Underperformed for a 173- taking questions

rad lulz
Posts: 9844
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm

Re: Underperformed for a 173- taking questions

Postby rad lulz » Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:27 pm

You sound like an insufferable douche.

HTH.

User avatar
kwais
Posts: 1683
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 12:28 pm

Re: Underperformed for a 173- taking questions

Postby kwais » Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:46 pm

Top three headlines of the day.

Europe spiraling into financial ruin
Egypt elects Muslim Brotherhood
Some kid gets a completely predictable score, given his pt average.

There is plenty of reading on the first two out there. Good thing OP is here to flesh out the third.

User avatar
Clearly
Posts: 4166
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 4:09 pm

Re: Underperformed for a 173- taking questions

Postby Clearly » Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:09 am

Jesus, about time. Thank you to the previous 2 posters. I couldn't believe people took this seriously.

Congrats on the score, I'm not trying to be a douche, its an accomplishment, but totally undeserving of starting this thread. If you had never shot below 178, and hit 173, I suspect we MIGHT have some questions on how pissed you must be, or what you did wrong. But you started a thread to field questions regarding a totally predictable occurrence, nothing unique about this at all. Also, if you want HYS, retake Oct, and prep your ass off. I genuinely believe anyone who can score a 173 can score a 177 if they work towards improving whatever 1 thing fucks them up every test, and draws a lucky test that highlights their skills. At this point we have shown we are very good at this test, not much lays between that and 177+ besides one or two deficiencies, and luck.

Starships
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 2:40 pm

Re: Underperformed for a 173- taking questions

Postby Starships » Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:16 pm

Didn't realize I would draw this much criticism- live and learn I suppose.

And I wasn't starting the thread to bitch about the 173- I was over the moon with a "real" score that could "really" get me into law school. I'm quite thankful/ happy that I got this thing done.

I posted the underperformance distinction because I assumed (I know this applies to me) that nobody would care to take any kind of LSAT advice from a 173 scorer. For TLS, it's not that good of a score. But if people have LSAT related questions, I believe I am quite competent to answer them, or at least more so than my score would indicate. I have been answering PM's to the best of my ability.

And I knew I was a douche- but an insufferable one? That really stings, breh.

User avatar
Nova
Posts: 9116
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2012 8:55 pm

Re: Underperformed for a 173- taking questions

Postby Nova » Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:27 pm

Starships wrote:I posted the underperformance distinction because I assumed (I know this applies to me) that nobody would care to take any kind of LSAT advice from a 173 scorer. For TLS, it's not that good of a score.


viewtopic.php?f=6&t=396

User avatar
CorkBoard
Posts: 3216
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 6:05 pm

Re: Underperformed for a 173- taking questions

Postby CorkBoard » Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:49 pm

Starships wrote:Didn't realize I would draw this much criticism- live and learn I suppose.

And I wasn't starting the thread to bitch about the 173- I was over the moon with a "real" score that could "really" get me into law school. I'm quite thankful/ happy that I got this thing done.

I posted the underperformance distinction because I assumed (I know this applies to me) that nobody would care to take any kind of LSAT advice from a 173 scorer. For TLS, it's not that good of a score. But if people have LSAT related questions, I believe I am quite competent to answer them, or at least more so than my score would indicate. I have been answering PM's to the best of my ability.

And I knew I was a douche- but an insufferable one? That really stings, breh.

It sounds more like you're trying to obnoxiously dickslang your 173 by calling it an underperformance.

Starships
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2012 2:40 pm

Re: Underperformed for a 173- taking questions

Postby Starships » Mon Jun 25, 2012 4:28 pm

Thank you Nova- didn't realize that was a forum to post tips in, but rather one of those TLS pre-put-together pages of advice (never read it). I mentioned not knowing this in my first post in this thread- I don't think anyone cared though.

Big fan of the word "dickslang."

I am as sorry that this came off the wrong way. I was really just trying to offer myself up for advice and thought the credential thing was necessary. Hope I didn't ruin anybody's day.

User avatar
Nova
Posts: 9116
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2012 8:55 pm

Re: Underperformed for a 173- taking questions

Postby Nova » Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:40 pm

I was also trying to imply that you dont need a 174+ to give legit, helpful advice that posters and lurkers will listen to. Posters and lurkers who are scoring in the 140s and 150s are often well served by taking advice from those who scored in the 160s.

User avatar
CorkBoard
Posts: 3216
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 6:05 pm

Re: Underperformed for a 173- taking questions

Postby CorkBoard » Mon Jun 25, 2012 8:12 pm

Starships wrote:I am as sorry that this came off the wrong way. I was really just trying to offer myself up for advice and thought the credential thing was necessary. Hope I didn't ruin anybody's day.

GOD DAMNIT MY LIFE IS RUINED FOREVER

User avatar
jkpolk
Posts: 896
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:44 am

Re: Underperformed for a 173- taking questions

Postby jkpolk » Mon Jun 25, 2012 8:24 pm

CorkBoard wrote:GOD DAMNIT MY LIFE IS RUINED FOREVER


Image

why u mad cork?

User avatar
TrialLawyer16
Posts: 287
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2011 5:43 pm

Re: Underperformed for a 173- taking questions

Postby TrialLawyer16 » Tue Jun 26, 2012 1:03 pm

CorkBoard wrote:
Starships wrote:Didn't realize I would draw this much criticism- live and learn I suppose.

And I wasn't starting the thread to bitch about the 173- I was over the moon with a "real" score that could "really" get me into law school. I'm quite thankful/ happy that I got this thing done.

I posted the underperformance distinction because I assumed (I know this applies to me) that nobody would care to take any kind of LSAT advice from a 173 scorer. For TLS, it's not that good of a score. But if people have LSAT related questions, I believe I am quite competent to answer them, or at least more so than my score would indicate. I have been answering PM's to the best of my ability.

And I knew I was a douche- but an insufferable one? That really stings, breh.

It sounds more like you're trying to obnoxiously dickslang your 173 by calling it an underperformance.

Lol wow

And unfortunately it doesn't matter what you scored on preptests, broham. It's all about game day

longagofaraway30
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 6:47 am

Re: Underperformed for a 173- taking questions

Postby longagofaraway30 » Tue Jun 26, 2012 2:43 pm

What, may I ask, was your SAT score :evil: :lol:

User avatar
Mr.Binks
Posts: 574
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 12:49 pm

Re: Underperformed for a 173- taking questions

Postby Mr.Binks » Tue Jun 26, 2012 3:00 pm

Soo.. lock this thread..?




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 34iplaw, DumbHollywoodActor, eastring, VMars, Vursz and 5 guests