If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
User avatar
usuaggie
Posts: 585
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 8:43 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby usuaggie » Sat Dec 11, 2010 3:16 pm

gwuorbust wrote:
Columbia Law wrote:

It's NEVER counter-productive to type more. Either you're stupid or you're not.


TITCR

10k words by a dumb as fuck person is going to be dumb as fuck

10k words by a smart person is probably going to be smart


10k smart words > 3k smart words > 10k dumb words > 3k dumb words



somebody needs to work on their reading comprehension.

User avatar
beach_terror
Posts: 7230
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:01 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby beach_terror » Sat Dec 11, 2010 3:26 pm

Or people just need to stop making blanket statements about things that aren't black or white.

User avatar
gwuorbust
Posts: 2087
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 11:37 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby gwuorbust » Sat Dec 11, 2010 3:30 pm

usuaggie wrote:
gwuorbust wrote:
Columbia Law wrote:

It's NEVER counter-productive to type more. Either you're stupid or you're not.


TITCR

10k words by a dumb as fuck person is going to be dumb as fuck

10k words by a smart person is probably going to be smart


10k smart words > 3k smart words > 10k dumb words > 3k dumb words



somebody needs to work on their reading comprehension.


altering his statement to match what I think, brah

User avatar
Bildungsroman
Posts: 5548
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 2:42 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby Bildungsroman » Sat Dec 11, 2010 3:31 pm

Hey OP where do you go to law school again? I always forget since you're so humble.

User avatar
ResolutePear
Posts: 8614
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 10:07 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby ResolutePear » Sat Dec 11, 2010 3:37 pm

gwuorbust wrote:
Columbia Law wrote:

It's NEVER counter-productive to type more. Either you're stupid or you're not.


TITCR

10k words by a dumb as fuck person is going to be dumb as fuck

10k words by a smart person is probably going to be smart


10k smart words > 3k smart words > 10k dumb words > 3k dumb words


I'd like to amend this:

3k smarter words > 10k smart words > 3k smart words > 10k dumb words > 3k dumb words.

Are you guys follow this pattern? It's the basis for your curve:

It's all about writing a better paper than anybody else - and they read content not length. Though, to be honest, everybody knows length is a great ego factor.. so write those 10k words and go get laid by your fellow peers. :|

User avatar
Ty Webb
Posts: 517
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby Ty Webb » Sat Dec 11, 2010 3:43 pm

ResolutePear wrote:
gwuorbust wrote:
Columbia Law wrote:

It's NEVER counter-productive to type more. Either you're stupid or you're not.


TITCR

10k words by a dumb as fuck person is going to be dumb as fuck

10k words by a smart person is probably going to be smart


10k smart words > 3k smart words > 10k dumb words > 3k dumb words


I'd like to amend this:

3k smarter words > 10k smart words > 3k smart words > 10k dumb words > 3k dumb words.

Are you guys follow this pattern? It's the basis for your curve:

It's all about writing a better paper than anybody else - and they read content not length. Though, to be honest, everybody knows length is a great ego factor.. so write those 10k words and go get laid by your fellow peers. :|



Far too many professors use a "point system" or "checklist" for this to be true at large. Law professors tend to generally "count up" rather than starting at 100 and starting down.

User avatar
BruceWayne
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:36 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby BruceWayne » Sat Dec 11, 2010 3:55 pm

G. T. L. Rev. wrote:
Ty Webb wrote:Far too many professors use a "point system" or "checklist" for this to be true at large. Law professors tend to generally "count up" rather than starting at 100 and starting down.

This is an empirical point. Where's your evidence?



Unfortunately I know for a fact that this is what my Torts professor does; he gave out a copy of his grading rubric.

User avatar
Ty Webb
Posts: 517
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby Ty Webb » Sat Dec 11, 2010 4:00 pm

BruceWayne wrote:
G. T. L. Rev. wrote:
Ty Webb wrote:Far too many professors use a "point system" or "checklist" for this to be true at large. Law professors tend to generally "count up" rather than starting at 100 and starting down.

This is an empirical point. Where's your evidence?



Unfortunately I know for a fact that this is what my Torts professor does; he gave out a copy of his grading rubric.


Mine as well. Same goes for my contracts professor.

I don't have evidence that it's this way across the board (I really don't give a shit, either). I'm simply saying that I know of enough examples of professors "pointing" that a hard rule that 3k better words > 10k good words is not compelling to me.

User avatar
Columbia Law
Posts: 295
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 7:51 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby Columbia Law » Sat Dec 11, 2010 4:04 pm

ResolutePear wrote:
gwuorbust wrote:
Columbia Law wrote:

It's NEVER counter-productive to type more. Either you're stupid or you're not.


TITCR

10k words by a dumb as fuck person is going to be dumb as fuck

10k words by a smart person is probably going to be smart


10k smart words > 3k smart words > 10k dumb words > 3k dumb words


I'd like to amend this:

3k smarter words > 10k smart words > 3k smart words > 10k dumb words > 3k dumb words.

Are you guys follow this pattern? It's the basis for your curve:

It's all about writing a better paper than anybody else - and they read content not length. Though, to be honest, everybody knows length is a great ego factor.. so write those 10k words and go get laid by your fellow peers. :|


LOL WTF?

Writing 10k smart words and spotting every issue is MUCH better than 3k.

Professors love to use checklists and even if they don't, a hardcore analysis will always win.

User avatar
ResolutePear
Posts: 8614
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 10:07 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby ResolutePear » Sat Dec 11, 2010 4:07 pm

Columbia Law wrote:
ResolutePear wrote:
gwuorbust wrote:
Columbia Law wrote:

It's NEVER counter-productive to type more. Either you're stupid or you're not.


TITCR

10k words by a dumb as fuck person is going to be dumb as fuck

10k words by a smart person is probably going to be smart


10k smart words > 3k smart words > 10k dumb words > 3k dumb words


I'd like to amend this:

3k smarter words > 10k smart words > 3k smart words > 10k dumb words > 3k dumb words.

Are you guys follow this pattern? It's the basis for your curve:

It's all about writing a better paper than anybody else - and they read content not length. Though, to be honest, everybody knows length is a great ego factor.. so write those 10k words and go get laid by your fellow peers. :|


LOL WTF?

Writing 10k smart words and spotting every issue is MUCH better than 3k.

Professors love to use checklists and even if they don't, a hardcore analysis will always win.


If you spot more issues with 3k words than with 10k words, who's better off?

User avatar
Ty Webb
Posts: 517
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby Ty Webb » Sat Dec 11, 2010 4:11 pm

If you spot more issues with 3k words than with 10k words, who's better off?



I won't say this scenario is impossible - I'm just saying it's very unlikely. If you're spotting more issues with 3k words than a person with 10k, chances are your analysis is absolutely barren. It's a catch-22.

For some reason, people seem to think that people typing 10k+ words are off typing treatises about why they love tort law. Most people with the ability to type that quickly (meaning their mind is moving that quickly) know the law well enough that they don't have to stop typing. This assumption that the extra 4k or so words in these long exams is all about fairies and butterflies is unfounded, IMO.

I know personally my mind works in paragraphs. By the last sentence of the paragraph, my mind will prepare a new paragraph.

User avatar
seespotrun
Posts: 2395
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:36 am

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby seespotrun » Sat Dec 11, 2010 5:13 pm

G. T. L. Rev. wrote:Actually, lots of profs will reduce your score for extraneous/incorrect arguments. For instance, if you wrote about strict liability for ultrahazardous activities when a product was involved (but no hazardous activity), my torts prof would've subtracted points.

While I generally agree that more analysis is better, there is no hard and fast rule, and OP's post is clearly just trolling.


TITCR.

I'll offer this: Law school exams should be written in pseudo stream of consciousness. I say "pseudo" because you shouldn't include irrelevant shit that's not implicated by the facts, but will inevitably cross your mind while you are narrowing the issue. Including this irrelevant shit is counter-productive even if you dismiss it with valid reasoning, and even if your professor doesn't deduct points for including irrelevant or incorrect info. This is so for at least two reasons: (1) The opportunity cost of spending your time on nonsense as opposed to relevant analysis that's implicated by the facts, and (2) the danger of confusing, boring, or appearing to your professor that you don't know what you're talking about.

Summary: Columbia Law = Troll

User avatar
Borhas
Posts: 4852
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 6:09 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby Borhas » Sat Dec 11, 2010 5:41 pm

Columbia Law wrote:You get it. Don't be smart and all like "OMGZ MY PROFESSOR PUT A WORD LIMIT YOU'RE WRONGZ!!".

Standard issue spotter. No limit. If you didn't have over 5000-6000 words you have ZERO shot at an A/A-. Drop out now.


I spit 4000 words a minute all over your 70wpm TTTyping

User avatar
skoobily doobily
Posts: 247
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 10:40 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby skoobily doobily » Sat Dec 11, 2010 5:42 pm

Columbia Law wrote:
ResolutePear wrote:
gwuorbust wrote:
Columbia Law wrote:

It's NEVER counter-productive to type more. Either you're stupid or you're not.


TITCR

10k words by a dumb as fuck person is going to be dumb as fuck

10k words by a smart person is probably going to be smart


10k smart words > 3k smart words > 10k dumb words > 3k dumb words


I'd like to amend this:

3k smarter words > 10k smart words > 3k smart words > 10k dumb words > 3k dumb words.

Are you guys follow this pattern? It's the basis for your curve:

It's all about writing a better paper than anybody else - and they read content not length. Though, to be honest, everybody knows length is a great ego factor.. so write those 10k words and go get laid by your fellow peers. :|


LOL WTF?

Writing 10k smart words and spotting every issue is MUCH better than 3k.

Professors love to use checklists and even if they don't, a hardcore analysis will always win.


FWIW Resolute Pear is a 0L

User avatar
JCougar
Posts: 3175
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 8:47 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby JCougar » Sat Dec 11, 2010 6:21 pm

Image

User avatar
ResolutePear
Posts: 8614
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 10:07 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby ResolutePear » Sat Dec 11, 2010 11:06 pm

skoobily doobily wrote:
Columbia Law wrote:
ResolutePear wrote:
gwuorbust wrote:
TITCR

10k words by a dumb as fuck person is going to be dumb as fuck

10k words by a smart person is probably going to be smart


10k smart words > 3k smart words > 10k dumb words > 3k dumb words


I'd like to amend this:

3k smarter words > 10k smart words > 3k smart words > 10k dumb words > 3k dumb words.

Are you guys follow this pattern? It's the basis for your curve:

It's all about writing a better paper than anybody else - and they read content not length. Though, to be honest, everybody knows length is a great ego factor.. so write those 10k words and go get laid by your fellow peers. :|


LOL WTF?

Writing 10k smart words and spotting every issue is MUCH better than 3k.

Professors love to use checklists and even if they don't, a hardcore analysis will always win.


FWIW Resolute Pear is a 0L


Your face is a 0L. FWIW.

User avatar
180orbust
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 2:45 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby 180orbust » Sun Dec 12, 2010 12:38 am

It doesn't require many words to identify the issue and make your point, or to deeply and intensively analyze these points. Professors do often use checklists, but not all items on their checklist are weighted equally. You might only get one or two points for something you spend a page blabbering on and on about, when the point you are making is only incidental to the main focus of the exam question.

If you approach your points calmly and methodically, then you are more likely to recognize which issues are most significant, how best to present them, and you're also less likely to forget about important, subtle details. I learned this the hard way when I got back several exams in which there were entire pages that I received no credit.

I do believe non-stop typing can be counter-productive. If you are dumb, then trying to produce 3,000 words of quality answer is probably a more manageable task than wasting your precious (and much needed, if you are dumb) time typing out 10,000 words of every stupid thought that crosses your mind. If you are smart and know the material cold, then typing a lot is fine so long as you are actually producing more content, rather than just a fluffier, more redundant way of making a simple point. The only way to make sure you are producing content rather than fluff is to slow it down and think. Its a lot easier to write what you have figured out than figuring it out as you go.

User avatar
dailygrind
Posts: 19639
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:08 am

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby dailygrind » Sun Dec 12, 2010 11:46 am

my prof's noted to the class that every year there are a handful of tests that are "tight as a laser beam," and extremely good. definitely don't need to be verbose to score points.

User avatar
doyleoil
Posts: 631
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 2:59 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby doyleoil » Sun Dec 12, 2010 12:05 pm

Shit ton of useless words in here. Kinda makes you wonder about the "advice" or "analysis" or whatever the hell this nonsense is supposed to be.

For more, see, e.g.: http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/795 ... acy-gossip

User avatar
nealric
Posts: 2391
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 9:53 am

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby nealric » Sun Dec 12, 2010 12:16 pm

Lol.

Just did a 3-hour corporate tax II exam: 1200 words.

Baylan
Posts: 356
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 4:26 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby Baylan » Sun Dec 12, 2010 12:40 pm

nealric wrote:Lol.

Just did a 3-hour corporate tax II exam: 1200 words.


Time to drop out? Thats what OP would have you believe...

User avatar
seespotrun
Posts: 2395
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:36 am

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby seespotrun » Sun Dec 12, 2010 12:50 pm

nealric wrote:Lol.

Just did a 3-hour corporate tax II exam: 1200 words.


You had an exam on a Sunday morning? Harsh.

User avatar
nealric
Posts: 2391
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 9:53 am

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby nealric » Sun Dec 12, 2010 1:00 pm

Time to drop out? Thats what OP would have you believe...



Lol- a little late for that. I graduate with my tax llm this semester.

Baylan
Posts: 356
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 4:26 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby Baylan » Sun Dec 12, 2010 1:03 pm

nealric wrote:
Time to drop out? Thats what OP would have you believe...



Lol- a little late for that. I graduate with my tax llm this semester.


You obviously have no idea how to take a law school exam...

User avatar
ResolutePear
Posts: 8614
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 10:07 pm

Re: If you didn't type 6000+ words on your 3 hours exam you're f

Postby ResolutePear » Sun Dec 12, 2010 1:03 pm

nealric wrote:
Time to drop out? Thats what OP would have you believe...



Lol- a little late for that. I graduate with my tax llm this semester.


Not to derail this fascinating topic :roll: ... but,

How are job prospects for the tax LLM? And, did you think that accounting courses/experience would have helped, or have helped you?




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests