C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers Forum
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 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.
-
- Posts: 9180
- Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
yeah, it's notorious for being incomplete + "nlj250" is a stupid measurement + more accurate and comprehensive data is available on lst
- smaug
- Posts: 13972
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 8:31 pm
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
How is it incomplete?Brut wrote:yeah, it's notorious for being incomplete + "nlj250" is a stupid measurement + more accurate and comprehensive data is available on lst
It might not be a good measure, but how is it difficult to believe it? Is it shocking that the National Law Journal would care about the National Law Journal 250 firms?
-
- Posts: 9180
- Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
dude read literally the first post of the thread
not all firms report
it even says so on the rankings page jesus
not all firms report
it even says so on the rankings page jesus
-
- Posts: 9180
- Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
on the other hand, all schools have to report 101+ attorney firm placement on 509 disclosures
so what's the point of this unreliable and incomplete measurement
so what's the point of this unreliable and incomplete measurement
- smaug
- Posts: 13972
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 8:31 pm
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
It seems more complete than in precious years. I'm just wondering what the basis for your feeling that it has to be "wrong" is. It doesn't seem that surprising to me.Brut wrote:dude read literally the first post of the thread
not all firms report
it even says so on the rankings page jesus
I mean, I figure the NLJ likes to promote the NLJ and its survey of large firms. I also have the feeling that practitioners might be (slightly) more likely to look at this than at LST, thought I'd be surprised if they really cared about either.Brut wrote:on the other hand, all schools have to report 101+ attorney firm placement on 509 disclosures
so what's the point of this unreliable and incomplete measurement
Just seems like an odd thing to get worked up about.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 9180
- Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
explain to us how it seems more complete than in previous years
-
- Posts: 9180
- Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
idk why you're so weirdly insistent on defending nlj's honor but trust me, this ranking is meaningless and no practitioner is going to change their mind about a school because of it
- smaug
- Posts: 13972
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 8:31 pm
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
Brut wrote:explain to us how it seems more complete than in previous years
Tiago Splitter wrote:S&C's New York office didn't respond to the survey last year and that probably accounts for most of the difference. It looks like all the big names are accounted for this year.
I didn't think they would change their mind about a school because of it. I think a practitioner might see it pop up among other things while they're wasting time, and click on it with placid curiosity as to hiring is doing everywhere, and then probably exits out after seeing that things are getting a little better but still aren't what they used to be.Brut wrote:idk why you're so weirdly insistent on defending nlj's honor but trust me, this ranking is meaningless and no practitioner is going to change their mind about a school because of it
I don't understand why you think this is some real ranking beyond a publication that measures the size of law firms listing the schools that new hires to those firms came from. They're about data collection. This is just publication of some of that data.
So, again, I'm just kinda confused why you're attacking something so trivial, and why you're so worked up about it.
-
- Posts: 9180
- Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
i really don't understand your white knighting of nlj, are you on the payroll or something?Jason Taverner wrote:Brut wrote:explain to us how it seems more complete than in previous yearsTiago Splitter wrote:S&C's New York office didn't respond to the survey last year and that probably accounts for most of the difference. It looks like all the big names are accounted for this year.I didn't think they would change their mind about a school because of it. I think a practitioner might see it pop up among other things while they're wasting time, and click on it with placid curiosity as to hiring is doing everywhere, and then probably exits out after seeing that things are getting a little better but still aren't what they used to be.Brut wrote:idk why you're so weirdly insistent on defending nlj's honor but trust me, this ranking is meaningless and no practitioner is going to change their mind about a school because of it
I don't understand why you think this is some real ranking beyond a publication that measures the size of law firms listing the schools that new hires to those firms came from. They're about data collection. This is just publication of some of that data.
So, again, I'm just kinda confused why you're attacking something so trivial, and why you're so worked up about it.
i apologize that you find the reality of this so offensive, but the truth is that no practitioner gives a shit about your "go to law schools" ranking
and yes, it is a ranking. it even refers to itself as a ranking, if you bothered to check the page
it is completely meaningless, notoriously incomplete, and worst of all, misleading to 0Ls
nlj250 itself is a pointless distinction
and all national rankings of law schools (not just this one) are idiotic
- chuckbass
- Posts: 9956
- Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 9:29 pm
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
Simmer down bb.
- smaug
- Posts: 13972
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 8:31 pm
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
You really like arguing against things that people didn't say.
Yes, you've got me, I am a secret shill of the National Law Journal, sent here to talk about reddit and lure 0Ls into trusting a very misleading ranking. We wish we were as good as other law school rankings, but we only have so much time, so we rush this to publication every year.
Hopefully we'll be able to dupe some 0Ls into making a decision they'll regret.
We also think that the largest law firms are the best, because they have the most people. Top of the NLJ 250 should mean the best and always means the best. We're taking on Vault and USNews. Prepare yourself, world.
Yes, you've got me, I am a secret shill of the National Law Journal, sent here to talk about reddit and lure 0Ls into trusting a very misleading ranking. We wish we were as good as other law school rankings, but we only have so much time, so we rush this to publication every year.
Hopefully we'll be able to dupe some 0Ls into making a decision they'll regret.
We also think that the largest law firms are the best, because they have the most people. Top of the NLJ 250 should mean the best and always means the best. We're taking on Vault and USNews. Prepare yourself, world.
- cron1834
- Posts: 2299
- Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 1:36 am
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
Obviously the ABA 101+ data is tons better, especially for shameless TTTs like my school.
When is that out again? NLJ is fun to look at, but I'm less concerned with it.
When is that out again? NLJ is fun to look at, but I'm less concerned with it.
- bearsfan23
- Posts: 1754
- Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 11:19 pm
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
You really shouldn't take Brut seriously. He gets worked up and throws a TLS bitch fest over the most minor, insignificant things. I think everyone else is on board about what the NLJ "rankings" really are and what they actually show.Jason Taverner wrote:You really like arguing against things that people didn't say.
Yes, you've got me, I am a secret shill of the National Law Journal, sent here to talk about reddit and lure 0Ls into trusting a very misleading ranking. We wish we were as good as other law school rankings, but we only have so much time, so we rush this to publication every year.
Hopefully we'll be able to dupe some 0Ls into making a decision they'll regret.
We also think that the largest law firms are the best, because they have the most people. Top of the NLJ 250 should mean the best and always means the best. We're taking on Vault and USNews. Prepare yourself, world.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- smaug
- Posts: 13972
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 8:31 pm
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
Excuse me while I tent my fingers and mutter "excellent" just out of earshot.bearsfan23 wrote:You really shouldn't take Brut seriously. He gets worked up and throws a TLS bitch fest over the most minor, insignificant things. I think everyone else is on board about what the NLJ "rankings" really are and what they actually show.Jason Taverner wrote:You really like arguing against things that people didn't say.
Yes, you've got me, I am a secret shill of the National Law Journal, sent here to talk about reddit and lure 0Ls into trusting a very misleading ranking. We wish we were as good as other law school rankings, but we only have so much time, so we rush this to publication every year.
Hopefully we'll be able to dupe some 0Ls into making a decision they'll regret.
We also think that the largest law firms are the best, because they have the most people. Top of the NLJ 250 should mean the best and always means the best. We're taking on Vault and USNews. Prepare yourself, world.
-
- Posts: 9180
- Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
ah yes excellent my shitty opinion is affirmed by another poster who shares the same shitty opinion!
-
- Posts: 9180
- Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
lol hey aren't you that guy who started an argument over my calling a ranking a "ranking"bearsfan23 wrote:He gets worked up and throws a TLS bitch fest over the most minor, insignificant things.
you can't make this stuff up
- smaug
- Posts: 13972
- Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 8:31 pm
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
No no, I'm happy that the plan for NLJ domination is working. We've already started to brainwash your peers. Imagine how easy it'll be to prey on unsuspecting 0Ls with our misleading rankings.Brut wrote:ah yes excellent my shitty opinion is affirmed by another poster who shares the same shitty opinion!
We're going to make a fortune off of this!
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- nothingtosee
- Posts: 958
- Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 12:08 am
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
Brut, do you consider yourself an easily agitated person?Brut wrote:lol hey aren't you that guy who started an argument over my calling a ranking a "ranking"bearsfan23 wrote:He gets worked up and throws a TLS bitch fest over the most minor, insignificant things.
you can't make this stuff up
-
- Posts: 9180
- Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
i just don't get the white knighting, especially since you find this stuff "minor" and "insignificant"Jason Taverner wrote:stuff
if it's so insignificant to you, why defend it to the end of the earth?
my point (that this is a useless, incomplete, and potentially misleading ranking (as all national rankings of law schools are)) hasn't been challenged, except by the argument that it wasn't intended to be a ranking a la USNWR, which is bullshit because (a) the problem arises in how 0Ls use it, not in what it's intended for, and (b) there's no other legitimate purpose for putting it in a ranking form and calling it a "ranking" with "ranks", than to try to compete with usnwr, which is widely watched by prospective students, generating considerable traffic. if they were truly just interested in sharing the raw data and had no interest in being perceived as a law school ranking, why call it "the go to law schools", why refer to it as a "ranking", why assign each school a "rank", why include the tagline "ranking the go-to schools". this completely undermines the argument that it's not intended to be relied on as a measurement of what schools students should go to.
-
- Posts: 9180
- Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
yes very cleverJason Taverner wrote:No no, I'm happy that the plan for NLJ domination is working. We've already started to brainwash your peers. Imagine how easy it'll be to prey on unsuspecting 0Ls with our misleading rankings.Brut wrote:ah yes excellent my shitty opinion is affirmed by another poster who shares the same shitty opinion!
We're going to make a fortune off of this!
- Tiago Splitter
- Posts: 17148
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
Not yet. The rest of your schtick has grown tired.Brut wrote:yeah, it's notorious for being incomplete + "nlj250" is a stupid measurement + more accurate and comprehensive data is available on lst
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 9180
- Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
then prove me wrong
-
- Posts: 3971
- Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:01 pm
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
scottidsntknow wrote:Simmer down bb.
-
- Posts: 9180
- Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2011 3:14 am
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
it's a perfectly legitimate point, tho not one that i expected to have to defend for a page and a half
tiago's non-response is typical for him, i'm not particularly interested in going another round
tiago's non-response is typical for him, i'm not particularly interested in going another round
- Tiago Splitter
- Posts: 17148
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am
Re: C/O 2014 NLJ 250 Numbers
There isn't any data on lst for class of 2014. In a few months there will be and then everyone will have forgotten about this list.Brut wrote:then prove me wrong
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login