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.
Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu May 03, 2012 6:50 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:When I was looking at the dates for the program there was a date in June for another orientation for students on the quarter system that aren't able to make the first orientation on the 25th. Does anyone know anything about this? Currently on the quarter system and the 25th may be a little hectic to get to.


Had my follow-up today. Interviewer said there is only one orientation (May 25th) and everyone is expected to attend that one.

Any insight into the admissions time line going forward? Or where they are at with reviewing apps

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu May 03, 2012 7:30 pm

I got a call for a follow-up today. She wanted to do it today, so I think they are just doing a bunch of followups back to back.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Thu May 03, 2012 9:56 pm

Anonymous User wrote:I got a call for a follow-up today. She wanted to do it today, so I think they are just doing a bunch of followups back to back.


Yeah I think so too. Mine said I would hear back within the week..... :?

User avatar
mcenteno
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 8:59 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby mcenteno » Fri May 04, 2012 1:56 am

How do they go about rejecting people?? Email, phone call??

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 10:51 am

mcenteno wrote:How do they go about rejecting people?? Email, phone call??


Online status checker and email.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 10:54 am

Within the last two weeks, have there been rejections?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 10:56 am

Anonymous User wrote:
mcenteno wrote:How do they go about rejecting people?? Email, phone call??


Online status checker and email.


Sweet, i cant wait lol

AS33
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby AS33 » Fri May 04, 2012 11:55 am

Just wanted to say that those of you who are still waiting, don't give up hope just yet. I had another follow-up and was informed that a decision would be made within a week. It makes the most sense that those of us who are accepted will hear by next Friday - so I think we all just have to hang in there one more week!

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 11:57 am

It amazes me how great of a job they've done silencing this forum this year. I give them an A+ on that and a D on everything else.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 12:14 pm

I think I'm gonna cry when I get rejected. I shouldn't have applied for this, law school apps were enough stress to last me a lifetime

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 12:19 pm

last year rejections came in HUGE HUGE HUGE SWARMS after the class was filled.

Like I remember everyone getting rejected at one time.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 2:28 pm

Has anyone gotten in this year without a follow-up??

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 2:47 pm

Anonymous User wrote:It amazes me how great of a job they've done silencing this forum this year. I give them an A+ on that and a D on everything else.



+1

Thank you.

I expressed a similar opinion and I was all but rhetorically lynched by several people. It amazes me how much "future lawyers" will easily roll over to a culture of gag. Seems they will make great underlings for their corporate overlords.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 3:47 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:It amazes me how great of a job they've done silencing this forum this year. I give them an A+ on that and a D on everything else.



+1

Thank you.

I expressed a similar opinion and I was all but rhetorically lynched by several people. It amazes me how much "future lawyers" will easily roll over to a culture of gag. Seems they will make great underlings for their corporate overlords.


It doesn't amaze me at all... Some of these "future lawyer" would sell their souls for corporate America

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 3:50 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:It amazes me how great of a job they've done silencing this forum this year. I give them an A+ on that and a D on everything else.



+1

Thank you.

I expressed a similar opinion and I was all but rhetorically lynched by several people. It amazes me how much "future lawyers" will easily roll over to a culture of gag. Seems they will make great underlings for their corporate overlords.


It doesn't amaze me at all... Some of these "future lawyer" would sell their souls for corporate America

So I take it you'll be withdrawing your application from SEO?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 4:11 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:It amazes me how great of a job they've done silencing this forum this year. I give them an A+ on that and a D on everything else.



+1

Thank you.

I expressed a similar opinion and I was all but rhetorically lynched by several people. It amazes me how much "future lawyers" will easily roll over to a culture of gag. Seems they will make great underlings for their corporate overlords.


It doesn't amaze me at all... Some of these "future lawyer" would sell their souls for corporate America

So I take it you'll be withdrawing your application from SEO?




There they are, right on cue.

User avatar
hyakku
Posts: 604
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 9:35 pm

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby hyakku » Fri May 04, 2012 4:12 pm

I don't really understand what half of you are even talking about. There's no official gag order, I even talked to SEO about TLS the first time I met them (since I heard about them here) and the only thing they ever have said was to be careful about what you hear about the program up here. Most people are just smart enough not to out themselves for no reason, in case they say or do something that could come back to them in the future, not because of some "gag order" by "corporate overlords." Maybe they told others not to talk on TLS, but I'm pretty sure they want as much exposure as possible for the program so I doubt this is the case. Whatever else you have in your head about people coming after you for being impatient is mostly in your head.

Edit: What the hell, cut off part of my post, which was the actual important part. Anyway, can anyone link to that page in the thread about talking to SEO about lateraling upward after acceptance? I can't find it and would like to read that again.
Last edited by hyakku on Fri May 04, 2012 4:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 4:14 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:It amazes me how great of a job they've done silencing this forum this year. I give them an A+ on that and a D on everything else.



+1

Thank you.

I expressed a similar opinion and I was all but rhetorically lynched by several people. It amazes me how much "future lawyers" will easily roll over to a culture of gag. Seems they will make great underlings for their corporate overlords.


It doesn't amaze me at all... Some of these "future lawyer" would sell their souls for corporate America

So I take it you'll be withdrawing your application from SEO?


+1

Alum here. If you are so repulsed by these "future lawyers" then drop the fuck out of the program. It seems that the great majority of the people on here are appreciative of the program (with its flaws) but some people like this are just the worst. Take your shit elsewhere because SEO sure as hell doesn't need a whiny little brat like you. I get so irritated with people like this who take for granted what a great opportunity this program is. Seriously, stop feeling so entitled.

There are plenty of flaws with the program. The fact that they don't have the slots filled at this point is pretty messed up I agree but there is a right way and wrong way to express any frustration you have. Coming off all butt hurt and bitchy for the past several posts (it's easy to tell its you even though its anonymous) is the wrong way.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 4:17 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:It amazes me how great of a job they've done silencing this forum this year. I give them an A+ on that and a D on everything else.



+1

Thank you.

I expressed a similar opinion and I was all but rhetorically lynched by several people. It amazes me how much "future lawyers" will easily roll over to a culture of gag. Seems they will make great underlings for their corporate overlords.


It doesn't amaze me at all... Some of these "future lawyer" would sell their souls for corporate America



+1

Alum here. If you are so repulsed by these "future lawyers" then drop the fuck out of the program. It seems that the great majority of the people on here are appreciative of the program (with its flaws) but some people like this are just the worst. Take your shit elsewhere because SEO sure as hell doesn't need a whiny little brat like you. I get so irritated with people like this who take for granted what a great opportunity this program is. Seriously, stop feeling so entitled.

There are plenty of flaws with the program. The fact that they don't have the slots filled at this point is pretty messed up I agree but there is a right way and wrong way to express any frustration you have. Coming off all butt hurt and bitchy for the past several posts (it's easy to tell its you even though its anonymous) is the wrong way.


Really mature, calm, cool and collected response. You make your program proud.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 4:22 pm

hyakku wrote:I don't really understand what half of you are even talking about. There's no official gag order, I even talked to SEO about TLS the first time I met them (since I heard about them here) and the only thing they ever have said was to be careful about what you hear about the program up here. Most people are just smart enough not to out themselves for no reason, in case they say or do something that could come back to them in the future, not because of some "gag order" by "corporate overlords." Maybe they told others not to talk on TLS, but I'm pretty sure they want as much exposure as possible for the program so I doubt this is the case. Whatever else you have in your head about people coming after you for being impatient is mostly in your head.

Edit: What the hell, cut off part of my post, which was the actual important part. Anyway, can anyone link to that page in the thread about talking to SEO about lateraling upward after acceptance? I can't find it and would like to read that again.



Hey, thanks for the more reasoned response. We're referring to the actions taken particularly through last year's thread (several members have com forth this year) by SEO. They contacted the individually compiling how many acceptances there were and which law school they were attending and asked them to stop. Why? Why can't we know which schools give you the best chance with actual hard evidence? What are they hiding?

There were others who were actually accepted which were contacted after they got in and chastised for divulging too much info on TLS. Besides that you have the alums popping in scaring the shit out of everyone. Yea, there is no gun to anyone's head. But when you use subtle fear of rejection from the program by alums, it can have a chilling effect on speech. (saw what I did there?)

Whatever, people disagree on this issue. I understand what a great program it is. And I can understand the pride alums have in the program. But that is no reason to just totally cast aside any form of criticism. No system/program is perfect, and maybe its an area for improvement. Many grievances are coming from legitimate concerns but their opinion is characterized as entitled whining. I don't know, the truth is usually somewhere in the middle and I think in this case that might be the case.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Fri May 04, 2012 4:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 4:26 pm

^ just quit while you're ahead you silly goose, and stop acting like SEO is the KGB.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 4:26 pm

Anonymous User wrote:^ just quit while you're ahead you silly goose, and stop acting like SEO is the KGB.



case in point

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 4:34 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
hyakku wrote:I don't really understand what half of you are even talking about. There's no official gag order, I even talked to SEO about TLS the first time I met them (since I heard about them here) and the only thing they ever have said was to be careful about what you hear about the program up here. Most people are just smart enough not to out themselves for no reason, in case they say or do something that could come back to them in the future, not because of some "gag order" by "corporate overlords." Maybe they told others not to talk on TLS, but I'm pretty sure they want as much exposure as possible for the program so I doubt this is the case. Whatever else you have in your head about people coming after you for being impatient is mostly in your head.

Edit: What the hell, cut off part of my post, which was the actual important part. Anyway, can anyone link to that page in the thread about talking to SEO about lateraling upward after acceptance? I can't find it and would like to read that again.



Hey, thanks for the more reasoned response. We're referring to the actions taken particularly through last year's thread (several members have com forth this year) by SEO. They contacted the individually compiling how many acceptances there were and which law school they were attending and asked them to stop. Why? Why can't we know which schools give you the best chance with actual hard evidence? What are they hiding?

There were others who were actually accepted which were contacted after they got in and chastised for divulging too much info on TLS. Besides that you have the alums popping in scaring the shit out of everyone. Yea, there is no gun to anyone's head. But when you use subtle fear of rejection from the program by alums, it can have a chilling effect on speech. (saw what I did there?)

Whatever, people disagree on this issue. I understand what a great program it is. And I can understand the pride alums have in the program. But that is no reason to just totally cast aside any form of criticism. No system/program is perfect, and maybe its an area for improvement. Many grievances are coming from legitimate concerns but their opinion is characterized as entitled whining. I don't know, the truth is usually somewhere in the middle and I think in this case that might be the case.


The angry alum from above. Who is casting aside any form of criticism? Am I? I am attacking the way in which its being done. I agree that there are things to be legitimately unhappy about but the way multiple people are doing it is just whiny.

"I expressed a similar opinion and I was all but rhetorically lynched by several people. It amazes me how much "future lawyers" will easily roll over to a culture of gag. Seems they will make great underlings for their corporate overlords."

"But keep up the anonymous SEO trolling, I'm sure it'll get you a spot."

"Well, it seems the groupthink has really took a turn for the worse so I'll stop commenting. Any opinion outside of one's own seems to be considered whining. We'll make great lawyers one day."

"The whole irony is the fact that they interview you on random campuses and once announced rejections on a public forum. Yeah, that's professional. If they're reading this they should realize there is a growing contingent of disillusioned alums out there. I mean it pays but we're not talking SA money here. In fact, one is almost better off finding a position on one's own without the albatross. In time, they'll start instructing candidates on how and when to breathe in a corporate environment."

"Their misplaced infatuation with stamping out all forms of "ghettoness" is amusing. You'd think they were dealing with kindergartners. "

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 4:42 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
hyakku wrote:I don't really understand what half of you are even talking about. There's no official gag order, I even talked to SEO about TLS the first time I met them (since I heard about them here) and the only thing they ever have said was to be careful about what you hear about the program up here. Most people are just smart enough not to out themselves for no reason, in case they say or do something that could come back to them in the future, not because of some "gag order" by "corporate overlords." Maybe they told others not to talk on TLS, but I'm pretty sure they want as much exposure as possible for the program so I doubt this is the case. Whatever else you have in your head about people coming after you for being impatient is mostly in your head.

Edit: What the hell, cut off part of my post, which was the actual important part. Anyway, can anyone link to that page in the thread about talking to SEO about lateraling upward after acceptance? I can't find it and would like to read that again.



Hey, thanks for the more reasoned response. We're referring to the actions taken particularly through last year's thread (several members have com forth this year) by SEO. They contacted the individually compiling how many acceptances there were and which law school they were attending and asked them to stop. Why? Why can't we know which schools give you the best chance with actual hard evidence? What are they hiding?

There were others who were actually accepted which were contacted after they got in and chastised for divulging too much info on TLS. Besides that you have the alums popping in scaring the shit out of everyone. Yea, there is no gun to anyone's head. But when you use subtle fear of rejection from the program by alums, it can have a chilling effect on speech. (saw what I did there?)

Whatever, people disagree on this issue. I understand what a great program it is. And I can understand the pride alums have in the program. But that is no reason to just totally cast aside any form of criticism. No system/program is perfect, and maybe its an area for improvement. Many grievances are coming from legitimate concerns but their opinion is characterized as entitled whining. I don't know, the truth is usually somewhere in the middle and I think in this case that might be the case.


The angry alum from above. Who is casting aside any form of criticism? Am I? I am attacking the way in which its being done. I agree that there are things to be legitimately unhappy about but the way multiple people are doing it is just whiny.

"I expressed a similar opinion and I was all but rhetorically lynched by several people. It amazes me how much "future lawyers" will easily roll over to a culture of gag. Seems they will make great underlings for their corporate overlords."

"But keep up the anonymous SEO trolling, I'm sure it'll get you a spot."

"Well, it seems the groupthink has really took a turn for the worse so I'll stop commenting. Any opinion outside of one's own seems to be considered whining. We'll make great lawyers one day."

"The whole irony is the fact that they interview you on random campuses and once announced rejections on a public forum. Yeah, that's professional. If they're reading this they should realize there is a growing contingent of disillusioned alums out there. I mean it pays but we're not talking SA money here. In fact, one is almost better off finding a position on one's own without the albatross. In time, they'll start instructing candidates on how and when to breathe in a corporate environment."

"Their misplaced infatuation with stamping out all forms of "ghettoness" is amusing. You'd think they were dealing with kindergartners. "


lol ok

"It's not what you're saying it's how you're saying it!"

Whining about the way others are whining. Great way to take away from the actual issues though. I think there's a name for that.

By the way, for someone so concerned with proper rhetoric, you sure have a loose tongue yourself:

"If you are so repulsed by these "future lawyers" then drop the fuck out of the program."

"Take your shit elsewhere because SEO sure as hell doesn't need a whiny little brat like you."


Not to mention the plenty of responses from your cohorts.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273567
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: SEO Corporate Law

Postby Anonymous User » Fri May 04, 2012 4:50 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
hyakku wrote:I don't really understand what half of you are even talking about. There's no official gag order, I even talked to SEO about TLS the first time I met them (since I heard about them here) and the only thing they ever have said was to be careful about what you hear about the program up here. Most people are just smart enough not to out themselves for no reason, in case they say or do something that could come back to them in the future, not because of some "gag order" by "corporate overlords." Maybe they told others not to talk on TLS, but I'm pretty sure they want as much exposure as possible for the program so I doubt this is the case. Whatever else you have in your head about people coming after you for being impatient is mostly in your head.

Edit: What the hell, cut off part of my post, which was the actual important part. Anyway, can anyone link to that page in the thread about talking to SEO about lateraling upward after acceptance? I can't find it and would like to read that again.



Hey, thanks for the more reasoned response. We're referring to the actions taken particularly through last year's thread (several members have com forth this year) by SEO. They contacted the individually compiling how many acceptances there were and which law school they were attending and asked them to stop. Why? Why can't we know which schools give you the best chance with actual hard evidence? What are they hiding?

There were others who were actually accepted which were contacted after they got in and chastised for divulging too much info on TLS. Besides that you have the alums popping in scaring the shit out of everyone. Yea, there is no gun to anyone's head. But when you use subtle fear of rejection from the program by alums, it can have a chilling effect on speech. (saw what I did there?)

Whatever, people disagree on this issue. I understand what a great program it is. And I can understand the pride alums have in the program. But that is no reason to just totally cast aside any form of criticism. No system/program is perfect, and maybe its an area for improvement. Many grievances are coming from legitimate concerns but their opinion is characterized as entitled whining. I don't know, the truth is usually somewhere in the middle and I think in this case that might be the case.


The angry alum from above. Who is casting aside any form of criticism? Am I? I am attacking the way in which its being done. I agree that there are things to be legitimately unhappy about but the way multiple people are doing it is just whiny.

"I expressed a similar opinion and I was all but rhetorically lynched by several people. It amazes me how much "future lawyers" will easily roll over to a culture of gag. Seems they will make great underlings for their corporate overlords."

"But keep up the anonymous SEO trolling, I'm sure it'll get you a spot."

"Well, it seems the groupthink has really took a turn for the worse so I'll stop commenting. Any opinion outside of one's own seems to be considered whining. We'll make great lawyers one day."

"The whole irony is the fact that they interview you on random campuses and once announced rejections on a public forum. Yeah, that's professional. If they're reading this they should realize there is a growing contingent of disillusioned alums out there. I mean it pays but we're not talking SA money here. In fact, one is almost better off finding a position on one's own without the albatross. In time, they'll start instructing candidates on how and when to breathe in a corporate environment."

"Their misplaced infatuation with stamping out all forms of "ghettoness" is amusing. You'd think they were dealing with kindergartners. "


lol ok

"It's not what you're saying it's how you're saying it!"

Whining about the way others are whining. Great way to take away from the actual issues though. I think there's a name for that.

By the way, for someone so concerned with proper rhetoric, you sure have a loose tongue yourself:

"If you are so repulsed by these "future lawyers" then drop the fuck out of the program."

"Take your shit elsewhere because SEO sure as hell doesn't need a whiny little brat like you."


Not to mention the plenty of responses from your cohorts.


You are completely missing my point. You are whining about a fantastic opportunity not being to your liking in a way that is just childish. You sound entitled. I don't care if you curse. Thats not the issue. The issue is you're whining about the program and saying you are some terrible victim. I am not doing those things. I am saying you are. If you can't see the distinction between me and you and can't even fathom why people are telling you to STFU then I'm done. Go ahead and revel in your ignorance.

Ok enough of these anonymous user internet battles. I hope the thread can go back to being useful for applicants. Good luck everyone.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.