Overheard at the LSAT

User avatar
ScottRiqui
Posts: 3640
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby ScottRiqui » Thu Oct 10, 2013 9:31 am

North wrote:
iamgeorgebush wrote:
guano wrote:People who get 166 might not be lazy, but they got no place going to law school. Retake or don't go

This is such nonsense...with a strong enough GPA, a 166 could get you into Berkeley, whose median is 167.

Even without a strong GPA, the T14-or-bust mentality isn't necessarily warranted. There are people who go to lower-ranked law schools, do very well at those law schools, and end up having very successful careers. I know several such people.

Who wants to turn this babbling into a Flaw LR question?


He has a point, though; the idea that a 166 won't get you accepted anywhere worth attending is overly simplistic.

User avatar
iamgeorgebush
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:57 pm

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby iamgeorgebush » Thu Oct 10, 2013 9:38 am

North wrote:
iamgeorgebush wrote:
guano wrote:People who get 166 might not be lazy, but they got no place going to law school. Retake or don't go

This is such nonsense...with a strong enough GPA, a 166 could get you into Berkeley, whose median is 167.

Even without a strong GPA, the T14-or-bust mentality isn't necessarily warranted. There are people who go to lower-ranked law schools, do very well at those law schools, and end up having very successful careers. I know several such people.

Who wants to turn this babbling into a Flaw LR question?

So you think that a person who scores a 166 has "no place going to law school"?

User avatar
hephaestus
Posts: 2385
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 4:21 pm

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby hephaestus » Thu Oct 10, 2013 9:41 am

iamgeorgebush wrote:
North wrote:
iamgeorgebush wrote:
guano wrote:People who get 166 might not be lazy, but they got no place going to law school. Retake or don't go

This is such nonsense...with a strong enough GPA, a 166 could get you into Berkeley, whose median is 167.

Even without a strong GPA, the T14-or-bust mentality isn't necessarily warranted. There are people who go to lower-ranked law schools, do very well at those law schools, and end up having very successful careers. I know several such people.

Who wants to turn this babbling into a Flaw LR question?

So you think that a person who scores a 166 has "no place going to law school"?

I think that everyone should have T14 numbers, even if they are going to a regional school. The market is bad enough that you should only go to a T14, or a regional school with a big scholarship (which generally requires T14 numbers unless it's a school that's not even worth attending for free). So a 166 could fit this description if they had a great GPA.

User avatar
jk148706
Posts: 2499
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 11:14 am

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby jk148706 » Thu Oct 10, 2013 9:44 am

ImNoScar wrote:I think that everyone should have T14 numbers, even if they are going to a regional school. The market is bad enough that you should only go to a T14, or a regional school with a big scholarship (which generally requires T14 numbers unless it's a school that's not even worth attending for free). So a 166 could fit this description if they had a great GPA.


93 percentile not good enough

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby guano » Thu Oct 10, 2013 9:45 am

I'll amend. If ya have a 3.8+ GPA a 166 is fine. But that really is the bare minimum.

User avatar
hephaestus
Posts: 2385
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 4:21 pm

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby hephaestus » Thu Oct 10, 2013 9:48 am

jk148706 wrote:
ImNoScar wrote:I think that everyone should have T14 numbers, even if they are going to a regional school. The market is bad enough that you should only go to a T14, or a regional school with a big scholarship (which generally requires T14 numbers unless it's a school that's not even worth attending for free). So a 166 could fit this description if they had a great GPA.


93 percentile not good enough

Who cares what the percentile is. What school are you referincing that is worth attending?

User avatar
North
Posts: 4041
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 7:09 pm

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby North » Thu Oct 10, 2013 9:51 am

iamgeorgebush wrote:
North wrote:
iamgeorgebush wrote:
guano wrote:People who get 166 might not be lazy, but they got no place going to law school. Retake or don't go

This is such nonsense...with a strong enough GPA, a 166 could get you into Berkeley, whose median is 167.

Even without a strong GPA, the T14-or-bust mentality isn't necessarily warranted. There are people who go to lower-ranked law schools, do very well at those law schools, and end up having very successful careers. I know several such people.

Who wants to turn this babbling into a Flaw LR question?

So you think that a person who scores a 166 has "no place going to law school"?

Was getting at the bolded. Editing quotes on my phone in class is hard.

Non-bolded guy should retake for HYS anyway.

User avatar
JWP1022
Posts: 269
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 10:15 pm

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby JWP1022 » Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:02 am

Some of the people posting in this thread right now are fucking idiots, and assholes to boot. A non-URM buddy of mine got into Duke and Michigan with a 3.7 and a 167. More broadly speaking, a good GPA from a good institution and a 166 could get you into some lower-tier T14 right now.

Also saying someone with a 93rd percentile score has no business going to law school makes you a douche of the highest order.

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15513
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby Tiago Splitter » Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:22 am

JWP1022 wrote:Some of the people posting in this thread right now are fucking idiots, and assholes to boot. A non-URM buddy of mine got into Duke and Michigan with a 3.7 and a 167. More broadly speaking, a good GPA from a good institution and a 166 could get you into some lower-tier T14 right now.

Also saying someone with a 93rd percentile score has no business going to law school makes you a douche of the highest order.

Calm down. If you have a great GPA from a good school then retake for money. No one's impressed that your friend or anyone else will pay 250k for a degree when a slightly better LSAT cuts the cost in half. As someone who nearly went to LS with a 166 I had no business going then and thank god I didn't. Now let's get this thread back on track.

User avatar
northwood
Posts: 4872
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 7:29 pm

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby northwood » Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:28 am

Way to allow this thread to go off track October LSAT takers... Bring on the funnies

JJ123
Posts: 180
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 11:40 am

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby JJ123 » Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:51 am

Shut up! More funny shit from the LSAT!

User avatar
AnonymousAlterEgoC
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 9:13 am

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby AnonymousAlterEgoC » Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:53 am

This isn't really that funny but...

I accidentally wore sunglasses to the test. Because of the location, I had to walk twenty minutes and it's bright here. I was freaking out because, like most douches, I wear expensive sunglasses (not flashy sunglasses, just expensive sunglasses). I could not find sunglasses on the list of items that was allowed/disallowed, so I decided that I needed to hide them. In hindsight, this was probably unnecessary, but this was my first time taking the test. So I found a bathroom close to the testing center and went to hide them behind a toilet in one of the stalls. I pushed my sunglasses behind the toilet and in doing so pushed another pair of sunglasses out, which someone must have hidden/lost. I pushed them back in and left them there. At the end of the test (the test was administered in different locations depending on the alphabet), I went back and found only my sunglasses.

david&goliath
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:50 am

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby david&goliath » Thu Oct 10, 2013 10:56 am

This one guy I know wrote the test in june with me for the first time. After we received our scores, I asked him what his score/percentile was...

He said: "I got a 160, but I dont have a percentile, they didn't send me one, I think my test centre didn't do the percentile thing"

User avatar
North
Posts: 4041
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 7:09 pm

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby North » Thu Oct 10, 2013 11:55 am

camelthing wrote:This isn't really that funny but...

I accidentally wore sunglasses to the test. Because of the location, I had to walk twenty minutes and it's bright here. I was freaking out because, like most douches, I wear expensive sunglasses (not flashy sunglasses, just expensive sunglasses). I could not find sunglasses on the list of items that was allowed/disallowed, so I decided that I needed to hide them. In hindsight, this was probably unnecessary, but this was my first time taking the test. So I found a bathroom close to the testing center and went to hide them behind a toilet in one of the stalls. I pushed my sunglasses behind the toilet and in doing so pushed another pair of sunglasses out, which someone must have hidden/lost. I pushed them back in and left them there. At the end of the test (the test was administered in different locations depending on the alphabet), I went back and found only my sunglasses.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

User avatar
sopranorleone
Posts: 220
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2012 5:38 pm

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby sopranorleone » Thu Oct 10, 2013 12:08 pm

North wrote:
camelthing wrote:This isn't really that funny but...

I accidentally wore sunglasses to the test. Because of the location, I had to walk twenty minutes and it's bright here. I was freaking out because, like most douches, I wear expensive sunglasses (not flashy sunglasses, just expensive sunglasses). I could not find sunglasses on the list of items that was allowed/disallowed, so I decided that I needed to hide them. In hindsight, this was probably unnecessary, but this was my first time taking the test. So I found a bathroom close to the testing center and went to hide them behind a toilet in one of the stalls. I pushed my sunglasses behind the toilet and in doing so pushed another pair of sunglasses out, which someone must have hidden/lost. I pushed them back in and left them there. At the end of the test (the test was administered in different locations depending on the alphabet), I went back and found only my sunglasses.

:lol: :lol: :lol:


The Godfather, LSAT-style

IrishJew
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 12:39 pm

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby IrishJew » Thu Oct 10, 2013 12:50 pm

PDaddy wrote:Taking section 3, and a cell phone rings.

Girl: "Hello? Oh...yeah...ok, hold on!" (quickly covers the phone speaker)

Girl (to Proctor): "Um...do you mind if I take this call? It's my friend Anastasia from New York; I have to find out how her test went."

Examinees: :lol: :lol: :lol:

The Proctor is so stunned she stands there with her mouth open without saying a word. The examinees sit in shock as well.

Proctor (After she realizes it isn't a joke): "Uh...sure, ya...just take it outside. Oh! And leave your materials HERE, and don't bother coming back, ok?" :D

Girl: "Oh...well...ok! Are you sure?"

Proctor: :roll:

Girl: "I'm so excited!"

Girl (to her firend as she gathers her belongings to walk out): "Ok, so go ahead. No, the proctor was kinda interrupting me, girl. She is...so rude! (farts on the way out, lol.)

Girl: "So ok ok, go ahead."

Note: Think Hillary Banks from The Fresh Prince of Bel Aire

Proctor gives the examinees 2-3 minutes back on the clock.


Awesome story, cannot believe how dumb some people are. But they gave you more time?!?!?!?! I took June 2010 and some asshole's phone went off during the test and we all had to listen to 5 minutes of him negotiating with the proctor (in the end he was aloud to turn it off and keep it. Rrrg.) No extra time.

Ron_Burgundy
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby Ron_Burgundy » Thu Oct 10, 2013 2:05 pm

Girl sitting next to me: Are you retaking?

Me: Yep, I didn't do as well as I would've liked on my first try.

Girl sitting next to me: Did you get below a 150?

Me: No, I got above a 150.

Girl sitting next to me: Then why are you retaking?





Me: I've been studying for about 8 months now, for about 4 hours a day. How about you? Did you study?

Girl sitting next to me: I took a practice test

Girl sitting next to me's friend: I didn't study; what's on the test?

Me: Logic.

Girl sitting next to me: Basically whatever you think the right answer is, it's the opposite.

User avatar
PepperJack
Posts: 646
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 1:23 pm

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby PepperJack » Thu Oct 10, 2013 2:16 pm

Ron_Burgundy wrote:Girl sitting next to me: Are you retaking?

Me: Yep, I didn't do as well as I would've liked on my first try.

Girl sitting next to me: Did you get below a 150?

Me: No, I got above a 150.

Girl sitting next to me: Then why are you retaking?





Me: I've been studying for about 8 months now, for about 4 hours a day. How about you? Did you study?

Girl sitting next to me: I took a practice test

Girl sitting next to me's friend: I didn't study; what's on the test?

Me: Logic.

Girl sitting next to me: Basically whatever you think the right answer is, it's the opposite.

Sounds like you missed the perfect opportunity to ask her out.

Girl next to you: I have a boyfriend, sorry.

You: Opposite.

User avatar
hephaestus
Posts: 2385
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 4:21 pm

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby hephaestus » Thu Oct 10, 2013 8:03 pm

sopranorleone wrote:
North wrote:
camelthing wrote:This isn't really that funny but...

I accidentally wore sunglasses to the test. Because of the location, I had to walk twenty minutes and it's bright here. I was freaking out because, like most douches, I wear expensive sunglasses (not flashy sunglasses, just expensive sunglasses). I could not find sunglasses on the list of items that was allowed/disallowed, so I decided that I needed to hide them. In hindsight, this was probably unnecessary, but this was my first time taking the test. So I found a bathroom close to the testing center and went to hide them behind a toilet in one of the stalls. I pushed my sunglasses behind the toilet and in doing so pushed another pair of sunglasses out, which someone must have hidden/lost. I pushed them back in and left them there. At the end of the test (the test was administered in different locations depending on the alphabet), I went back and found only my sunglasses.

:lol: :lol: :lol:


The Godfather, LSAT-style

:D

User avatar
RhymesLikeDimes
Posts: 403
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 12:58 pm

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby RhymesLikeDimes » Thu Oct 10, 2013 11:07 pm

"Albany is a good school. Andrew Cuomo went there!"

User avatar
ZGr88n
Posts: 449
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 10:00 pm

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby ZGr88n » Fri Oct 11, 2013 11:03 am

Girl in front of me: "I've been studying for like 3-4 months and did a few Logic games this morning before coming"

2 Girls behind me: "Wow, your just trying way to hard, for no reason"

Me: "Well you could have at least brushed your teeth before coming this morning, or would that be 'trying to hard, for no reason'"

ookoshi
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 11:30 am

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby ookoshi » Fri Oct 11, 2013 11:08 am

ImNoScar wrote:I think that everyone should have T14 numbers, even if they are going to a regional school. The market is bad enough that you should only go to a T14, or a regional school with a big scholarship (which generally requires T14 numbers unless it's a school that's not even worth attending for free). So a 166 could fit this description if they had a great GPA.


If the requirement is a big scholarship to a regional school, then I don't understand all these "bare minimums" people are talking about. I got large scholarships to Alabama and Emory and I was running a total trash GPA (2.25/167). A 166 can get you into a good regional school with decent money even with a mediocre GPA if the rest of your app is solid.

User avatar
Danger Zone
Posts: 7310
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:36 am

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby Danger Zone » Fri Oct 11, 2013 11:19 am

ZGr88n wrote:Girl in front of me: "I've been studying for like 3-4 months and did a few Logic games this morning before coming"

2 Girls behind me: "Wow, your just trying way to hard, for no reason"

Me: "Well you could have at least brushed your teeth before coming this morning, or would that be 'trying to hard, for no reason'"

You'll make a wonderful law student.

KingFish
Posts: 334
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 7:34 pm

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby KingFish » Fri Oct 11, 2013 4:39 pm

ZGr88n wrote:Girl in front of me: "I've been studying for like 3-4 months and did a few Logic games this morning before coming"

2 Girls behind me: "Wow, your just trying way to hard, for no reason"

Me: "Well you could have at least brushed your teeth before coming this morning, or would that be 'trying to hard, for no reason'"

Image

User avatar
Danger Zone
Posts: 7310
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 10:36 am

Re: Overheard at the LSAT

Postby Danger Zone » Fri Oct 11, 2013 4:40 pm

Would understanding the difference between to, too, and two be classified as "trying to hard, for no reason" under your analysis?




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: blackmamba8, cherrygalore, smashbash, SweetTort, Yahoo [Bot] and 3 guests