The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

(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.
hashashin
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 8:41 pm

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby hashashin » Wed Aug 07, 2013 8:42 pm

That said, Campos is still less of a douchebag than Brian Leiter.

NYstate
Posts: 1566
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:44 am

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby NYstate » Wed Aug 07, 2013 8:49 pm

I'm not interested in arguing with uninformed idiots. For example, you can believe that top schools hid the number of students they hired to boost their numbers until forced to account for them, or not. I don't really care.

If you want to address Campos, he posts here so PM him and see what he has to say. I read his blog when he was writing it and I don't recall the story you are describing.

I'm not sure why you are so quick to defend top schools. Here are two quick lies schools tell on their websites: they consider all LSAT scores so consider that before you retake ( or words to that effect) and that they have a holistic admission process that doesn't focus solely on numbers. This is true at a couple of schools but not most of the top schools, even Columbia and NYU.

But, honestly, I don't care what you believe. The evidence and history are all there for anyone with a brain to figure out.

hashashin
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 8:41 pm

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby hashashin » Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:04 pm

Tone down the Campos hagiography, brah.

As for Campos exploiting his student's suicide, here ya go: http://insidethelawschoolscam.blogspot.com/2011/09/lawyers-story.html

User avatar
Bikeflip
Posts: 1833
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby Bikeflip » Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:11 pm


hashashin
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 8:41 pm

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby hashashin » Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:12 pm

NYstate wrote:I'm not sure why you are so quick to defend top schools. Here are two quick lies schools tell on their websites: they consider all LSAT scores so consider that before you retake ( or words to that effect) and that they have a holistic admission process that doesn't focus solely on numbers. This is true at a couple of schools but not most of the top schools, even Columbia and NYU.


...Top schools probably SHOULD focus mostly on numbers, since LSAT scores, at least, indicate (with passable high accuracy) how high a given candidate's aptitude is for executive reasoning, which you kinda need if you intend to handle complex transactions. So, if their "lie" leads to a largely meritocratic distribution of top test-takers into top law schools, what exactly is wrong with that? This "deceit" is actually kinda cool.

User avatar
Bikeflip
Posts: 1833
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby Bikeflip » Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:22 pm

hashashin wrote:
NYstate wrote:I'm not sure why you are so quick to defend top schools. Here are two quick lies schools tell on their websites: they consider all LSAT scores so consider that before you retake ( or words to that effect) and that they have a holistic admission process that doesn't focus solely on numbers. This is true at a couple of schools but not most of the top schools, even Columbia and NYU.


...Top schools probably SHOULD focus mostly on numbers, since LSAT scores, at least, indicate (with passable high accuracy) how high a given candidate's aptitude is for executive reasoning, which you kinda need if you intend to handle complex transactions. So, if their "lie" leads to a largely meritocratic distribution of top test-takers into top law schools, what exactly is wrong with that? This "deceit" is actually kinda cool.



::checks profile. C/o 2016. 0L. Ignores::

zman
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:31 am

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby zman » Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:31 pm

Most schools have fewer people for for the 2011-2014(compared to 2010-2013) class. I suppose the % of the class getting the SA position is the same.

NYstate
Posts: 1566
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:44 am

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby NYstate » Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:42 pm

Bikeflip wrote:
hashashin wrote:
NYstate wrote:I'm not sure why you are so quick to defend top schools. Here are two quick lies schools tell on their websites: they consider all LSAT scores so consider that before you retake ( or words to that effect) and that they have a holistic admission process that doesn't focus solely on numbers. This is true at a couple of schools but not most of the top schools, even Columbia and NYU.


...Top schools probably SHOULD focus mostly on numbers, since LSAT scores, at least, indicate (with passable high accuracy) how high a given candidate's aptitude is for executive reasoning, which you kinda need if you intend to handle complex transactions. So, if their "lie" leads to a largely meritocratic distribution of top test-takers into top law schools, what exactly is wrong with that? This "deceit" is actually kinda cool.



::checks profile. C/o 2016. 0L. Ignores::


See the point is that schools mislead students into not retaking the LSAT because they think only their first score will count. Or that they can't improve enough to make a difference. Schools should honestly say that they look at the highest score.

NYstate
Posts: 1566
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:44 am

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby NYstate » Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:46 pm

hashashin wrote:Tone down the Campos hagiography, brah.

As for Campos exploiting his student's suicide, here ya go: http://insidethelawschoolscam.blogspot.com/2011/09/lawyers-story.html



Talk to Campos about Campos, like I suggested. He posts here and reads this forum regularly. PM him with your concerns if you want an answer.

User avatar
androstan
Posts: 2579
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:07 am

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby androstan » Thu Aug 08, 2013 10:02 am

hashashin wrote:
NYstate wrote:I'm not sure why you are so quick to defend top schools. Here are two quick lies schools tell on their websites: they consider all LSAT scores so consider that before you retake ( or words to that effect) and that they have a holistic admission process that doesn't focus solely on numbers. This is true at a couple of schools but not most of the top schools, even Columbia and NYU.


...Top schools probably SHOULD focus mostly on numbers, since LSAT scores, at least, indicate (with passable high accuracy) how high a given candidate's aptitude is for executive reasoning, which you kinda need if you intend to handle complex transactions. So, if their "lie" leads to a largely meritocratic distribution of top test-takers into top law schools, what exactly is wrong with that? This "deceit" is actually kinda cool.


I refuse to debate with a person who uses "since" to mean "because."

User avatar
Danger Zone
Posts: 7305
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:36 am

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby Danger Zone » Thu Aug 08, 2013 10:05 am

OOOH BURNED

blsingindisguise
Posts: 1296
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 1:08 am

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby blsingindisguise » Thu Aug 08, 2013 11:06 am

androstan wrote:I refuse to debate with a person who uses "since" to mean "because."


Well that sounds like a cop-out, as "since" means "because."

User avatar
Danger Zone
Posts: 7305
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:36 am

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby Danger Zone » Thu Aug 08, 2013 11:20 am

blsingindisguise wrote:
androstan wrote:I refuse to debate with a person who uses "since" to mean "because."


Well that sounds like a cop-out, since "since" means "because."

FTFY

User avatar
androstan
Posts: 2579
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:07 am

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby androstan » Thu Aug 08, 2013 11:33 am

blsingindisguise wrote:
androstan wrote:I refuse to debate with a person who uses "since" to mean "because."


Well that sounds like a cop-out, as "since" means "because."


Who the hell are you?

blsingindisguise
Posts: 1296
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 1:08 am

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby blsingindisguise » Thu Aug 08, 2013 11:39 am

androstan wrote:
blsingindisguise wrote:
androstan wrote:I refuse to debate with a person who uses "since" to mean "because."


Well that sounds like a cop-out, as "since" means "because."


Who the hell are you?


A guy who swoops down into threads to fuck with people.

*swoops away*

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby 09042014 » Thu Aug 08, 2013 11:42 am

androstan wrote:
blsingindisguise wrote:
androstan wrote:I refuse to debate with a person who uses "since" to mean "because."


Well that sounds like a cop-out, as "since" means "because."


Who the hell are you?


Why? You don't like getting fucked without knowing his name after?

User avatar
androstan
Posts: 2579
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:07 am

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby androstan » Thu Aug 08, 2013 12:01 pm

Desert Fox wrote:
androstan wrote:
blsingindisguise wrote:
androstan wrote:I refuse to debate with a person who uses "since" to mean "because."


Well that sounds like a cop-out, as "since" means "because."


Who the hell are you?


Why? You don't like getting fucked without knowing his name after?


Not while I'm fucking someone else.

blsingindisguise
Posts: 1296
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 1:08 am

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby blsingindisguise » Thu Aug 08, 2013 12:41 pm

androstan wrote:
blsingindisguise wrote:
androstan wrote:I refuse to debate with a person who uses "since" to mean "because."


Well that sounds like a cop-out, as "since" means "because."


Who the hell are you?


"I'm William Blake. You know my poetry?"

User avatar
justonemoregame
Posts: 1160
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 3:51 pm

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby justonemoregame » Thu Aug 08, 2013 12:45 pm

thread is dying of natural causes

User avatar
androstan
Posts: 2579
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:07 am

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby androstan » Thu Aug 08, 2013 12:47 pm

blsingindisguise wrote:
androstan wrote:
blsingindisguise wrote:
androstan wrote:I refuse to debate with a person who uses "since" to mean "because."


Well that sounds like a cop-out, as "since" means "because."


Who the hell are you?


"I'm William Blake. You know my poetry?"


No.

blsingindisguise
Posts: 1296
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 1:08 am

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby blsingindisguise » Thu Aug 08, 2013 12:48 pm

What I love in these threads is how the 0Ls (and I mean this has happened every year since the financial crisis) always say stuff like "well this isn't NEWS to ANYONE," and "well we all know things aren't going to improve to 2006 levels, but they're getting better," when what they actually mean is "nah nah nah I can't hear you NYC to 190k!"

NYstate
Posts: 1566
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:44 am

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby NYstate » Thu Aug 08, 2013 12:55 pm

blsingindisguise wrote:What I love in these threads is how the 0Ls (and I mean this has happened every year since the financial crisis) always say stuff like "well this isn't NEWS to ANYONE," and "well we all know things aren't going to improve to 2006 levels, but they're getting better," when what they actually mean is "nah nah nah I can't hear you NYC to 190k!"


This is probably true. No one really believes that they will end up without a job. They can say they understand the odds, but if they really thought they might end up unemployed, or even out of biglaw, they simply wouldn't go. They are willing to roll the dice but they don't believe they will lose.

I have always found that strange. Most lawyers are not huge risk takers. Yet the will take on debt and waste 3 years on an assumption that they will be fine.

I think it is the enticement of a biglaw salary.

RodneyRuxin
Posts: 455
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 11:08 pm

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby RodneyRuxin » Thu Aug 08, 2013 12:58 pm

I am so sick of these stupid fucking threads sharing stupid fucking articles started by some aspie OP with <30 posts.


Why do people respond?

sener212
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:51 am

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby sener212 » Thu Aug 08, 2013 2:01 pm

RodneyRuxin wrote:I am so sick of these stupid fucking threads sharing stupid fucking articles started by some aspie OP with <30 posts.


Why do people respond?


I'm sorry I don't post enough on TLS for you.

My guess is people (at least initially) responded because the article has some interesting, and very up-to-date, information about the legal market for large law firms. But what the hell was I thinking posting that kind of thing in the Legal Employment Forum? It's just so ridiculous and stupid. I'm sorry.

RodneyRuxin
Posts: 455
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 11:08 pm

Re: The Legal Market for Entry Levels is not Improving, Fyi

Postby RodneyRuxin » Thu Aug 08, 2013 2:03 pm

sener212 wrote:
RodneyRuxin wrote:I am so sick of these stupid fucking threads sharing stupid fucking articles started by some aspie OP with <30 posts.


Why do people respond?


I'm sorry I don't post enough on TLS for you.

My guess is people (at least initially) responded because the article has some interesting, and very up-to-date, information about the legal market for large law firms. But what the hell was I thinking posting that kind of thing in the Legal Employment Forum? It's just so ridiculous and stupid. I'm sorry.


I'm sorry let me rephrase. If school hasn't started yet, and you're still a 0L (which I'm guessing is the case considering you're posting in the class of 2016 northwestern thread) then GTFO of the employment forum.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.