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. "