WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
splitmuch
Posts: 968
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby splitmuch » Mon Mar 28, 2011 6:22 pm

Just to defend WUSTL for a quick second, I have gotten a derivative of the "impressed with your credentials line" in every single one of my (ample number of) WLs and dings

Splintor49
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 8:42 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby Splintor49 » Mon Mar 28, 2011 6:23 pm

FourOnTheFloor wrote:
sparty99 wrote:
DorianGray89 wrote:Just got dinged.


+ 1

Did you also get the line, "Although we are unable to offer you a seat in this year's class, the Admissions Committee was highly impressed with your credentials."


I also got this email. First ding of my cycle...I was starting to wonder what a rejection letter looks like. Apparently they look patronizing. ;)



+1 Boy, when they say they come in waves...

User avatar
Justathought
Posts: 977
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2010 11:16 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby Justathought » Mon Mar 28, 2011 6:23 pm

mrwarre85 wrote:Dinged.

I think the line about being impressed with your credentials in insulting. This is of course with the assumption that everyone's email contained that line.


Dinged too. I agree the line was totally insulting for you guys. However, I think they meant it for me. :P

User avatar
Spookyghost
Posts: 193
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 10:28 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby Spookyghost » Mon Mar 28, 2011 6:26 pm

mrwarre85 wrote:Dinged.

I think the line about being impressed with your credentials in insulting. This is of course with the assumption that everyone's email contained that line.


Haha, I thought it was stupid.

You obviously weren't that ****ing impressed with my credentials if you didn't accept me.

User avatar
Moral_Midgetry
Posts: 543
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 3:29 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby Moral_Midgetry » Mon Mar 28, 2011 6:28 pm

I wish all schools would stop with the patronizing "impressed with your credentials" bs and just say "thanks for the app fee, but we decided you wouldn't be a good fit for our class." It would be much less insulting.

User avatar
snapdragon
Posts: 766
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2010 11:34 am

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby snapdragon » Mon Mar 28, 2011 6:29 pm

Ding. No hard feelings here, doubt I would have attended at sticker. Adieu wustl.

User avatar
fatduck
Posts: 4186
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby fatduck » Mon Mar 28, 2011 6:30 pm

Moral_Midgetry wrote:I wish all schools would stop with the patronizing "impressed with your credentials" bs and just say "thanks for the app fee, but we decided you wouldn't be a good fit for our class." It would be much less insulting.

you're right, i bet no one would complain, then!

User avatar
law4vus
Posts: 743
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:35 am

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby law4vus » Mon Mar 28, 2011 6:32 pm

All these 167 splitters are getting dinged when they were nearly auto admit last year. I'm still in review 3/14...3.3 167. Meh.

sparty99
Posts: 1433
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 8:41 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby sparty99 » Mon Mar 28, 2011 6:33 pm

"Although we are unable to offer you a seat in this year's class, the Admissions Committee was highly impressed with your credentials until we saw your 148 LSAT score. You should try Sears."

User avatar
chrisbru
Posts: 4252
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2010 1:44 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby chrisbru » Mon Mar 28, 2011 6:45 pm

sparty99 wrote:"Although we are unable to offer you a seat in this year's class, the Admissions Committee was highly impressed with your credentials until we saw your 148 LSAT score. You should try Sears."


lol nice

purplebulldogs
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:05 am

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby purplebulldogs » Mon Mar 28, 2011 6:48 pm

sparty99 wrote:"Although we are unable to offer you a seat in this year's class, the Admissions Committee was highly impressed with your credentials until we saw your 148 LSAT score. You should try Sears."


wait, Sears has a law school now?

User avatar
edgarfigaro
Posts: 244
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 4:53 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby edgarfigaro » Mon Mar 28, 2011 6:51 pm

purplebulldogs wrote:
sparty99 wrote:"Although we are unable to offer you a seat in this year's class, the Admissions Committee was highly impressed with your credentials until we saw your 148 LSAT score. You should try Sears."


wait, Sears has a law school now?


Honestly, it'd almost be more shocking that they didn't have one.

tinlawman
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2011 5:52 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby tinlawman » Mon Mar 28, 2011 6:52 pm

What do you guys have under status?

User avatar
Flips88
Posts: 13671
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 7:42 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby Flips88 » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:12 pm

tinlawman wrote:What do you guys have under status?

In Review 3/23

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby romothesavior » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:18 pm

mrwarre85 wrote:Dinged.

I think the line about being impressed with your credentials in insulting. This is of course with the assumption that everyone's email contained that line.

If you find this line insulting, then don't ever apply for any legal jobs. I've gotten a "We found your resume highly impressive, but we are unable to offer you an interview/job" line in almost every job rejection letter I have gotten. And I think I got in in every LS rejection as well.

Sorry to hear about the dings guys.

thewarflamingo
Posts: 939
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 12:27 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby thewarflamingo » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:20 pm

Hmm no email here yet, I'm assuming I'm waitlisted at best at this point.

User avatar
ArthurDigbySellers
Posts: 398
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:49 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby ArthurDigbySellers » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:27 pm

law4vus wrote:All these 167 splitters are getting dinged when they were nearly auto admit last year. I'm still in review 3/14...3.3 167. Meh.


Yeah. Wow, it looks like 168 is the new 167 at WUSTL. Dunno how I evaded the dinghammer, but for whatever reason I'm not out just yet. Condolences to all, rejection stings. I'm sure you guys will be successful wherever you go, insert another generic patronizing comment. But seriously, I'm no stranger to rejection. Go have a beer and write a nasty letter to WUSTL (DO NOT mail the letter, lol, writing it will just make you feel better). Works for me.

User avatar
mountaintime
Posts: 222
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 6:38 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby mountaintime » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:29 pm

romothesavior wrote:I'll also throw out Fitz's and Zia's (on the Hill) as great options.


Fitz's is terrible. That place is a tourist trap.

User avatar
ArthurDigbySellers
Posts: 398
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:49 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby ArthurDigbySellers » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:32 pm

romothesavior wrote:
mrwarre85 wrote:Dinged.

I think the line about being impressed with your credentials in insulting. This is of course with the assumption that everyone's email contained that line.

If you find this line insulting, then don't ever apply for any legal jobs. I've gotten a "We found your resume highly impressive, but we are unable to offer you an interview/job" line in almost every job rejection letter I have gotten. And I think I got in in every LS rejection as well.

Sorry to hear about the dings guys.


It seems like passive aggressive-ness is the name of the game with lawyers. I always saw the Closing "Very Truly Yours," as extremely passive aggressive, sort of like a British fuck you, not unlike this...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0Rjn6W9 ... re=related

User avatar
ArthurDigbySellers
Posts: 398
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:49 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby ArthurDigbySellers » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:33 pm

Flips88 wrote:
tinlawman wrote:What do you guys have under status?

In Review 3/23


In review 3/15

Sandro
Posts: 2526
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 12:12 am

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby Sandro » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:34 pm

Dinged, woooo. 8)

sold123
Posts: 74
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 12:39 am

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby sold123 » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:34 pm

ArthurDigbySellers wrote:
romothesavior wrote:
mrwarre85 wrote:Dinged.

I think the line about being impressed with your credentials in insulting. This is of course with the assumption that everyone's email contained that line.

If you find this line insulting, then don't ever apply for any legal jobs. I've gotten a "We found your resume highly impressive, but we are unable to offer you an interview/job" line in almost every job rejection letter I have gotten. And I think I got in in every LS rejection as well.

Sorry to hear about the dings guys.


It seems like passive aggressive-ness is the name of the game with lawyers. I always saw the Closing "Very Truly Yours," as extremely passive aggressive, sort of like a British fuck you, not unlike this...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0Rjn6W9 ... re=related


You think so? I don't see why they would have any reason to be aggressive in this situation. As in "Hey, thanks for wasting our time with your shitty f**** app"? I read it more as "Good try sport, pip pip."

Sorry bout the dings.

User avatar
ArthurDigbySellers
Posts: 398
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:49 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby ArthurDigbySellers » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:37 pm

sold123 wrote:
ArthurDigbySellers wrote:
romothesavior wrote:
mrwarre85 wrote:Dinged.

I think the line about being impressed with your credentials in insulting. This is of course with the assumption that everyone's email contained that line.

If you find this line insulting, then don't ever apply for any legal jobs. I've gotten a "We found your resume highly impressive, but we are unable to offer you an interview/job" line in almost every job rejection letter I have gotten. And I think I got in in every LS rejection as well.

Sorry to hear about the dings guys.


It seems like passive aggressive-ness is the name of the game with lawyers. I always saw the Closing "Very Truly Yours," as extremely passive aggressive, sort of like a British fuck you, not unlike this...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0Rjn6W9 ... re=related


You think so? I don't see why they would have any reason to be aggressive in this situation. As in "Hey, thanks for wasting our time with your shitty f**** app"? I read it more as "Good try sport, pip pip."

Sorry bout the dings.


Lol no not rejection letters, I meant that having worked in a small litigation office, some (actually most) of the correspondence between lawyers is very passive aggressive.

SrLaw
Posts: 588
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby SrLaw » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:42 pm

Just rejected with a 3.44 and a 167? I really do not care but I am highly confused as to how I did not at least get a WL? I can honestly say that my odds of attending were .02% anyway.

User avatar
law4vus
Posts: 743
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 11:35 am

Re: WUSTL 2011 Cycle

Postby law4vus » Mon Mar 28, 2011 7:51 pm

SrLaw wrote:Just rejected with a 3.44 and a 167? I really do not care but I am highly confused as to how I did not at least get a WL? I can honestly say that my odds of attending were .02% anyway.


WUSTL is just stringing me along. Same LSAT, lower GPA, haven't changed date since 3/14.
:(

Is this like in alphabetical order or something? lol




Return to “Law School Acceptances, Denials, and Waitlists”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], potatocowpower and 3 guests