Re: Stanford Law School 2011 Applicants (Pics)
Posted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 4:17 pm
...? i'm not freaking out........
Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=133556
...? i'm not freaking out........
11 am EST 12/11/2009. So 2nd Friday of December. You count down as to be a little longer sorry.Knock wrote:
Sweet, let us know what you find.
That sounds about right. Kretzky (my hero) heard back in the 2nd batch on 12/17. So that was a Thursday?r6_philly wrote:11 am EST 12/11/2009. So 2nd Friday of December. You count down as to be a little longer sorry.Knock wrote:
Sweet, let us know what you find.
Welcome to the club. Enjoy your stay.arism87 wrote:I've been trying NOT to stalk this thread or be excited about Stanford, because my chances aren't good. But here I am, caving...
If you're referring to my spreadsheet thing, that's the date they put for WL in LSN, which I assume is the date they were put on the WL. Most people put WL and then Accepted/Rejected/Withdrew on LSN, but I was focusing more on timeframes for hearing back initially so that's not included on there.2807 wrote:what does the date next to the waitlist mean? Is that a date that they were put on the list? or the date they got in?... or out? or what?
When is the latest people hear from the waitlist?
+1arism87 wrote:I've been trying NOT to stalk this thread or be excited about Stanford, because my chances aren't good. But here I am, caving...
Yes I am referring to your spready. Nice work.dulcatis wrote:If you're referring to my spreadsheet thing, that's the date they put for WL in LSN, which I assume is the date they were put on the WL. Most people put WL and then Accepted/Rejected/Withdrew on LSN, but I was focusing more on timeframes for hearing back initially so that's not included on there.2807 wrote:what does the date next to the waitlist mean? Is that a date that they were put on the list? or the date they got in?... or out? or what?
When is the latest people hear from the waitlist?
Uh yeah, isn't it exciting? Ohhh Stanford. I assume a decent number of kids end up staying on the WL until they kill it, which would be around when classes start. Some LSN stalking might turn up more conclusive information though. I am definitely getting straight-up rejected, so I haven't looked into it too much2807 wrote:Yes I am referring to your spready. Nice work.dulcatis wrote:If you're referring to my spreadsheet thing, that's the date they put for WL in LSN, which I assume is the date they were put on the WL. Most people put WL and then Accepted/Rejected/Withdrew on LSN, but I was focusing more on timeframes for hearing back initially so that's not included on there.2807 wrote:what does the date next to the waitlist mean? Is that a date that they were put on the list? or the date they got in?... or out? or what?
When is the latest people hear from the waitlist?
So, they applied in Nov, and in APRIL they are finally given an answer?.... and it is WAIT? Ugh. Do you know when people hear the FINAL answer? Is it reasonable to wait until the last day before classes start? Is there some sort of system to hearing an answer after being waitlisted?
I'm not certain, but i'm pretty sure that "submitted for review" is the same thing as "under review."HopefulFish wrote:Does anybody know the Stanford review process? Is being submitted for review same as under review, or will I receive a new update with "Under Review"?
I would. I submitted around the same time and I think I had them within a few weeks. Maybe give it till the end of the work week.sergeantpzr wrote:I submitted mid October... and don't think I have gotten the email for status checker yet. Should I email and bug them politely?
I want them to call me to show me this friendliness.sergeantpzr wrote:Called them. Boy are they friendly
"under review" or "has been submitted for review"?hulahoop wrote:under review! thank god was getting super paranoid about that damn dean's statement....
+1. Same thought went through my head the moment I read this.r6_philly wrote:"under review" or "has been submitted for review"?hulahoop wrote:under review! thank god was getting super paranoid about that damn dean's statement....
cardinals1989 wrote:+1. Same thought went through my head the moment I read this.r6_philly wrote:"under review" or "has been submitted for review"?hulahoop wrote:under review! thank god was getting super paranoid about that damn dean's statement....