dr. Dre » Tue May 14, 2013 1:07 pm

:lol:

User avatar
LexLeon
Posts: 400
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 11:03 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby LexLeon » Tue May 14, 2013 2:54 pm

guano wrote:
LexLeon wrote:You broskis and broskettes are missing my point!

According to my idea, we should expect to see that the people with the greatest numbers have the highest rates of acceptance as the best schools.

Why, you ask?

The most excellent people happen to be the most intelligent people who happen to be the people who have the highest numbers.

The correlation and causation conflation is a rudiment of informal logic, of which all of you broskettes and broskis are aware.

Do you see, then, that data like the above graph don't count as a strike against my idea?

I thank Stillwater for noting the outlier on the above graph, who perhaps demonstrates my point and that the maxim "numbers...end of story" cannot be the only important maxim.

wait, so, what you're really saying is that schools accept the most excellent people, and that the most excellent people have the highest numbers?
If I recall my "A=B" and "B=C" so "A=C" correctly, that means that schools accept the people with the highest numbers

so we all agree that schools accept the students with the best numbers.



Of course we agree, dear brother or sister.

But I claim that these students are desired not primarily for their numbers, but for their intelligence, leadership, moral excellence, and other qualities.

User avatar
North
Posts: 4040
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 7:09 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby North » Tue May 14, 2013 3:05 pm

LexLeon wrote:Of course we agree, dear brother or sister.

But I claim that these students are desired not primarily for their numbers, but for their intelligence, leadership, moral excellence, and other qualities.

HLS admit in THE FIGHT OF HIS LIFE to distinguish himself from the RUBES at other T14's who aren't as excellent as him.

User avatar
LexLeon
Posts: 400
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2011 11:03 pm

Re: Honor Societies?

Postby LexLeon » Sat Jun 15, 2013 11:56 pm

North wrote:
LexLeon wrote:Of course we agree, dear brother or sister.

But I claim that these students are desired not primarily for their numbers, but for their intelligence, leadership, moral excellence, and other qualities.

HLS admit in THE FIGHT OF HIS LIFE to distinguish himself from the RUBES at other T14's who aren't as excellent as him.


You guys really love turning to ad hominibus when defeat looms, ay?




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests