Top Law Schools

Just wasted a half hour of my life reading this. I'll never get that time back. If there's one thing TLS is amazing at, it's feeding the trolls.

ndirish2010 wrote:Just wasted a half hour of my life reading this. I'll never get that time back. If there's one thing TLS is amazing at, it's feeding the trolls.

nothing more predictable than a gaggle of autists

greekdebtcrisis wrote:

First Offense wrote:

greekdebtcrisis wrote:

First Offense wrote:And also because you have literally zero leverage in a negotiation unless you're a SCOTUS clerk. Special snowflakes are few and far between.

This is just wrong and you shouldn't disseminate bad info.

Subtle troll reply.

No it's just pure stupidity you're trying to spread. That you don't have any leverage is completely false. If anyone wants to pm me about the leverage, I'm happy to respond but I also want to underscore how wrong you are in your information and that by Jove I hope no one takes your advice seriously.

Leverage? Decent TV show but they cancelled it. It was about time anyways. I did enjoy watching it, though.

lawman84 wrote:

greekdebtcrisis wrote:

First Offense wrote:

greekdebtcrisis wrote:

First Offense wrote:And also because you have literally zero leverage in a negotiation unless you're a SCOTUS clerk. Special snowflakes are few and far between.

This is just wrong and you shouldn't disseminate bad info.

Subtle troll reply.

No it's just pure stupidity you're trying to spread. That you don't have any leverage is completely false. If anyone wants to pm me about the leverage, I'm happy to respond but I also want to underscore how wrong you are in your information and that by Jove I hope no one takes your advice seriously.

Leverage? Decent TV show but they cancelled it. It was about time anyways. I did enjoy watching it, though.

I like it. Anyway, I respond through my phone so I am OK with mistakes made on my end. (My favorite is when people attack you on your writing...it says a lot about those individuals. It's the substance that matters in this thread imho.)

Also I don't get why people think I am trolling. Perhaps those people just don't think they have any shot at anything in life that's rewarding other than a law firm? Perhaps they think that maybe they can get a job elsewhere that is rewarding but for much less and that the law firm is the golden ticket? I mean I guess if those same people see the world as black and white, then telling them about grey is just nonsensical trolling.

Truthfully, I am saddened by how people scare others out of thinking that there are options outside of biglaw or that you can actually have a say in your negotiations with biglaw. Those scaremongers then pat themselves on their backs for getting biglaw, shutting up, and silently rejoicing their biglaw offer without even considering what their self-worth is (if you've seen "Inside Out" there is a great scene for you to remind yourself of: it has to do with "fear" saving the world from calamity...hint is that the audience in the theatre laughed at that scene). Once the congratulatory remarks have settled, they then start to distinguish between v-X and v-Y like it makes a difference when they leave transactional biglaw. Once they join the ranks of biglaw they work hard, play it safe, and sadly might sell themselves short after exiting (like they did when they appeased their biglaw firms by not negotiating). (My guess and hope is that by the time they exit biglaw, they will have learned from other associates and from partners about how to negotiate their worth, so I am willing to adjust my last statement.)

Jason Taverner wrote:I think I got the normal deal. That said, I think 99% of people get the normal deal. I've actually heard of people getting better than normal deals, but they involve something extraordinary. (SCOTUS clerk negotiating down hours expectation, someone getting a class year boost, firms putting up with very short periods of time in employment between clerkships).

But yeah, some of the things you're talking about just don't exist on the law side. There's not much to negotiate for first years.

So I may agree with you that there is not much, but there still are a couple of points you can negotiate. One of them is related to the SCOTUS clerk negotiating down hours expectation, but not exactly that. But if I were an incoming first year, I would surely negotiate for that one item. Class year boost is negotiable if you have other interesting attributes like an MBA (in fact you can get a bonus for it too). I just feel like you won't believe me unless I have some v10 partners call you up and go through the terms of the agreements which they negotiated with their incoming first years. I can't do any more other than tell you in PM more specific points that were negotiated.

greekdebtcrisis wrote: I just feel like you won't believe me unless I have some v10 partners call you up and go through the terms of the agreements which they negotiated with their incoming first years.

Sorry, V10 is not sufficiently prestigious. If V5 (but non-Skadden) partner confirms, I will believe you. Please have partner PM me terms. TIA.

rpupkin wrote:

greekdebtcrisis wrote: I just feel like you won't believe me unless I have some v10 partners call you up and go through the terms of the agreements which they negotiated with their incoming first years.

Sorry, V10 is not sufficiently prestigious. If V5 (but non-Skadden) partner confirms, I will believe you. Please have partner PM me terms. TIA.

V5? I guess this is OK if you like the opinion of peasants. WLRK (and MAYBE Cravath) are the only authorities that can talk about anything ever in law. And of course equity partners only it goes without saying.

solid walkback

what things are you specifically talking about then?

please rekindle your flame

People think you're trolling because you're blatantly making shit up. That is usually the first clue.

ndirish2010 wrote:Just wasted a half hour of my life reading this. I'll never get that time back. If there's one thing TLS is amazing at, it's feeding the trolls.

Clicking on 6 turns out to have been a great decision, thanks for doing the heavy lifting for me

ndirish2010 wrote:People think you're trolling because you're blatantly making shit up. That is usually the first clue.

Like what?

greekdebtcrisis wrote:

ndirish2010 wrote:People think you're trolling because you're blatantly making shit up. That is usually the first clue.

Like what?

The whole thread.

greekdebtcrisis wrote:

ndirish2010 wrote:People think you're trolling because you're blatantly making shit up. That is usually the first clue.

Like what?

PM us for details.

rpupkin wrote:

greekdebtcrisis wrote:

ndirish2010 wrote:People think you're trolling because you're blatantly making shit up. That is usually the first clue.

Like what?

PM us for details.

LOL. On the off chance he does, please don't encourage that.

ndirish2010 wrote:

greekdebtcrisis wrote:

ndirish2010 wrote:People think you're trolling because you're blatantly making shit up. That is usually the first clue.

Like what?

The whole thread.

I don't know what you need to prove you wrong but I think you're a lost cause by now or you're just saying this to hurt others.

Either be more concrete so that I can try to clarify things for you or stop posting silly responses like "this whole thread," as they are unhelpful to me and to others.

Do you work at a law firm? Have you worked in biglaw? I'm trying to figure out what your angle is in here and how you can contribute constructively.

To answer the call of the question, no, I'd rather be you, you fucking cunt.

greekdebtcrisis wrote:

ndirish2010 wrote:

greekdebtcrisis wrote:

ndirish2010 wrote:People think you're trolling because you're blatantly making shit up. That is usually the first clue.

Like what?

The whole thread.

I don't know what you need to prove you wrong but I think you're a lost cause by now or you're just saying this to hurt others.

Either be more concrete so that I can try to clarify things for you or stop posting silly responses like "this whole thread," as they are unhelpful to me and to others.

Do you work at a law firm? Have you worked in biglaw? I'm trying to figure out what your angle is in here and how you can contribute constructively.

The one in this thread who is intentionally hurting others is you, not me.

My employment is neither here nor there. I am a lawyer, I don't work in biglaw, nor do I want to.

However, this is not really fun anymore. Arguing with a crazy troll gets boring. All I have to say is that 0Ls should not listen to this guy.

seespotrun wrote:To answer the call of the question, no, I'd rather be you, you fucking cunt.

hey i miss you and i think you owe me lunch

or maybe i owe you lunch

ndirish2010 wrote:However, this is not really fun anymore. Arguing with a crazy troll gets boring. All I have to say is that 0Ls should not listen to this guy.

Yeah ok I'm also tired. This has reached obvious troll levels

I just don't understand why trolls would spend the time to do this. Damn, what kind of person is going to invest that time and energy to say, at the end of it all, "hah I got them good!"

mr.hands wrote:

ndirish2010 wrote:However, this is not really fun anymore. Arguing with a crazy troll gets boring. All I have to say is that 0Ls should not listen to this guy.

Yeah ok I'm also tired. This has reached obvious troll levels

I just don't understand why trolls would spend the time to do this. Damn, what kind of person is going to invest that time and energy to say, at the end of it all, "hah I got them good!"

A sociopath?

mr.hands wrote:

ndirish2010 wrote:However, this is not really fun anymore. Arguing with a crazy troll gets boring. All I have to say is that 0Ls should not listen to this guy.

Yeah ok I'm also tired. This has reached obvious troll levels

I just don't understand why trolls would spend the time to do this. Damn, what kind of person is going to invest that time and energy to say, at the end of it all, "hah I got them good!"

I actually don't think OP is an intentional troll. He wanted to spark a provocative discussion, but he lacked the insight and the writing skills to get such a discussion going. When posters started questioning some of his assumptions, he reached and asserted some implausible things he thought were true. When the skepticism mounted, he retracted into a PM-me-for-the-real-answers turtle shell.

Yeah, the OP's posts have become increasingly trollish ITT, but I refuse to give him credit for a deliberately executed troll.

I thought it was decent flame tbh

hdunlop wrote:I thought it was decent flame tbh

I thought it was pretty shit at the beginning of the thread, but became more entertaining as time went on and more people took it seriously

Not sure if that just means TLS = super trollable (def. true), or whether quality trolling = knowing your audience

rpupkin wrote: I actually don't think OP is an intentional troll. He wanted to spark a provocative discussion, but he lacked the insight and the writing skills to get such a discussion going. When posters started questioning some of his assumptions, he reached and asserted some implausible things he thought were true. When the skepticism mounted, he retracted into a PM-me-for-the-real-answers turtle shell.

this also sounds true tho

ndirish2010 wrote:

greekdebtcrisis wrote:

ndirish2010 wrote:

greekdebtcrisis wrote:

ndirish2010 wrote:People think you're trolling because you're blatantly making shit up. That is usually the first clue.

Like what?

The whole thread.

I don't know what you need to prove you wrong but I think you're a lost cause by now or you're just saying this to hurt others.

Either be more concrete so that I can try to clarify things for you or stop posting silly responses like "this whole thread," as they are unhelpful to me and to others.

Do you work at a law firm? Have you worked in biglaw? I'm trying to figure out what your angle is in here and how you can contribute constructively.

The one in this thread who is intentionally hurting others is you, not me.

My employment is neither here nor there. I am a lawyer, I don't work in biglaw, nor do I want to.

So this seems to undermine any thoughtful contribution on your behalf. Does your SO work in biglaw? I'm just trying to figure out how you can make silly claims without having even had experience in the field.

While I only summered at a biglaw firm, at least I can say that SO has been there for a couple of years and agrees with everything I am talking about. People keep on insisting it is trolling but perhaps their reasoning isn't off completely: I did HYS and that bubble is much smaller and perhaps it is wrong of me to say that the opportunities are the same outside of that bubble. (Initially I said t14 but everyone here assumes that that must be 14 so I decided to clarify.)

In fact my SO's friends want to exit biglaw and are now gunning for firms at which I've received offers. One received an offer from the same firm at which I got a position at a lower salary (after four years of biglaw...). My SO is exiting biglaw in a year as it is unrewarding. Part of the reason I was eager to find another job is because of my SO too--I found that my SO's life was just miserable and a waste of time.

My SO also knows you can negotiate as a first year which to my bafflement is resisted ITT to an unhealthy degree. To give you an example of how one might go about that without a clerkship: you do your boring 2L summer schtick and then you do 3L OCI with an offer in hand. You get your 3L offers and you start negotiating pro bono and for example. (This exact hypo has been done.) I would rather have pro bono guaranteed to count toward my billables as that work is much more rewarding and substantive than the tedious shit you do. When you're billing >2500, you'd be thanking whatever deity you believe in that some of that was guaranteed pro bono in your first year. Otherwise, a firm can say "we love pro bono and our associates do it!" It is a load of shit as they make it sound like everyone can do it at their own time. Firms need to make money and pro bono is a always secondary. In fact the firms do whatever they can to get you off pro bono. Negotiating that bit with the leverage of other firm offers is not annoying, or stupid, or trolling, it is smart. When any of you ITT go into biglaw, you'll see what I mean.