Biglaw Concerns please

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby paratactical » Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:19 pm

LSHopeful2 wrote:Rich in composition and truth, yes, dumb-ass. Now stop bothering me. GTFO (x2).

u mad?

User avatar
stratocophic
Posts: 2207
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 6:24 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby stratocophic » Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:20 pm

paratactical wrote:
LSHopeful2 wrote:Rich in composition and truth, yes, dumb-ass. Now stop bothering me. GTFO (x2).

u mad?

Image

User avatar
mrmangs
Posts: 674
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby mrmangs » Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:20 pm

LSHopeful2 wrote:Rich in composition and truth, yes, dumb-ass. Now stop bothering me. GTFO (x2).


She, and I, thought you were flame because lots of flamers post exactly the sort of questions you asked. I think it's clear at this point you are just really naive and don't have much knowledge about law (I don't mean to offend, just being honest).

Yes, people on the internet can be mean. But don't take it personally. You don't know them and they don't know you. You can easily walk away from this... There is no need for you to respond to her baiting. Good luck.

User avatar
LSHopeful2
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 5:05 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby LSHopeful2 » Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:23 pm

My my, another incompetent remark, eh? You seem to think that I stated some "objectionable" comments in my posts which makes you want to act childish. If there's any truth to the adage to the statement, "Lawyers are the scum of the earth" then I would certainly believe that thus far. Of course, there are many other genuine attorneys who care to help others, including those with inquiring minds.
The Lord your God (whom you probably don't believe in) would advise you to treat your fellow beings with respect.

User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby paratactical » Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:24 pm

mrmangs wrote:
LSHopeful2 wrote:Rich in composition and truth, yes, dumb-ass. Now stop bothering me. GTFO (x2).


She, and I, thought you were flame because lots of flamers post exactly the sort of questions you asked. I think it's clear at this point you are just really naive and don't have much knowledge about law (I don't mean to offend, just being honest).

Yes, people on the internet can be mean. But don't take it personally. You don't know them and they don't know you. You can easily walk away from this... There is no need for you to respond to her baiting. Good luck.

You know, I wasn't trying to bait LSHopeful. I offered to answer any questions they asked. It wasn't until the post about international law that I said I doubted the sincerity of the post (where you agreed with me). When another post came, I said basically what you're saying here, which is that the OP needs to do some research because they don't really know what the field they are talking about is. I've worked in two very highly rated biglaw firms in two different markets and while I'm not the best measure, I do have a pretty good idea of what the day to day is like. I offered help if the OP asked actual questions rather than just rambling vaguely. I do bait people at times, but this was me trying to be helpful and some ignorant person going batshit on me suddenly. This one is not my bad.

User avatar
mrmangs
Posts: 674
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby mrmangs » Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:24 pm

LSHopeful2 wrote:My my, another incompetent remark, eh? You seem to think that I stated some "objectionable" comments in my posts which makes you want to act childish. If there's any truth to the adage to the statement, "Lawyers are the scum of the earth" then I would certainly believe that thus far. Of course, there are many other genuine attorneys who care to help others, including those with inquiring minds.
The Lord your God (whom you probably don't believe in) would advise you to treat your fellow beings with respect.


Wait, are you flame?

User avatar
LSHopeful2
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 5:05 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby LSHopeful2 » Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:27 pm

I am not naive about the hours of law firm work, the nature of work you do, and the possibility of going against your morals or values in law (ever heard of Islamic Banking sponsored by the Treasury and Wall Street? Endorsed in order to avoid USURY).

On a rudimentary level, I certainly am not "naive", as you assert, about the nature or practice of law. The further intricacies of law will be later laid out accordingly once you begin practicing in any given field. Fair enough.
Last edited by LSHopeful2 on Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby paratactical » Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:27 pm

mrmangs wrote:
LSHopeful2 wrote:My my, another incompetent remark, eh? You seem to think that I stated some "objectionable" comments in my posts which makes you want to act childish. If there's any truth to the adage to the statement, "Lawyers are the scum of the earth" then I would certainly believe that thus far. Of course, there are many other genuine attorneys who care to help others, including those with inquiring minds.
The Lord your God (whom you probably don't believe in) would advise you to treat your fellow beings with respect.


Wait, are you flame?


I'm betting the last two anon posts are the OP.

User avatar
mrmangs
Posts: 674
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby mrmangs » Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:29 pm

paratactical wrote:
mrmangs wrote:
LSHopeful2 wrote:Rich in composition and truth, yes, dumb-ass. Now stop bothering me. GTFO (x2).


She, and I, thought you were flame because lots of flamers post exactly the sort of questions you asked. I think it's clear at this point you are just really naive and don't have much knowledge about law (I don't mean to offend, just being honest).

Yes, people on the internet can be mean. But don't take it personally. You don't know them and they don't know you. You can easily walk away from this... There is no need for you to respond to her baiting. Good luck.

You know, I wasn't trying to bait LSHopeful. I offered to answer any questions they asked. It wasn't until the post about international law that I said I doubted the sincerity of the post (where you agreed with me). When another post came, I said basically what you're saying here, which is that the OP needs to do some research because they don't really know what the field they are talking about is. I've worked in two very highly rated biglaw firms in two different markets and while I'm not the best measure, I do have a pretty good idea of what the day to day is like. I offered help if the OP asked actual questions rather than just rambling vaguely. I do bait people at times, but this was me trying to be helpful and some ignorant person going batshit on me suddenly. This one is not my bad.


Oh, I agree. You were blunt, but on point. I just had a feeling like I knew where this was going, however, and I felt a twinge of sympathy for the poor guy. But now I can't take him seriously anymore. :lol:.

User avatar
LSHopeful2
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 5:05 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby LSHopeful2 » Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:37 pm

paratactical wrote:
mrmangs wrote:
LSHopeful2 wrote:Rich in composition and truth, yes, dumb-ass. Now stop bothering me. GTFO (x2).


She, and I, thought you were flame because lots of flamers post exactly the sort of questions you asked. I think it's clear at this point you are just really naive and don't have much knowledge about law (I don't mean to offend, just being honest).

Yes, people on the internet can be mean. But don't take it personally. You don't know them and they don't know you. You can easily walk away from this... There is no need for you to respond to her baiting. Good luck.

You know, I wasn't trying to bait LSHopeful. I offered to answer any questions they asked. It wasn't until the post about international law that I said I doubted the sincerity of the post (where you agreed with me). When another post came, I said basically what you're saying here, which is that the OP needs to do some research because they don't really know what the field they are talking about is. I've worked in two very highly rated biglaw firms in two different markets and while I'm not the best measure, I do have a pretty good idea of what the day to day is like. I offered help if the OP asked actual questions rather than just rambling vaguely. I do bait people at times, but this was me trying to be helpful and some ignorant person going batshit on me suddenly. This one is not my bad.


Hey dumb-ass, what would lead you to doubt the sincerity of my post with regard to international law? Why would you automatically conclude that? Do you see what is going on in Palestine, how the occupied territories have given rise to a region of constant war-fare and instability? International law, along with many other fields of law, is what thrills me. "Law" may be an umbrella term, so before fucking pissing people off, calling people clueless, and what have you, why not make use of yourself to describe the differences and offer a piece of your (doubtful) advice?

If you thought my post was a flame, that's your problem, not mine. Again, as I stated, I didn't mock anyone or anything, and did not resort to "the law is a joke," or, "Lawyers are scum" (but now I see that to be quasi-true, given the nature of your remarks).

So, stop assuming and start reading.

User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby paratactical » Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:42 pm

LSHopeful2 wrote:Hey dumb-ass, what would lead you to doubt the sincerity of my post with regard to international law? Why would you automatically conclude that? Do you see what is going on in Palestine, how the occupied territories have given rise to a region of constant war-fare and instability? International law, along with many other fields of law, is what thrills me. "Law" may be an umbrella term, so before fucking pissing people off, calling people clueless, and what have you, why not make use of yourself to describe the differences and offer a piece of your (doubtful) advice?

If you thought my post was a flame, that's your problem, not mine. Again, as I stated, I didn't mock anyone or anything, and did not resort to "the law is a joke," or, "Lawyers are scum" (but now I see that to be quasi-true, given the nature of your remarks).

So, stop assuming and start reading.


Here, moran, stop posting and starting doing some research and reading so you don't sound so damn stupid.

http://www.annaivey.com/iveyfiles/2008/ ... e_the_hype

Here, I'll even quote some important shit so you don't have to think too hard.

No law student should expect ex ante to have a career in int'l law, given how small the field actually is. But it's no wonder, as Anna suggests, that kids still buy into the myth--because schools like hls, nyu, and columbia (along with many lesser ones) have bloated int'l law programs that perpetuate and use this myth to sell themselves.

User avatar
LSHopeful2
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 5:05 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby LSHopeful2 » Wed Dec 01, 2010 6:51 pm

paratactical wrote:
LSHopeful2 wrote:Hey dumb-ass, what would lead you to doubt the sincerity of my post with regard to international law? Why would you automatically conclude that? Do you see what is going on in Palestine, how the occupied territories have given rise to a region of constant war-fare and instability? International law, along with many other fields of law, is what thrills me. "Law" may be an umbrella term, so before fucking pissing people off, calling people clueless, and what have you, why not make use of yourself to describe the differences and offer a piece of your (doubtful) advice?

If you thought my post was a flame, that's your problem, not mine. Again, as I stated, I didn't mock anyone or anything, and did not resort to "the law is a joke," or, "Lawyers are scum" (but now I see that to be quasi-true, given the nature of your remarks).

So, stop assuming and start reading.


Here, moran, stop posting and starting doing some research and reading so you don't sound so damn stupid.

http://www.annaivey.com/iveyfiles/2008/ ... e_the_hype

Here, I'll even quote some important shit so you don't have to think too hard.

No law student should expect ex ante to have a career in int'l law, given how small the field actually is. But it's no wonder, as Anna suggests, that kids still buy into the myth--because schools like hls, nyu, and columbia (along with many lesser ones) have bloated int'l law programs that perpetuate and use this myth to sell themselves.



Now, if you initially described the prospects of international law without being pompous or pretentious by simply stating "prospects for international law and the field of work you describe are quite limited" professionally, or providing some link where one can read that to in fact be the case, you would have saved us a lot of time.

So, next time, you incompetent fool, offer to be professional and give some sound advice, rather than mocking others and trying to appear like a big-shot.

You child. Backtrack my posts with regard to the Geneva Conventions and International law issues. Sure, I may not have been aware of how limited this field is, so, you could have described the prospects professionally as to its availability in a concise and articulate matter. Point taken.

Now that I have established this in your incompetent mind, perhaps next time you won't be so judgmental and won't assume that everything you see is, as you call it, "a flame."

sissyclark
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby sissyclark » Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:05 pm

OP is like one of those kids that everyone picked on in middle school because he got so mad whenever you would pick on him. OP, If by some magic chance you ever get a job around people, you're gonna have a tough time.

User avatar
LSHopeful2
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 5:05 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby LSHopeful2 » Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:09 pm

^Actually, I was not. I just don't see anything wrong with the notion of professionalism and not resorting to childish, rude remarks as exhibited by para's posts. If you can't accept that as I do, then you are a sadist, meaning you love to find joy in the debasement of others. So, the equation backs on to you: You were the one who was picked on, and finds "pride" in bashing others in order to counter-balance the effects of childhood harassment by those who wronged you.

I'm just advocating respect and common courtesy. Seems to be an issue for you.

sissyclark
Posts: 52
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby sissyclark » Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:15 pm

I swear, OP was homeschooled.

User avatar
mrmangs
Posts: 674
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby mrmangs » Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:16 pm

LSHopeful2 wrote:
paratactical wrote:
LSHopeful2 wrote:Hey dumb-ass, what would lead you to doubt the sincerity of my post with regard to international law? Why would you automatically conclude that? Do you see what is going on in Palestine, how the occupied territories have given rise to a region of constant war-fare and instability? International law, along with many other fields of law, is what thrills me. "Law" may be an umbrella term, so before fucking pissing people off, calling people clueless, and what have you, why not make use of yourself to describe the differences and offer a piece of your (doubtful) advice?

If you thought my post was a flame, that's your problem, not mine. Again, as I stated, I didn't mock anyone or anything, and did not resort to "the law is a joke," or, "Lawyers are scum" (but now I see that to be quasi-true, given the nature of your remarks).

So, stop assuming and start reading.


Here, moran, stop posting and starting doing some research and reading so you don't sound so damn stupid.

http://www.annaivey.com/iveyfiles/2008/ ... e_the_hype

Here, I'll even quote some important shit so you don't have to think too hard.

No law student should expect ex ante to have a career in int'l law, given how small the field actually is. But it's no wonder, as Anna suggests, that kids still buy into the myth--because schools like hls, nyu, and columbia (along with many lesser ones) have bloated int'l law programs that perpetuate and use this myth to sell themselves.



Now, if you initially described the prospects of international law without being pompous or pretentious by simply stating "prospects for international law and the field of work you describe are quite limited" professionally, or providing some link where one can read that to in fact be the case, you would have saved us a lot of time.

So, next time, you incompetent fool, offer to be professional and give some sound advice, rather than mocking others and trying to appear like a big-shot.

You child. Backtrack my posts with regard to the Geneva Conventions and International law issues. Sure, I may not have been aware of how limited this field is, so, you could have described the prospects professionally as to its availability in a concise and articulate matter. Point taken.

Now that I have established this in your incompetent mind, perhaps next time you won't be so judgmental and won't assume that everything you see is, as you call it, "a flame."


Oh, god. This made me laugh out loud at work and now everyone is staring at me.

User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby paratactical » Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:17 pm

mrmangs wrote:
Oh, god. This made me laugh out loud at work and now everyone is staring at me.

Clearly you're just and jerk face jerk!

User avatar
LSHopeful2
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 5:05 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby LSHopeful2 » Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:18 pm

Come to grips with reality, retard. You know that professionalism trumps any and every childish, or rude remark. Professionalism at the workplace, at guests houses, even on the internet, so as to make your case and present it legitimately (at least in theory). I have pity for you since you can't accept to acknowledge this standard. Shame, man, shame! :D

User avatar
stratocophic
Posts: 2207
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 6:24 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby stratocophic » Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:22 pm

Going to go out on a limb here and say English is not a certain somebody's first language.

User avatar
FunkyJD
Posts: 1039
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 3:38 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby FunkyJD » Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:23 pm

smh at this thread :lol:

User avatar
LSHopeful2
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 5:05 pm

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby LSHopeful2 » Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:27 pm

Strat, you know what I said is held by 100% of the general public. What do you have against professionalism? I am saddened for anyone who has employed you, for you fail to accept and acknowledge this universal standard. It seems to me you have no hobbies other than bashing and ridiculing others, for ridicule's sake. Pity!

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: Biglaw Concerns please

Postby vanwinkle » Wed Dec 01, 2010 7:37 pm

LSHopeful2 wrote:Para, you are pissing me off, retard. STFU.

LSHopeful2 wrote:Go back to school and brush up on your common sense and decorum skills. Numbnut. Now stop throwing insults, because you're pissing me off. GTFO.

Impressive. At least two bannable offenses in the same post. (Also, the irony of calling for respect and courtesy afterwards is palpable.) Sadly for you, I'm the one who gets to say GTFO.

Image




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.