Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

(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.
Anonymous User
Posts: 273601
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 13, 2013 10:00 am

Anonymous User wrote:When calling a hiring partner at a firm in TX, after thanking him for the opportunity and offer, but that I would be accepting with another firm, the partner said, "Thanks for letting us know....That may possibly mean an opportunity for one of your classmates."

Every law firm generally has a fixed target for SA class size, and people with multiple offers can only go to 1 (maybe 2 in TX) places, so I definitely support non-hoarding of offers so other people can hear from those firms.


Congrats on your offers, and thank you for being so considerate!

FWIW, I've heard people interviewing in TX have similar responses after declining offers.

User avatar
Samara
Posts: 3245
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 4:26 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby Samara » Fri Sep 13, 2013 10:47 am

KidStuddi wrote:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:
KidStuddi wrote:You guys seem so vehement that it's all an unfair, a capricious, meritless system of distinction, but why are there people walking around with dozens of offers while others have to claw and fight for one? Do you really think it's nothing more than a statistical quirk? They're outliers for no reason? Do you really think that a candidate with 10 V15 offers will produce the exact same quality work product as the guy with 1 offer from a satellite office of a NLJ250 firm? I don't. Maybe I'm a dick, but after grading journal competitions, I'm pretty confident in saying more than half of the rising 1Ls at my school are idiots while an uncomfortably small minority actually can write coherently and make cogent arguments. And this inequality is my reality. I see it all around me and I accept it.

You really think that you can accurately judge the lawyering ability of the rising 2Ls at your school based on their LR write ons, and that based on this impeccable measure, more than half of them are idiots? Wow.


Unless you're arguing that law firms don't base hiring decisions at least in part on law review / journal invitations, not only am I making that decision based on a writing sample, but dozens if not hundreds of firms are then relying on my judgement when evaluating those candidates.

But really, how many chances do I need to give someone before I'm justified in telling them that they're a fuck up? Not to go too ad hominem here, but this is what I mean by the participation trophy mindset. I'm sorry, but my job was to rank the quality of these 1Ls' writing and that's exactly what I did. I was given the responsibility by a group of my peers to decide whether these 1Ls would be invited to join the law review (with all the attendant implications for their future) and that's exactly what I did. While you may be handwringing about it all the way home, I'm not going to invite someone onto law review just to give them a chance to fuck up again when, at that point, it would be my job as an editor to catch and fix their fuck ups. If you can't hunker down and produce some quality writing for a writing competition with full knowledge of what's at stake for yourself? I don't want you briefing my motions when it's someone else's ass / money on the line. Sorry if that makes me judgmental, but I've got a stack of 10 other essays where the authors took the task seriously and delivered.

LOL @ you for judging people based on their write-on submissions. You know that not everyone cares about journal, right?

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18426
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby bk1 » Fri Sep 13, 2013 11:08 am

Gorki wrote:people with jobs who are oblivious to their lucky position in life and insufferably arrogant.

Well I guess this nailed it. Since we're not going to see eye to eye studdi (and you continue to misunderstand the point we're making), I'm just gonna bow out.

User avatar
Icculus
Posts: 1421
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:02 am

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby Icculus » Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:23 pm

Okay, I was going to leave this whole thread alone, but are you fucking kidding me?

KidStuddi wrote:after grading journal competitions, I'm pretty confident in saying more than half of the rising 1Ls at my school are idiots while an uncomfortably small minority actually can write coherently and make cogent arguments. And this inequality is my reality. I see it all around me and I accept it.


Do you really think that the write on competition is the best source of material to judge the intelligence level of your fellow students? Jesus Christ, you sound terrible. My guess is you are the type of law student that makes people hate law students, especially after reading this. You said it best yourself...

KidStuddi wrote:I'm a dick

User avatar
Amity
Posts: 72
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2013 1:36 am

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby Amity » Fri Sep 13, 2013 4:55 pm

If this year is like last, you will [likely] receive a pile of offers (or callbacks) weeks after you have accepted an offer. If you haven’t been offered yet, even better… the later choices are often better than the earlier ones. True, you may have been an alternate…but I am sure you can deal with it. There is one difference that is part of a late offer, the firm may ask you to decide within a week.

It would be nice if people turned down their offers quicker, but that isn’t the will of the Gods.

swimmer11
Posts: 464
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 1:54 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby swimmer11 » Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:27 pm

ITT: Prime examples of the reason people hate law students and lawyers.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273601
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:33 pm

Icculus wrote:Okay, I was going to leave this whole thread alone, but are you fucking kidding me?

KidStuddi wrote:after grading journal competitions, I'm pretty confident in saying more than half of the rising 1Ls at my school are idiots while an uncomfortably small minority actually can write coherently and make cogent arguments. And this inequality is my reality. I see it all around me and I accept it.


Do you really think that the write on competition is the best source of material to judge the intelligence level of your fellow students? Jesus Christ, you sound terrible. My guess is you are the type of law student that makes people hate law students, especially after reading this. You said it best yourself...

KidStuddi wrote:I'm a dick

Not to mention the fact that LRW being pass/fail at most institutions + the fact that TLS shows write on's do pretty similar to their grades means that many people don't put forth a full effort during the write on when going all out would harm their chances of having the stamina to get the A's in doctrinal courses, and lit everyone gets on some journal.

User avatar
OneMoreLawHopeful
Posts: 1191
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 6:21 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby OneMoreLawHopeful » Fri Sep 13, 2013 5:35 pm

bk1 wrote:I get it, you and OneMoreLawHopeful cling to the idea that the world is a very meritocratic place (essentially the bootstraps fallacy). It's a comforting thought and the idea that the world isn't like that isn't a very pleasant idea to entertain. But the reality is that the world is far less meritocratic than either of you want to believe.


Look, I'm really uncomfortable with this. My first post in this thread explicitly included an example of a group of people who clearly were screwed over by forces beyond their control (people who accepted SA positions at Dewey).

I will readily acknowledge that people get screwed all of the time, I've never subscribed to the "bootstraps" story, but I think that you guys are also claiming the world is a far LESS meritocratic place and that's not fair.

For a good example of why I think this, let's look at something you wrote and compare it with hard numbers:
bk1 wrote:
KidStuddi wrote:I don't think the percentage of students who are truly on the periphery is near as large as people are making it out to be. Maybe the lottery systems at top schools give people a lot of false hope, but for the most part, there aren't that many surprises as to who ends up getting a BigLaw job and who doesn't.

This just isn't true. There are people every year who strike out from the top of the class at T14s and people at the bottom of the class who nab biglaw. People around median often end up with a significant number getting biglaw and a significant number striking out...


There is an implicit assumption here that someone at the "top of the class" at a T14 doesn't have something else wrong with them (interviews like a crazy, makes unreasonable demands about which office they will work at, fails a background check, etc.). I just want to be clear about how many people we're talking about, using numbers from LST.

Look at Stanford, the total number of people from the class of 2012 who ended up working for a firm with 10 or fewer lawyers, unemployed and seeking, or in school funded jobs is 8 (1 + 3 + 4). So, 8 out of 181 students ended up in a situation that looks like they probably totally struck out. That's less than 5% of the total class. All I'm saying is that it seems likely the majority of these people had other problems. Is it really so hard to believe that 5 of these people had either (1) straight Ps, (2) no ability to interview, (3) some additional variable still within the student's control (e.g. a criminal record), or some combination of the three? Why is it so hard to believe that Stanford accepted 5 people, out of 181, who come off like serial killers in in-person interviews, especially since no part of the law school application process involves an in-person interview?

I'm not even saying all 8 are terrible interviewers (though <5% of the class having interview problems still seems low), I'm just saying that it's entire feasible that a majority of the 8 did have real problems. I'm not saying that 1 out of every 5 students at Stanford has interview problems; I'm saying that it's entirely likely that 5 out of 181 do.

You may say it's not fair to choose Stanford for a variety of reasons (and you may be correct, I'll do another school below), but I chose Stanford because I have personal knowledge of the class of 2012 which I can share (though I was not a student there, to be clear). I know for a fact that one of the students who was no-offered after his SA did not surprise anyone when this happened. This was a guy who went K-JD, and didn't really "get" that in the real world there are hard deadlines. As a 2L, he worked in a clinic, and literally missed filing dates because he just didn't think they mattered. No one was surprised when he was no offered, because he had the work ethic of an academic, even though he had great grades, and must have had a terrific LSAT score and undergrad GPA. He might have been "at the top of the class" (it's hard to know at Stanford with their grading system), but since Stanford professors usually let students turn in papers whenever (there are exceptions, but they are rare), his fatal flaw didn't shake out in the usual way. A law firm couldn't use someone like him, and the decision to no-offer him was literally on him.

But, let's say Stanford is a "bad example" for whatever reason. Let's look at Northwestern's numbers as well (it's bigger, has a high underemployment score, etc.):

Start by adding up the number with jobs at firms with 10 or fewer lawyers, those who are in school-funded positions, and those who are unemployed and seeking. 12 + 11 + 12 = 35.

Now unlike Stanford, Northwestern has real grades and firms can calculate a real curve. But I also want to give you the benefit of the doubt, so let's say that only 1/3rd of the 35 can be attributed to being "way below median," and we'll even round down to 11. So we're talking about 24 students out of 295, or 8% of the class.

I would just ask the exact same question as above: is it really so hard to believe that the majority of those students (13 of the 24) have some additional problem (terrible interviews, criminal record, etc.)? Is it really so hard to believe that a number of students, fewer than 1 out of 20 in the whole school, has a problem like that?

I keep harping on this for two reasons:
(1) It's been repeated to me by at least bk1 and Pokemon that I'm subject to something like the "narrative fallacy," though fundamental attribution error is more accurate; yet it's never suggested to the poster who says "I'm at the top of my class at H and I struck out after 3,000 screener interviews" of the one who says "I got no offered for a random and stupid reason," that their own account of events (be it their interview skills of the "stupid little thing" that led to being no-offered) is inaccurate because of self serving bias, even though it is every bit as well documented as the "narrative fallacy."

(2) I can't give too much away on this without outing myself, but I actually have first-hand knowledge of a guy who got post-callback dinged at a v20 this cycle for reasons that aren't being discussed here. This guy had literally *the perfect* resume. Clearly on his way to latin honors at a school in the MVP range, had previously gotten a masters at an LSE-caliber institution, spoke multiple foreign languages, etc. He was tall, good looking, and confident, but he couldn't interview worth a damn.

As an example - he was asked if he had a cuisine preference for lunch; instead of saying "seafood" or something, he decided to tell a rambling un-humorous anecdote about how much people smoke in New York City and how that ruins restaurants for him, but it still wasn't as bad as the semester he spent in Paris. He never named any cuisine. Every attempt at conversation with him was the same. "So, did you see any good movies this summer?" turned into a story about how he had to quit being a film major because he didn't think other people in the field where being academically honest about the difference between "the visceral and its detached platonic ideal." He never ended up mentioning a movie. "What did you like about [LSE-calibur institution]?" was the only question that got a short answer, and the whole answer was "I thought it would be good for my career."

Whether or not he was getting an offer had literally come down to the lunch. The firm liked his credentials, but all of his interviewers felt like he was impossible to converse with, and hoped maybe he would open up at lunch. After the most awkward lunch the associates involved had ever been to, he was dinged.

And despite the obvious problems with this guy - if he strikes out, there seems to be an implicit assumption that it's just sheer luck, and not his inability to make normal human being type conversation for even just 45 minutes.




I'm not saying EVERYONE who strikes out is at fault. I've ALWAYS said there is a luck element and some people get screwed. I DO NOT think that people with jobs should go around bragging. But I do think an attitude which says "Someone who struck out and is at the top of their class at HYS isn't at fault," is every bit as much a fantasy as the attitude that says "Everyone who struck out has something wrong with them."

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18426
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby bk1 » Fri Sep 13, 2013 6:00 pm

And I break my own word. For the five millionth time, we're not focusing on the people who had bad outcomes. We're focusing on the people who had good outcomes and saying they should be appreciative of the fact that things could have turned out differently for them due to reasons beyond their control. Full stop.

User avatar
OneMoreLawHopeful
Posts: 1191
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 6:21 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby OneMoreLawHopeful » Fri Sep 13, 2013 6:09 pm

bk1 wrote:And I break my own word. For the five millionth time, we're not focusing on the people who had bad outcomes. We're focusing on the people who had good outcomes and saying they should be appreciative of the fact that things could have turned out differently for them due to reasons beyond their control. Full stop.


I accept that, and have never claimed that people should be unappreciative. I'm just uncomfortable because the definition of "being unappreciative" seems to be slipping to encompass behaviors that were totally normal on TLS when I went through the OCI cycle just 12 months ago. I never recall posters being as vicious about "You have an offer, pls killself," as they have gotten this cycle. You can actually just scroll through threads and see regular Veil posters being unhelpfully vicious in thread after thread in response to 2L questions that those same posters themselves asked just 12 months ago. I also lurked for fully a year before I registered, and I never recall it being like this.

The justification for the current state of affairs is "The Veil," but then we're right back at people who had bad outcomes, which is apparently what we're "not discussing."

Pokemon
Posts: 1866
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:58 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby Pokemon » Fri Sep 13, 2013 6:25 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:When calling a hiring partner at a firm in TX, after thanking him for the opportunity and offer, but that I would be accepting with another firm, the partner said, "Thanks for letting us know....That may possibly mean an opportunity for one of your classmates."

Every law firm generally has a fixed target for SA class size, and people with multiple offers can only go to 1 (maybe 2 in TX) places, so I definitely support non-hoarding of offers so other people can hear from those firms.


Congrats on your offers, and thank you for being so considerate!

FWIW, I've heard people interviewing in TX have similar responses after declining offers.


I do not doubt that if you reject an offer, that offer will go to someone else (unless the firm is excellent at calculating its yield). What I doubt is that the timing matters that much. If you had told that firm your "no" three weeks from now, it is not like the offer would not go to a classmate.

This is not to say I support hoarding. It is bad manners and rude to the firm that made you the offer when you keep an offer open at a place you do not plan on accepting.

If you are struggling, this is the time to mass mail...

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

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby NYstate » Fri Sep 13, 2013 6:41 pm

OneMoreLawHopeful wrote:
bk1 wrote:And I break my own word. For the five millionth time, we're not focusing on the people who had bad outcomes. We're focusing on the people who had good outcomes and saying they should be appreciative of the fact that things could have turned out differently for them due to reasons beyond their control. Full stop.


I accept that, and have never claimed that people should be unappreciative. I'm just uncomfortable because the definition of "being unappreciative" seems to be slipping to encompass behaviors that were totally normal on TLS when I went through the OCI cycle just 12 months ago. I never recall posters being as vicious about "You have an offer, pls killself," as they have gotten this cycle. You can actually just scroll through threads and see regular Veil posters being unhelpfully vicious in thread after thread in response to 2L questions that those same posters themselves asked just 12 months ago. I also lurked for fully a year before I registered, and I never recall it being like this.

The justification for the current state of affairs is "The Veil," but then we're right back at people who had bad outcomes, which is apparently what we're "not discussing."


So what is your concern here? People are being mean? I haven't really been paying attention but possibly some of the "behaviors" you are talking about are in response to people being complete jerks about their offers. Not sure, maybe you could link to some examples of what you are talking about. That would be helpful.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273601
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 13, 2013 6:46 pm

NYstate wrote:
OneMoreLawHopeful wrote:
I accept that, and have never claimed that people should be unappreciative. I'm just uncomfortable because the definition of "being unappreciative" seems to be slipping to encompass behaviors that were totally normal on TLS when I went through the OCI cycle just 12 months ago. I never recall posters being as vicious about "You have an offer, pls killself," as they have gotten this cycle. You can actually just scroll through threads and see regular Veil posters being unhelpfully vicious in thread after thread in response to 2L questions that those same posters themselves asked just 12 months ago. I also lurked for fully a year before I registered, and I never recall it being like this.

The justification for the current state of affairs is "The Veil," but then we're right back at people who had bad outcomes, which is apparently what we're "not discussing."


So what is your concern here? People are being mean? I haven't really been paying attention but possibly some of the "behaviors" you are talking about are in response to people being complete jerks about their offers. Not sure, maybe you could link to some examples of what you are talking about. That would be helpful.


Here's one: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=216459. There isn't much in OP's post that's offensive -- OP seems to know S&C has the best corporate practice but isn't sure if the rumors about their culture are enough to make choosing his other options a reasonable choice -- but people accuse him of bragging about offers, as if going to the "best" firm is a no-brainer here.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273601
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 13, 2013 6:55 pm

The comment about the vale posters being a vicious pack of posters surprised me the most. That simply has not been the case. If we look at how this discussion started, it was Icculus saying "some of us with offers, appreciate the position we are in."
Then KidStuddi + OneMoreLawHopeful, responded with, "nah brah, if you have a jerb you deserve it, and if you do not have a jerb, you do not deserve it cause this is not kindergarten where every person is special in his own little way."

But certainly, it was not valers being "you lucky motherf*ckers do not deserve this." I check this forum quite often, and have not noticed an increase in animosity... but that might be just me.

@onemorehopeful; let's imagine a lower T14, maybe NU. At that school, the great majority of the students will be near median. That is how law school grades work after all. Let's say median at this school is 3.3 and thus a super-large part of the class will have grades between 3.1 to 3.5.

This group has become our new sample now. The average person on this group might have something like 3-4 callbacks and 1 offer. Slightly less than half, maybe 33%, of the people in this group might strike out. You really do not think that something beyond the candidates control could play a role here. I mean think about it, 1 or 2 offers is how much these people generally get, out of 20 interviews...

Now let's go on the higher GPA people. Relatively fewer high GPA people strike out. Does that necessarily mean that the interviewer was a serial killer? It could. But also, at a school like NU where there will be maybe 50 high GPA people, it is conceivable that there will be 2-4 unlucky ones. I mean a high GPA person, 3.5 + will on average have something like 4 offers. Well, that average does not preclude the possibility of someone with 0 offers if randomized.


Anyway, my point here is not that grades/interviewing ability do not play role. They do... they often are the deciding factors. But this is not to say that there is also not another group of people whose failure can be attributed to something beyond grades/interviewing ability. If you had 10 offers from OCI, then yeah, you are amazing... if you had 3+, then yeah, you had things going for you... if you were at 1-2 (and a large part is here), you could have easily struck out.


Ps, and let's not forget other elements that could play a role in such situations. Twenty minute behavioral interviews tend to be more prone to biases/quick judgments/old boys' club type situations. After all, there is nothing technical in the process. This is something that might be completely oblivious to you if you are already part of such groups.

Pokemon-- did not mean to be anon.

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

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby NYstate » Fri Sep 13, 2013 6:58 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
NYstate wrote:
OneMoreLawHopeful wrote:
I accept that, and have never claimed that people should be unappreciative. I'm just uncomfortable because the definition of "being unappreciative" seems to be slipping to encompass behaviors that were totally normal on TLS when I went through the OCI cycle just 12 months ago. I never recall posters being as vicious about "You have an offer, pls killself," as they have gotten this cycle. You can actually just scroll through threads and see regular Veil posters being unhelpfully vicious in thread after thread in response to 2L questions that those same posters themselves asked just 12 months ago. I also lurked for fully a year before I registered, and I never recall it being like this.

The justification for the current state of affairs is "The Veil," but then we're right back at people who had bad outcomes, which is apparently what we're "not discussing."


So what is your concern here? People are being mean? I haven't really been paying attention but possibly some of the "behaviors" you are talking about are in response to people being complete jerks about their offers. Not sure, maybe you could link to some examples of what you are talking about. That would be helpful.


Here's one: http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 3&t=216459. There isn't much in OP's post that's offensive -- OP seems to know S&C has the best corporate practice but isn't sure if the rumors about their culture are enough to make choosing his other options a reasonable choice -- but people accuse him of bragging about offers, as if going to the "best" firm is a no-brainer here.


You mean one guy who asked if that was a humblebrag because he couldn't believe this was a real question? (given the measurable difference in the corporate departments at these firms, with Sullivan far ahead of the others) I don't see that as any ruder than anything else on TLS. There is one guy with 2 posts who seems a little rude, but who takes that seriously, or as representative of TLS posters?

I'm being honest here. I just don't read that as rude. Maybe that is because the answers made sense to me and fit in with my thoughts.
Last edited by NYstate on Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:02 pm, edited 2 times in total.

masterbrowski
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Jul 30, 2013 11:17 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby masterbrowski » Fri Sep 13, 2013 6:59 pm

Chalk me up to another who is doubtful that this makes a difference. From what I have heard, I don't think this is how firms with large summer classes hire.

The recruiter I talked to said it wasn't a 1 for 1 thing. Rather, the firm knew the average acceptance rate for its offers. The recruiting committee used this rate to gauge how many offers it extended. That meant the firm made far more offers than it had room for with the assumption that many students would decline. Under that system, someone turning down an offer would not immediately lead to another offer being made.

FWIW I know of several firms in my area that ended up with too many summers during the year that I did OCI. Firms were a little bit bullish with hiring during our year (yes, this was post-recession)

Pokemon
Posts: 1866
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:58 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby Pokemon » Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:07 pm

masterbrowski wrote:Chalk me up to another who is doubtful that this makes a difference. From what I have heard, I don't think this is how firms with large summer classes hire.

The recruiter I talked to said it wasn't a 1 for 1 thing. Rather, the firm knew the average acceptance rate for its offers. The recruiting committee used this rate to gauge how many offers it extended. That meant the firm made far more offers than it had room for with the assumption that many students would decline. Under that system, someone turning down an offer would not immediately lead to another offer being made.

FWIW I know of several firms in my area that ended up with too many summers during the year that I did OCI. Firms were a little bit bullish with hiring during our year (yes, this was post-recession)


That is how it probably works with offices that hire 15+ SAs. Even these firms sometimes make mistakes and start doing resume collects in September/October/November.

Anyway, I do think that rejecting an offer usually means someone else is getting it. I just do not understand, if you are striking out, why would you focus on when that resume collect is asked when, you could instead be MASS MAILING!

Anonymous User
Posts: 273601
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:17 pm

NYstate wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
NYstate wrote:
So what is your concern here? People are being mean? I haven't really been paying attention but possibly some of the "behaviors" you are talking about are in response to people being complete jerks about their offers. Not sure, maybe you could link to some examples of what you are talking about. That would be helpful.


Here's one: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=216459. There isn't much in OP's post that's offensive -- OP seems to know S&C has the best corporate practice but isn't sure if the rumors about their culture are enough to make choosing his other options a reasonable choice -- but people accuse him of bragging about offers, as if going to the "best" firm is a no-brainer here.


You mean one guy who asked if that was a humblebrag because he couldn't believe this was a real question? (given the measurable difference in the corporate departments at these firms, with Sullivan far ahead of the others) I don't see that as any ruder than anything else on TLS. There is one guy with 2 posts who seems a little rude, but who takes that seriously, or as representative of TLS posters?

I'm being honest here. I just don't read that as rude. Maybe that is because the answers made sense to me and fit in with my thoughts.


Given how bad S&C's rep is on TLS (and given that Paul Weiss corp is okay), I don't think the question's so unreasonable that it warranted those responses. Compare those to sealocust's answer in that thread, which understands why OP might be asking the question and is actually helpful.

User avatar
OneMoreLawHopeful
Posts: 1191
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 6:21 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby OneMoreLawHopeful » Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:21 pm

NYstate wrote:So what is your concern here? People are being mean? I haven't really been paying attention but possibly some of the "behaviors" you are talking about are in response to people being complete jerks about their offers. Not sure, maybe you could link to some examples of what you are talking about. That would be helpful.


Sure, here's an example:

Last week someone started a thread for 3Ls with jobs. The goal (as stated in the original post of the thread) was to discuss things like stipends, bar prep, and similar concerns for people that have permanent offers.

A regular vale poster shows up and complains that it's all just a brag and people should shut up. One of the specific accusations is that if someone had real concerns about their stipend, their should ask their firm instead of strangers on the internet. A search of this person's post history turned up their own posts pre-2L-SA about whether or not they could ask their summer firm for a salary advance, especially given how much money they were going to get paid.

If you don't want to take my word on this, that's fine, I'll PM you, but I don't want this to be about anyone specific doing anything wrong.

This is also hardly uncommon. Do searches for last year about people trying to decide between firms - they usually got helpful stories from former SAs instead of 3 anon-abusing posts saying "HUMBLEBRAG!" followed by 2 saying "Be glad you got any offer!"

I can handle people being mean, clearly I wouldn't survive the internet if I couldn't. But when worthwhile discussion and the sharing of helpful information is shat upon in the name of protecting "the Vale," it makes TLS a less helpful place overall.

Anonymous User wrote:Then KidStuddi + OneMoreLawHopeful, responded with, "nah brah, if you have a jerb you deserve it, and if you do not have a jerb, you do not deserve it cause this is not kindergarten where every person is special in his own little way."
...
@onemorehopeful; let's imagine a lower T14, maybe NU. At that school, the great majority of the students will be near median. That is how law school grades work after all. Let's say median at this school is 3.3 and thus a super-large part of the class will have grades between 3.1 to 3.5.

This group has become our new sample now. The average person on this group might have something like 3-4 callbacks and 1 offer. Slightly less than half, maybe 33%, of the people in this group might strike out. You really do not think that something beyond the candidates control could play a role here. I mean think about it, 1 or 2 offers is how much these people generally get, out of 20 interviews...

Pokemon-- did not mean to be anon.


First, you are using a strawman. I have never said that things beyond a candidates control cannot be the primary cause. In my above numerical examples I specifically allowed for a minority of each group to strike out for reasons beyond their control. It is not worth discussing this with you if you are going to strawman my position.

Second, I reject your premises. You are limiting the sample (as you do in the bolded text) and so you are not getting an accurate picture. I did the math, above, to provide an accurate picture. If we are talking about actual not-hypothetical numbers at Northwestern, we are talking about something like 5% of the class, a very small figure.

Third, you have a false (unquoted) premise: that offers are somehow "randomly" distributed. They are not. The system is not perfect, there are factors beyond everyone's control, but it is in a law firm's best interest to hire the best candidates they can, and they try to do so. The screening interviews may be given out by lottery - the callbacks and offers are not.

But, finally, and most importantly I just don't think we're going to see eye-to-eye because you (and others, particular A. Nony in a post that now seems to be missing) are making an assumption that I just disagree with, that looks something like:

If you don't know why the person struck out, it was more-likely-than-not pure luck.

I reject this premise. Some people strike out through sheer bad luck (for the third time I'll say it - In August 2011 there was no reason not to be an SA at Dewey). But if you are truly ignorant of why they struck out, assuming luck is not magically "more right" than assuming something tangible yet unobservable (like bad interview skills). Both views are biased, I will fully admit. But that's just it - they're BOTH biased, and yet multiple posters here are acting like the former is somehow not biased.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 22892
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:45 pm

Dude, the title of that particular thread, while probably not meant maliciously, struck many as being in poor taste. If the title had been different no one would have cared about the content.

Pokemon
Posts: 1866
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:58 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby Pokemon » Fri Sep 13, 2013 7:46 pm

This has gone on for far too long...

User avatar
OneMoreLawHopeful
Posts: 1191
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 6:21 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby OneMoreLawHopeful » Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:21 pm

A. Nony Mouse wrote:Dude, the title of that particular thread, while probably not meant maliciously, struck many as being in poor taste. If the title had been different no one would have cared about the content.


Then, as an alternative example, I would encourage you to examine the responses to these two "help me choose!" threads made a year apart:
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=193717&p=5873844 (2012)
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=216459 (2013)

The first thread is thoughtful discussion, the second is anon-abuse and humblebrag accusations. The difference is the 12 months since the Vale went up.

Edit: deleted out of deference to Pokemon

Pokemon
Posts: 1866
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 11:58 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby Pokemon » Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:34 pm

OneMoreLawHopeful wrote:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:Dude, the title of that particular thread, while probably not meant maliciously, struck many as being in poor taste. If the title had been different no one would have cared about the content.


Then, as an alternative example, I would encourage you to examine the responses to these two "help me choose!" threads made a year apart:
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=193717&p=5873844 (2012)
viewtopic.php?f=23&t=216459 (2013)

The first thread is thoughtful discussion, the second is anon-abuse and humblebrag accusations. The difference is the 12 months since the Vale went up.

Edit: deleted out of deference to Pokemon



"Is this a serious question, or are you just humbragging? Sullivan & Cromwell has arguably the best corporate group based on leagues tables over the past ten years. It was ranked #2 in corporate based on a Vault survey of partners back in the mid-2000s, and it almost certainly has surpassed Cravath (#1 back then) since the financial crisis (though the partners survey is no longer being conducted). S&C/Wachtell/Cravath are the best for large public M&A. S&C/Davis Polk are the best for capital market. S&C is the best for securities regulation, hands down. Unless you have strong personal/fit reasons for choosing Paul Weiss/Gibson Dunn, S&C is the way to go for corporate among all firms, not just Paul Weiss/Gibson Dunn."


I did not read this answer as someone without a job complaining. I read it more like someone being, wtf, how is this hard to choose. Kind of like choosing between Yale and a T30 for law school... Additionally, he went on too explain that S&C is superior to the other firms, but if you have personality reasons to prefer them, go for it. It honestly does not seem to me mean...

Not sure why you think it is the unemployed people who respond like that to such threads. There is like 0 evidence of that. Also, humblebragging was at TLS as a term much prior to the Vale...

The "anti-vale" thread on the other hand. That is something way too mean to just ignore...

User avatar
OneMoreLawHopeful
Posts: 1191
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 6:21 pm

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby OneMoreLawHopeful » Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:40 pm

Pokemon wrote:Not sure why you think it is the unemployed people who respond like that to such threads. There is like 0 evidence of that. Also, humblebragging was at TLS as a term much prior to the Vale...

I don't, I just think that the way the Vale is policed, and in particular the way some Vale posters conduct themselves (again, I really don't want this to be about individuals, but I'll go ahead with more links if that's what it takes), is changing the culture of TLS is a way that will make it worse for future posters. The post you quoted was hardly the only crap post in the thread, and laxbrah even states in that thread that he has noticed growing hostility towards posters trying to choose between jobs. The person who replies (anonymously) does not dispute that there may have been unwarranted hostility.

Things are changing, and it hardly seems for the better.

Pokemon wrote:The "anti-vale" thread on the other hand. That is something way too mean to just ignore...

Again, if it was just about the thread title, why were the contents of the posts about how "people with jobs don't need this information"?

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 22892
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: Have an offer? Do the rest of us a favor...

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Fri Sep 13, 2013 8:43 pm

OneMoreLawHopeful wrote:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:Dude, the title of that particular thread, while probably not meant maliciously, struck many as being in poor taste. If the title had been different no one would have cared about the content.


Then, as an alternative example, I would encourage you to examine the responses to these two "help me choose!" threads made a year apart:
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... &p=5873844 (2012)
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3&t=216459 (2013)

The first thread is thoughtful discussion, the second is anon-abuse and humblebrag accusations. The difference is the 12 months since the Vale went up.

Edit: deleted out of deference to Pokemon

It's easy to cherry-pick a "nice" thread from last year and a "mean" thread from this year. There have been "nice" threads this year, and there's no evidence the Vale regulars commented in the second thread you cite. You yourself are in a different position now than you were last year, which may influence how you read threads and which ones make an impression on you.

I think it's short-sighted to blame the Vale for any increase in nastiness. It seems much more likely that both the Vale and said alleged increase in nastiness reflect the increased recognition that law school is frequently a crappy investment, the anxiety that inspires, and a greater willingness to talk about it.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.