SEO Corporate Law

(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.
bocadellupo
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2008 3:39 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby bocadellupo » Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:28 pm

so yeah... i have this interview for an SEO internship... umm...

pithypike
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 4:35 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby pithypike » Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:41 pm

Agreed with Bobina.

And how can you call yourself intellectually superior when typing things like priviledged? Or optomystic? It boggles the mind.

User avatar
RVP11
Posts: 2774
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:32 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby RVP11 » Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:02 pm

blackprince206 wrote:T-30? I don't think so. You're T-30.


Bobina and Pithy = both admitted to a T10. Thanks.

blackprince206 wrote:My GPA is median for many top schools, and my LSAT is well over 160 (not quite 170, though). I have a double-degree (which is harder to acheive than a double-major), a minor and 10 years worth of full-time work experience ("professional" jobs/management, including Account Executive at a major corp and financial advisor at a Wall Street firm with a Seattle office), several of which I completed while in school full-time...another 10 years volunteering at a non-profit for at risk youth, 15 years of acting in plays and directing community-oriented projects to combat domestic violence and gangs. Tutoring freshmen and sophomores at my university for nearly three years...upward trend in grades, endured 14 family deaths during college, including one on the night before an astronomy final.


Adcomms everywhere thank you for identifying your online persona for them.

blackprince206 wrote:With my profile, I do not need a 3.9 and a 170 to get into a top-10.

Even if I weren't a URM, my softs would put me over the top.


You're really overestimating the impressiveness of your record or underestimating everyone else's.

blackprince206 wrote:Plus, my weaker grades don't count b/c they are over 10 yrs old. So my 3.72 major GPA and my 3.8 in my last two years of school pretty much get me in wherever. Yup, I have a 3.58 overall GPA, but that's not the way schools look at it. Super old grades do not count. Only my last three years will be counted. Don't believe me, call Columbia, Vanderbilt or Virginia.


:lol: if you really believe that your LSDAS GPA doesn't largely control your destiny.

User avatar
ihatelaw
Posts: 107
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 2:26 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby ihatelaw » Thu Dec 25, 2008 11:51 am

You know...I want to go through what blackrpince is saying line by line and give me two cents but I won't. Its pretty simple dude - Yea, being a minority puts you at a disadvantage compared to whites. Thats if you speak in purely general terms. However, speaking in general terms is rarely accurate. Economic, family, and personal factors all play into that advantages and disadvantages that you had. Thats why a pakistani in london living in a lower class neighborhood or a white kid from a trailer park in alabama may be at more of a social and economic disadvantage than a black kid from a middle class suburb in chicago.



The reason more URM's than whites with my numbers might get into top schools is that there are far more white applicants, and many of them are clones of other applicants, not b/c they have to be, but b/c they choose to be. They don't do or write anything to set themselves apart. This dynamic is not a function of underqualified URM's, which is what you and others have seemingly implied the whole time.



Affirmative action doesn't exist because schools find your application so much more impressive or unique from run of the mill white applications. Would a non-URM be accepted with your stats? Matters on your LSAt. If you have a 168/169 its possible but with a 165 or 166, tT10 is unlikely. I know URMs who were accepted to T10s with far less impressive resumes and applications than your own. These acceptances are related to the fact that you are under represented, not because you are more impressive. Having a diverse and balanced intellectual community is important for the legal field. But don't confuse that with you being a gift from god for law schools. Law schools don't give a shit about you - you're just a number. If you fit on the graph, you'll get in sometimes without your application being read. You may get accepted into a T10 but that does not make you more valuable, better, or more impressive than any other T-10 student. Or for that matter, any other student. Similarly, they aren't any better than you either. Don't be a pretentious d-bag.



And the reason an A average, though what you have is a B+/A- average, is not impressive is because at a T10 nearly everyone has an A- or above in a tough major. And your resume isn't as impressive as you think. A number of applicants have higher degrees, better work experience, better volunteer experience, and tougher lives than you. Its hard to believe, isn't it? Get off the fucking cross.

pithypike
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 4:35 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby pithypike » Thu Dec 25, 2008 12:21 pm

At this point it's obvious you are a lost cause, but I'll chip in my two cents anyway.

None of us are racist and I am in favor of AA (to an extent). The thing that irritates me about you is how intensely you stick to the idea that AA hasn't helped you at all. I understand you want to believe your accomplishments are entirely your own, and that's okay, but you are an URM, and you have benefited from that status in law school admissions.

I understand you have had to struggle against whitey your whole life, and that's very impressive, but law schools aren't accepting you because of the struggle. Sorry man.

Just wanted to add how repulsive I find your suggestion that people start beating up "white boys." If anyone is racist, it is you.

You should be ashamed. Racial epithets and the encouraging of race-based assaults is pretty disgusting.

pithypike
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2007 4:35 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby pithypike » Fri Dec 26, 2008 12:41 am

blackprince206 wrote:
BendAndSnap wrote:
uvalaw4l wrote:And? So some whites have access; plenty don't. Whites may not get a push back like blacks do, but you're crazy if you think all whites get a leg up. Maybe you just haven't been exposed to the non-rich white population like I have, but you're unnecessarily and unfairly lumping people together based on their race and nothing else when you tell someone who's non-URM to inquire with mom & dad or the local country club.


this is exactly my point, and reason for asking if similar jumpstart programs existed for the population at large. i obviously understand the point of SEO and fully support it. calm down on ne sait jamais, i'm just wondering if there's some established program besides SEO and besides your suggested "country club" route - some of us don't qualify for either (duh) :roll:


Let's be clear...there are some whites (I am speaking of rural whites) who are very much socioeconimically disavdantaged. That said, all things being equal, who would have an easier time transcending poverty, a white man or a Black man?

White skin, itself, bestowes priviledge on ppl; dark skin is a detriment.

I do agree that for extremely impoverished whites there should be some avenue available. But many of the people on TLS are extremely racist and I wouldn't care if they went to a matchbook law school and worked at a gas station for the rest of their lives.

People of color on this post should realize that many of the white people asking questions in this post have been spewing venom at me and other Blacks in other posts.

And they've called me everything but the "N" word. They deserve the toilet. Don't help them! Don't talk to them...this site is racist, we need to have our posts and they can have theirs...cool whites can kick it, but these punk-ass white frat boys can get the hell on.


And yet the only racial epithet I've ever seen on this board came from you, not any "punk-ass white frat boys." Intriguing.....

It's fairly clear who the resident racist of TLS is.

User avatar
kurama20
Posts: 675
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:04 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby kurama20 » Fri Dec 26, 2008 7:10 pm

Code: Select all

And the reason an A average, though what you have is a B+/A- average, is not impressive is because at a T10 nearly everyone has an A- or above in a [b]tough major[/b].


Just wanted to point out that the bolded part of the argument is EXTREMELY WRONG. One thing that a lot of people on here with high gpas who knock others don't seem to admit is that they earned them in majors that tend to give out high gpas. The reason top law schools have such high gpas is because most of the students are majoring in the softer majors. I hear people on here with 3.8 gpa's in poli sci, english, history, and comparative lit bragging about how intelligent they are and how everyone below 3.6 is just not "qualified" for top schools. That's arrogant and highly unrealistic; a lot of people with 3.0 etc. gpas in engineering, science, math, econ have worked just as hard and are just as intelligent. Those majors just don't give out high averages like the ones that most people who apply to law schools study. The truth is that most people on here bragging and being arrogant about their "qualifications" are studying poli sci etc. I'm not bashing the major, but just show some more humility and be honest.

User avatar
ChinaBowls
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:33 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby ChinaBowls » Fri Dec 26, 2008 9:26 pm

Just wanted to point out that the bolded part of the argument is EXTREMELY WRONG. One thing that a lot of people on here with high gpas who knock others don't seem to admit is that they earned them in majors that tend to give out high gpas. The reason top law schools have such high gpas is because most of the students are majoring in the softer majors. I hear people on here with 3.8 gpa's in poli sci, english, history, and comparative lit bragging about how intelligent they are and how everyone below 3.6 is just not "qualified" for top schools. That's arrogant and highly unrealistic; a lot of people with 3.0 etc. gpas in engineering, science, math, econ have worked just as hard and are just as intelligent. Those majors just don't give out high averages like the ones that most people who apply to law schools study. The truth is that most people on here bragging and being arrogant about their "qualifications" are studying poli sci etc. I'm not bashing the major, but just show some more humility and be honest.


Amen!

FuturehoyaLawya
Posts: 62
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 11:10 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby FuturehoyaLawya » Sat Dec 27, 2008 10:12 am

why not create a new thread entitled: blackprince206, race, politics, AA, and any other annoying subject about race in the lawschool admission process.....and you can all have your own discussion about it...while people who are interested in discussing the SEO Corporate Law Program can do so. I think it is pretty annoying to hear the same people (yes blackprince206 this means you, are you even black??) talk about the same thing..over and over and over and over again. URMS get a boost. URMS are still underrepresented (didn't Chicago have like 5 Black males in their entering class last year....out of like 200 something people). AA is unfair. URMs score lower on standardized tests, especially the SATs and the LSATs. The same URMs will probably be at the bottom of their lawschool class anyway (minus Asians, oh wait, their not URMs)--so why do you all care? I betcha blackprince206 will get into his top10 lawschool, and be at the bottom of the class (see how life works out, you can get your revenge that way). However, He won't be at the bottom because of his LSAT score, but because of his off-the-wall comments (regardless of skin color) and his refusal to just listen. Black people don't like to listen, so I hear...and are always angry..something else I heard on the street.

What else...oh yes..URMs tend to be poor (they also attend the worst public schools in this country). But wait a minute, if they are not in these poor schools, aren't most of them in jail or on welfare....so how are they even applying to these top law schools, yes...those 5 black men at Chicago are trailblazers. but you know what that means 5 less white men at Chicago who probably had better GPAs/LSATs not getting in, life is so unfair..... But you know what, we can't forget about those poor whites who are suffering in those trailer parks across America too....:(I wish AA could solve everything.

These are all the things I've learned on TLS just to sum up the main points about AA and URMs status. I do find it all so interesting. But what I find more interesting is the SEO Corporate Law program. So, let's go back to that. thanks! :)

User avatar
kurama20
Posts: 675
Joined: Thu May 24, 2007 5:04 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby kurama20 » Sat Dec 27, 2008 10:52 am

Luckily for you I majored in one of the following: engineering, science, math, econ and still got a higher GPA than blackprince. Awwww, cry a little tear for me...so does this mean that I now have a right to criticize his paltry GPA in a paltry major?


The post wasn't really relating to you and blackprince. I was just mentioning it because a lot of posters who brag about their "qualifications" and claim that others aren't "qualified" are oftentimes poli sci etc. majors. I just find that shortsighted and annoying.

rolen27
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2007 4:59 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby rolen27 » Mon Dec 29, 2008 3:23 pm

Do you have to be a US citizen or permanent resident?

User avatar
jamaicanjynx
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:24 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby jamaicanjynx » Mon Dec 29, 2008 3:32 pm

rolen27 wrote:Do you have to be a US citizen or permanent resident?



No

User avatar
Bright*Star
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:43 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Bright*Star » Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:19 pm

Has anyone interviewed for SEO in NY this year?
Last edited by Bright*Star on Fri Jan 02, 2009 5:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Bright*Star
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:43 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Bright*Star » Tue Dec 30, 2008 6:14 pm

bump (to actually discuss SEO)

conn09
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 11:19 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby conn09 » Tue Dec 30, 2008 6:57 pm

So apparently I got invited to apply. I was overseas for the last 2 months and finally went through all of my law school related mail. Does anyone know if these jobs pay enough to completely screw up need based financial aid.

User avatar
Bright*Star
Posts: 18
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:43 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Bright*Star » Tue Dec 30, 2008 7:52 pm

Your 1L fin. aid will be calculated for 2008 so the $750-$1200/week from SEO will not matter. Maybe you can request the lower paying job and let me take the higher one? haha j/k

But seriously, 10 weeks at that pay shouldn't be bad at all in terms of hurting your need based aid.

conn09
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 11:19 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby conn09 » Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:30 pm

Bright*Star wrote:Your 1L fin. aid will be calculated for 2008 so the $750-$1200/week from SEO will not matter. Maybe you can request the lower paying job and let me take the higher one? haha j/k

But seriously, 10 weeks at that pay shouldn't be bad at all in terms of hurting your need based aid.


OK thanks. I've just had a really hard time with qualifying for any kind of need based aid throughout college. Somehow my mom's < 40K salary disqualified from any grants, work study, and a decent amount of subsidized loans.

User avatar
treple
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 11:06 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby treple » Mon Jan 05, 2009 4:03 pm

Just booked my trip! Chicago here I come.

User avatar
jamaicanjynx
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:24 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby jamaicanjynx » Tue Jan 06, 2009 7:39 pm

Has anyone interviewed recently? Care to share pointers? Mine's coming up in a few days...

workaholic
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 10:13 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby workaholic » Tue Jan 06, 2009 9:35 pm

I just caught the tail end of this post and still have no idea what its talking about. I too am interested in corporate law so whats this SEO program?

KP429
Posts: 191
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby KP429 » Tue Jan 06, 2009 9:46 pm

I don't know if this issue has been raised yet or not, but if anyone can provide some information on the financial aid impact of a summer's worth of income from SEO -- well.. it would be much appreciated.

It seems like ~$10k gross would be made over the course of the summer internship, but most will be lost in housing, taxes, and living expenses in uber-expensive NYC. Would that be a big burden for low/middle class 0Ls like myself?

User avatar
alexb240
Posts: 131
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 10:14 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby alexb240 » Tue Jan 06, 2009 10:08 pm

So I didn't bother to read this thread, as it seems to have digressed for quite some time and is now rounding back on to topic. But, I've written a bit about SEO (I was a corporate law intern this past summer) in the past, so I'm happy to offer any advice/information that I can. I wrote about my experience most recently in the "YLS 1L taking some questions" thread (you should be able to search for it), but have also previously written on my interview experience (and I may have one or two other posts discussing my general experience as well).

The next couple of weeks are extremely busy for me (we're beginning our finals period tomorrow), but I'll try and get to questions when I can. Good luck to all those who applied!

User avatar
Kohinoor
Posts: 2756
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Kohinoor » Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:01 am

So how do people think they did on their interviews? I got wrecked.

User avatar
treple
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 11:06 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby treple » Sat Jan 10, 2009 12:32 am

^^ What'd they ask you?

legends159
Posts: 1090
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 4:12 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby legends159 » Sat Jan 10, 2009 1:31 am

Kohinoor wrote:So how do people think they did on their interviews? I got wrecked.


keep your chin up, most people feel this way.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.