Boalt 3L worth returning to school? (Employment Prospects) Forum

[Kronk]

.

[09042014]

Just FYI, we just got the 2010 OCI Bid / Offer / Accept spreadsheet, and I did an approximate count of a 133 people that got jobs from OCI last year, with about triple that in offers (mostly to the same people, I would assume).

So that 30% number must be wrong somehow, or at least skewed. We have a 270-ish person class, but if it gets a big bigger with the transfer class maybe? So 280-290, with 133-ish getting SAs. That'd be about 45%-50% of the class that got jobs through OCI, all those a couple of those offers were government organizations that came to OCI. Either way, I am guessing that 30% stat must have been either a total flame or a number CDO gave out before offers had been accepted or something. Don't know. Can only say that the CDO says the spreadsheet I just read was information from the employers, not from the students.

It was also evident people bid based on location rather than where they would want to get a job. MoFo and Kirkland recruit for all their offices, but each had 100+ bids just for the SF offices and didn't give out near that many interviews, obviously. I imagine if some of those people had big on NYC firms instead they might have had more success. Although if they're anything like me, they didn't big on NYC firms because they hate NYC.

30% was for 2009. 45-50% seems about right.

Also you should probably post this anonymously.

[bilbobaggins]

Just FYI, we just got the 2010 OCI Bid / Offer / Accept spreadsheet, and I did an approximate count of a 133 people that got jobs from OCI last year, with about triple that in offers (mostly to the same people, I would assume).

So that 30% number must be wrong somehow, or at least skewed. We have a 270-ish person class, but if it gets a big bigger with the transfer class maybe? So 280-290, with 133-ish getting SAs. That'd be about 45%-50% of the class that got jobs through OCI, all those a couple of those offers were government organizations that came to OCI. Either way, I am guessing that 30% stat must have been either a total flame or a number CDO gave out before offers had been accepted or something. Don't know. Can only say that the CDO says the spreadsheet I just read was information from the employers, not from the students.

It was also evident people bid based on location rather than where they would want to get a job. MoFo and Kirkland recruit for all their offices, but each had 100+ bids just for the SF offices and didn't give out near that many interviews, obviously. I imagine if some of those people had big on NYC firms instead they might have had more success. Although if they're anything like me, they didn't big on NYC firms because they hate NYC.

30% was for 2009. 45-50% seems about right.

Also you should probably post this anonymously.

For what it's worth, I'd say about 75% of the class does OCI in a wholehearted manner.

[Rock-N-Roll]

Just FYI, we just got the 2010 OCI Bid / Offer / Accept spreadsheet, and I did an approximate count of a 133 people that got jobs from OCI last year, with about triple that in offers (mostly to the same people, I would assume).

So that 30% number must be wrong somehow, or at least skewed. We have a 270-ish person class, but if it gets a big bigger with the transfer class maybe? So 280-290, with 133-ish getting SAs. That'd be about 45%-50% of the class that got jobs through OCI, all those a couple of those offers were government organizations that came to OCI. Either way, I am guessing that 30% stat must have been either a total flame or a number CDO gave out before offers had been accepted or something. Don't know. Can only say that the CDO says the spreadsheet I just read was information from the employers, not from the students.

It was also evident people bid based on location rather than where they would want to get a job. MoFo and Kirkland recruit for all their offices, but each had 100+ bids just for the SF offices and didn't give out near that many interviews, obviously. I imagine if some of those people had big on NYC firms instead they might have had more success. Although if they're anything like me, they didn't big on NYC firms because they hate NYC.

30% was for 2009. 45-50% seems about right.

Also you should probably post this anonymously.

Desert Fox: You are just a hard-core anti-Boalt troll. I am pasting a link below of a graph from this website that actually shows close to 50% for the class of 2009.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=150681

[bilbobaggins]

What's sad is that TLS is one of the few places where trolls can be so successful.

[Rock-N-Roll]

For what it's worth, I'd say about 75% of the class does OCI in a wholehearted manner.

If what you're saying is accurate then: .75 x 270 = 202 students and 133/202 x 100 = 65.8%

[bilbobaggins]

For what it's worth, I'd say about 75% of the class does OCI in a wholehearted manner.

If what you're saying is accurate then: .75 x 270 = 202 students and 133/202 x 100 = 65.8%

I'd say I'm within 5% of being right. I also just looked at the data and there are a few missing offers that I'm aware of (where there are blanks, but I have personal knowledge of individuals working there). Could mean they didn't get them through OCI, but helpful, nonetheless.

[09042014]

Just FYI, we just got the 2010 OCI Bid / Offer / Accept spreadsheet, and I did an approximate count of a 133 people that got jobs from OCI last year, with about triple that in offers (mostly to the same people, I would assume).

So that 30% number must be wrong somehow, or at least skewed. We have a 270-ish person class, but if it gets a big bigger with the transfer class maybe? So 280-290, with 133-ish getting SAs. That'd be about 45%-50% of the class that got jobs through OCI, all those a couple of those offers were government organizations that came to OCI. Either way, I am guessing that 30% stat must have been either a total flame or a number CDO gave out before offers had been accepted or something. Don't know. Can only say that the CDO says the spreadsheet I just read was information from the employers, not from the students.

It was also evident people bid based on location rather than where they would want to get a job. MoFo and Kirkland recruit for all their offices, but each had 100+ bids just for the SF offices and didn't give out near that many interviews, obviously. I imagine if some of those people had big on NYC firms instead they might have had more success. Although if they're anything like me, they didn't big on NYC firms because they hate NYC.

30% was for 2009. 45-50% seems about right.

Also you should probably post this anonymously.

Desert Fox: You are just a hard-core anti-Boalt troll. I am pasting a link below of a graph from this website that actually shows close to 50% for the class of 2009.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=150681

OCI 2009 you dumbass.

[Rock-N-Roll]

Just FYI, we just got the 2010 OCI Bid / Offer / Accept spreadsheet, and I did an approximate count of a 133 people that got jobs from OCI last year, with about triple that in offers (mostly to the same people, I would assume).

So that 30% number must be wrong somehow, or at least skewed. We have a 270-ish person class, but if it gets a big bigger with the transfer class maybe? So 280-290, with 133-ish getting SAs. That'd be about 45%-50% of the class that got jobs through OCI, all those a couple of those offers were government organizations that came to OCI. Either way, I am guessing that 30% stat must have been either a total flame or a number CDO gave out before offers had been accepted or something. Don't know. Can only say that the CDO says the spreadsheet I just read was information from the employers, not from the students.

It was also evident people bid based on location rather than where they would want to get a job. MoFo and Kirkland recruit for all their offices, but each had 100+ bids just for the SF offices and didn't give out near that many interviews, obviously. I imagine if some of those people had big on NYC firms instead they might have had more success. Although if they're anything like me, they didn't big on NYC firms because they hate NYC.

30% was for 2009. 45-50% seems about right.

Also you should probably post this anonymously.

Desert Fox: You are just a hard-core anti-Boalt troll. I am pasting a link below of a graph from this website that actually shows close to 50% for the class of 2009.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=150681

OCI 2009 you dumbass.

Good job. You demonstrated my 0L nube-ish-ness by pointing out this (not insignificant) distinction (between class of '09 and OCI '09).

BUT STILL. If you're gonna call me a dumbass like saying BOOM case-closed, you better come up with some actual data to support that 30% claim of yours.

Otherwise the troll accusation stands!

[09042014]

Shut the fuck up, you are out of your element.

[Kronk]

DF isn't trolling, and the 30% wasn't his stat. Someone else put that out there, and DF was just pointing out that the 30% stat was from 2009 OCI rather than the 2010 numbers being discussed now.

[Rock-N-Roll]

DF isn't trolling, and the 30% wasn't his stat. Someone else put that out there, and DF was just pointing out that the 30% stat was from 2009 OCI rather than the 2010 numbers being discussed now.

Believe me. I understand.
I just don't think he is right about 2009 OCI being 30%.

[Rock-N-Roll]

Shut the fuck up, you are out of your element.

How 'bout less aggression and more data please? What is your source for 30% 2009 OCI?

[Kronk]

DF isn't trolling, and the 30% wasn't his stat. Someone else put that out there, and DF was just pointing out that the 30% stat was from 2009 OCI rather than the 2010 numbers being discussed now.

Believe me. I understand.
I just don't think he is right about 2009 OCI being 30%.

He wasn't even arguing that. Someone else was.

[Rock-N-Roll]

30% was for 2009. 45-50% seems about right.

Kronk: Respectfully, you missed it. Desert Fox quotes 30% here as fact.

[bilbobaggins]

The internet, where everyone has an opinion and people get angry about nothing.

[Rock-N-Roll]

The internet, where everyone has an opinion and people get angry about nothing.

Are you guys saying I'm off-base? I just hate the amount of unsubstantiated data and information that gets thrown around this site.

As someone on their way to Boalt, I felt I had a right to call him on it.

[Kronk]

30% was for 2009. 45-50% seems about right.

Kronk: Respectfully, you missed it. Desert Fox quotes 30% here as fact.

Respectfully, no he doesn't. DF doesn't know shit about the 30% number except that someone else quoted it. He didn't argue the 30% number either way. If you want to know about the 30% number, ask the troll who started this thread (boaltrising3L).

ETA: And as far as I'm aware, the 30% number was a rumor that some people started, saying that CDO told them 30% got jobs at OCI. No one ever substantiated it, but it was flying around in this thread and on xoxo. I would guess the real number was more around 40-45%, but I have no idea.

[Rock-N-Roll]

The internet, where everyone has an opinion and people get angry about nothing.

And bilbobaggins, I've seen your ire raised a couple of times when people have served up BS on Boalt in the past. I liked that about you.

[bilbobaggins]

30% was for 2009. 45-50% seems about right.

Kronk: Respectfully, you missed it. Desert Fox quotes 30% here as fact.

Respectfully, no he doesn't. DF doesn't know shit about the 30% number except that someone else quoted it. He didn't argue the 30% number either way. If you want to know about the 30% number, ask the troll who started this thread (boaltrising3L).

I wasn't referring to you, Rock, about the anger.

This is sort of bullshit, dude. If he doesn't know the number to be accurate he shouldn't be presenting it as such. By saying "30% was for 2009" he is presenting it as such. If someone says it like that people are going to ask why he's quoting that number. If it's not his number, he should attribute it. This is how trolling in general and Boalt-trolling in particular generally occurs.

[Rock-N-Roll]

30% was for 2009. 45-50% seems about right.

Kronk: Respectfully, you missed it. Desert Fox quotes 30% here as fact.

Respectfully, no he doesn't. DF doesn't know shit about the 30% number except that someone else quoted it. He didn't argue the 30% number either way. If you want to know about the 30% number, ask the troll who started this thread (boaltrising3L).

I wasn't referring to you, Rock, about the anger.

This is sort of bullshit, dude. If he doesn't know the number to be accurate he shouldn't be presenting it as such. By saying "30% was for 2009" he is presenting it as such. If someone says it like that people are going to ask why he's quoting that number. If it's not his number, he should attribute it. This is how trolling in general and Boalt-trolling in particular generally occurs.

Thanks. That's how I feel.

[Kronk]

Well I edited it to show where the 30% number came from. DF isn't an idiot, and he knows the difference between a rumor and a hard statistic (I would assume, though the dude can't spell so who knows).

[09042014]

I guess I need to retard proof my message for the boaltie 0Ls.

I was clearly referring to Kronks claim that the 30% figure must be wrong because he counts 45-50%. I replied that 30% was for a different year. If it would make you waterheads feel better, next time I will write it out as "The 30% claim was for 2009. That data is for 2010. That seems right."

That 165 25%ile really shows in some of these threads.

^That is Boalt antitrolling.

[Kronk]

I guess I need to retard proof my message for the boaltie 0Ls.

I was clearly referring to Kronks claim that the 30% figure must be wrong because he counts 45-50%. I replied that 30% was for a different year. If it would make you waterheads feel better, next time I will write it out as "The 30% claim was for 2009. That data is for 2010. That seems right."

That 165 25%ile really shows in some of these threads.

^That is Boalt antitrolling.

I like how I defended you and then you diarrhead'd all over Boalt anyway. Shows the moral compass of someone from NorthwesTTTern.

[Rock-N-Roll]

Well I edited it to show where the 30% number came from. DF isn't an idiot, and he knows the difference between a rumor and a hard statistic (I would assume, though the dude can't spell so who knows).

Kronk: I'm saying the unsubstantiated BS people quote on here as fact DOES affect 0Ls who are just grasping at straws, trying to find a shred of meaningful data to help guide their decision of what law school to attend.

And it's neither here nor there, but if what you're saying is true about Dersert Fox's intention, he could have surely told me that instead of telling me to F' off.