UVa. Regular Decision

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby r6_philly » Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:20 pm

somewhere wrote:
r6_philly wrote:Being relatively rare = doesn't happy often if at all.


If it doesn't happen at all, it's not rare, it's non-existent.

There is abundant evidence, however, that people with lower numbers sometimes get accepted above where their numbers would suggest, and sometimes (but more rarely) even with money. The lower you go, the rarer, obviously, and into non-existence. But the claim that the present case is outlandish is, as I see it, false, and more suggestive of a bruised ego than perception of the truth.



Actually let's say rare = 1% chance. Then if you have a sample of 50, it may not happen AT ALL. That's why I said "not often if at all".

Think of the lotto. Some days people hit it some days nobody hits it. It's rare, but not impossible.

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby r6_philly » Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:22 pm

somewhere wrote:
r6_philly wrote:
somewhere wrote:My point was only that being relatively rare does not make something outlandish or on-its-face unbelievable.


Also,

Outlandish = "exceeding proper or reasonable limits or standards " - Merriam-Webster


People with webbed toes are rare. It is not outlandish to say that people with webbed toes exist.


Don't be a sore loser, it detracts from your credibility.

FTR I know neonx is legit.

ETA: And false comparison, it would be proper to say that someone claiming to have webbed toes as outlandish.
Last edited by r6_philly on Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Flips88
Posts: 13640
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 7:42 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby Flips88 » Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:23 pm

r6_philly wrote:
somewhere wrote:
r6_philly wrote:
somewhere wrote:My point was only that being relatively rare does not make something outlandish or on-its-face unbelievable.


Also,

Outlandish = "exceeding proper or reasonable limits or standards " - Merriam-Webster


People with webbed toes are rare. It is not outlandish to say that people with webbed toes exist.


Don't be a sore loser, it detracts from your credibility.

FTR I know neonx is legit.


And IIRC, Neonx is LGBT, how that influences decisions is a big question mark, but it's a variable to account for.

paulinaporizkova
Posts: 2494
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 9:25 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby paulinaporizkova » Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:24 pm

somewhere wrote:
paulinaporizkova wrote:unfortunately they've been known to stretch the truth to keep their number of applications up.


I am not aware of any compelling evidence that this is true.

Your explanation of the motive is perfectly sensible. But motive alone does not imply guilt.

I believe the motive for many people to be certain that you're right is the fact that they got rejected from places with borderline numbers and it hurt their ego. Hurts it even more to see somebody with lower numbers getting in. But there's a valid alternate explanation: that sometimes people with lower numbers have otherwise more compelling applications.


i suppose, and you're probably trying to use me as a case study if you looked at my profile, maybe. but just because i might fit the profile of the person you're talking about who got a rejection or waitlist doesn't mean what i said before wasn't true

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby r6_philly » Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:26 pm

Flips88 wrote:And IIRC, Neonx is LGBT, how that influences decisions is a big question mark, but it's a variable to account for.


It accounts for the same reason as URM accounts for something. Disadvantaged and under-represented groups are supposed to receive separate considerations.

But the point is he is not a troll, he is legit. But it does not make his cycle anywhere close to normal.

melamine
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat May 22, 2010 11:06 am

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby melamine » Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:43 pm

Flips88 wrote:
r6_philly wrote:
somewhere wrote:
Don't be a sore loser, it detracts from your credibility.

FTR I know neonx is legit.


And IIRC, Neonx is LGBT, how that influences decisions is a big question mark, but it's a variable to account for.


fwiw - my scores are comparable to neonx - also nonURM - in fact his might be considered better given that his GPA puts him above medians of most top schools (whereas mine don't really). the only reason i've gotten into some top schools is soft factors - so that's some good evidence soft factors can make quite a difference. it's not that surprising - if you assume that he has really good soft factors. one school, i was @ 25% for LSAT, and below 50% for GPA. soft factors make a difference if you have really good softs.

User avatar
Flips88
Posts: 13640
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 7:42 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby Flips88 » Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:48 pm

melamine wrote:
Flips88 wrote:
r6_philly wrote:
somewhere wrote:
Don't be a sore loser, it detracts from your credibility.

FTR I know neonx is legit.


And IIRC, Neonx is LGBT, how that influences decisions is a big question mark, but it's a variable to account for.


fwiw - my scores are comparable to neonx - also nonURM - in fact his might be considered better given that his GPA puts him above medians of most top schools (whereas mine don't really). the only reason i've gotten into some top schools is soft factors - so that's some good evidence soft factors can make quite a difference. it's not that surprising - if you assume that he has really good soft factors. one school, i was @ 25% for LSAT, and below 50% for GPA. soft factors make a difference if you have really good softs.


You know it's easy to check through someone's posts to figure out where they stand stats wise. And according to yours, you have a PhD from an Ivy. I would say that's what's carrying you, not softs.

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby r6_philly » Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:55 pm

Flips88 wrote:You know it's easy to check through someone's posts to figure out where they stand stats wise. And according to yours, you have a PhD from an Ivy. I would say that's what's carrying you, not softs.


I wish that Ivy magic will work a little for me. But Columbia is not convinced.

melamine
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat May 22, 2010 11:06 am

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby melamine » Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:55 pm

Flips88 wrote:
melamine wrote:
Flips88 wrote:
r6_philly wrote:
And IIRC, Neonx is LGBT, how that influences decisions is a big question mark, but it's a variable to account for.


fwiw - my scores are comparable to neonx - also nonURM - in fact his might be considered better given that his GPA puts him above medians of most top schools (whereas mine don't really). the only reason i've gotten into some top schools is soft factors - so that's some good evidence soft factors can make quite a difference. it's not that surprising - if you assume that he has really good soft factors. one school, i was @ 25% for LSAT, and below 50% for GPA. soft factors make a difference if you have really good softs.


You know it's easy to check through someone's posts to figure out where they stand stats wise. And according to yours, you have a PhD from an Ivy. I would say that's what's carrying you, not softs.


no, the phd is not from an ivy. and, last time i checked, those counted as soft factors. (some people on TLS called that an "okay soft", btw). i'm just saying - who knows what else is on neonx's application. the implicit charge was that LSAT and GPA are the main determining factors - and that anyone who is non-URM with "insufficient" numbers here must be a troll - regardless of what other softs he might have. i'm just saying that in my experience my softs made a huge difference - where i was told i wouldn't get in to certain schools, given my numbers.

somewhere
Posts: 233
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 12:38 am

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby somewhere » Wed Feb 09, 2011 11:33 pm

paulinaporizkova wrote:i suppose, and you're probably trying to use me as a case study if you looked at my profile, maybe. but just because i might fit the profile of the person you're talking about who got a rejection or waitlist doesn't mean what i said before wasn't true


I hadn't looked at your profile.

And true or not, the best you have is a hunch. There's an awful lot of certainty on TLS and very little of it is backed up with compelling evidence. What happened to you, or what happened to whomever, is not compelling evidence for very broad claims.

somewhere
Posts: 233
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 12:38 am

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby somewhere » Wed Feb 09, 2011 11:44 pm

r6_philly wrote:
somewhere wrote:
r6_philly wrote:Being relatively rare = doesn't happy often if at all.


If it doesn't happen at all, it's not rare, it's non-existent.

There is abundant evidence, however, that people with lower numbers sometimes get accepted above where their numbers would suggest, and sometimes (but more rarely) even with money. The lower you go, the rarer, obviously, and into non-existence. But the claim that the present case is outlandish is, as I see it, false, and more suggestive of a bruised ego than perception of the truth.



Actually let's say rare = 1% chance. Then if you have a sample of 50, it may not happen AT ALL. That's why I said "not often if at all".

Think of the lotto. Some days people hit it some days nobody hits it. It's rare, but not impossible.

...
And false comparison, it would be proper to say that someone claiming to have webbed toes as outlandish.


I don't mean to be picking on you, philly, or being overly strict with my parsing of your language— I don't expect that everyone on an internet forum writes every clause with great caution. Still, I maintain that, "Being relatively rare = doesn't happy often if at all" is, strictly speaking, logically false because of the last three words.

Something that does not happen at all should not be called "relatively rare." Something that is relatively rare cannot be said to happen not at all. You're right that something that happens rarely might not occur at all in a too-small sample, but that's not what I was talking about. Relatively rare means it happens (necessarily), but with relative infrequency.

How about this comparison:

There are some 350 million people in this country. How many of them are/were professional motorcycle racers? I honestly don't know; some hundreds? Maybe some thousands? They're quite rare, in any case, no?

How many of them, do you suppose, have applied to or will attend T14 law schools? Current/former pro motorcycle racers in the general population, and in the population of top law school candidates, are awfully rare, right?

Yet I don't consider the claim that you are/were one to be at all outlandish, nor would that claim lead me to call you a troll.

And in the last five or ten years, how many people with high GPAs and ~95th (or whatever) percentile (sub-170) LSATs have been offered large-but-less-than-full-ride scholarships at Virginia? I don't know, but I assume it's probably not a very big number. But I'd bet it's bigger than the number of current/former pro motorcycle racers to go.

Yet the one gets called outlandish and a troll. That's what I was criticizing.

User avatar
WhatSarahSaid
Posts: 293
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 2:01 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby WhatSarahSaid » Wed Feb 09, 2011 11:50 pm

You'll want to avoid being outlandish. Everyone knows that people who apply to Virginia have a much better getting in if they're in-landish.

neonx
Posts: 1025
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 2:36 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby neonx » Wed Feb 09, 2011 11:50 pm

I just got back from Happy Hour and read these last few posts. I'd be happy to release more information about myself and my application once I'm done with my cycle (I've kept a pretty extensive day-to-day log of everything that's happened in this cycle from all the way back to when I started prepping for the LSAT; I'll gladly unlock the address in April or May of this year.) Besides, I've already talked to many of you in this thread in PM.

(ETA: There have been many more interesting scenarios with other applicants, too -- e.g. if you check the Stanford and Yale threads.)

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby r6_philly » Wed Feb 09, 2011 11:52 pm

somewhere wrote:
Yet the one gets called outlandish and a troll. That's what I was criticizing.


You are putting things in context, I was making light hearted jokes at what you wrote. Because I didn't really say that he was outlandish or troll. Sorry you took it so seriously.

On being outlandish: even people in my own life thought of me going to applying to law school is outlandish. They don't know the world "trolling" but my wife would not believe me when I said I could be a lawyer. Part of the reason why I started looking at LSAT is because she ridiculed me into wanting to do well on it. It is quite outlandish to think one could make this transition, that's why it's so rare. And in many cycles, it doesn't happen at all.

Anyway, read this with a smile. It was not supposed to be taken so seriously.

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby r6_philly » Wed Feb 09, 2011 11:53 pm

WhatSarahSaid wrote:You'll want to avoid being outlandish. Everyone knows that people who apply to Virginia have a much better getting in if they're in-landish.


:lol:

Not if you live in VA Beach

User avatar
hipstermafia
Posts: 1053
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 12:45 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby hipstermafia » Wed Feb 09, 2011 11:54 pm

Philly, can we start a tls fan club for you?

r6_philly
Posts: 10707
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:32 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby r6_philly » Wed Feb 09, 2011 11:56 pm

hipstermafia wrote:Philly, can we start a tls fan club for you?


I am just another dude at this point. Let's do a R6 Happy Hour.

User avatar
hipstermafia
Posts: 1053
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 12:45 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby hipstermafia » Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:00 am

r6_philly wrote:
hipstermafia wrote:Philly, can we start a tls fan club for you?


I am just another dude at this point. Let's do a R6 Happy Hour.

that'll do :)

User avatar
WVUCelticFan
Posts: 217
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 5:44 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby WVUCelticFan » Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:01 am

hipstermafia wrote:Philly, can we start a tls fan club for you?


I'd join.

melamine
Posts: 196
Joined: Sat May 22, 2010 11:06 am

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby melamine » Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:04 am

whats the general timeline from first going Under Review/Pending Decision? is there another thing after this?

sarahlawg
Posts: 1001
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 5:59 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby sarahlawg » Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:06 am

:roll: @ the last several pages of this thread.

Sorry to see people waitlisted. For those who really want UVA, I hope this year's dip in applications causes a nice pull from the WL! Good luck to everyone still waiting!

neonx
Posts: 1025
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 2:36 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby neonx » Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:07 am

melamine wrote:whats the general timeline from first going Under Review/Pending Decision? is there another thing after this?


That's the last stage before you should get a call or an e-mail.

somewhere
Posts: 233
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 12:38 am

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby somewhere » Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:08 am

r6_philly wrote:On being outlandish: even people in my own life thought of me going to applying to law school is outlandish.


Those people were wrong, and you've proved it. Nothing outlandish about it.

And I am aware that you weren't calling him a troll; I meant to be mostly responding to the person who did, and only responded to your point when it seemed to be justifying his/hers. I didn't mean to be down on you, though, so no worries.

sarahlawg
Posts: 1001
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 5:59 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby sarahlawg » Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:09 am

neonx wrote:
melamine wrote:whats the general timeline from first going Under Review/Pending Decision? is there another thing after this?


That's the last stage before you should get a call or an e-mail.


saying it's the 'last stage' is a bit misleading - people can hang out at this stage for months before an actual decision.

neonx
Posts: 1025
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 2:36 pm

Re: UVa. Regular Decision

Postby neonx » Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:10 am

sarahlawg wrote:
neonx wrote:
melamine wrote:whats the general timeline from first going Under Review/Pending Decision? is there another thing after this?


That's the last stage before you should get a call or an e-mail.


saying it's the 'last stage' is a bit misleading - people can hang out at this stage for months before an actual decision.


Haha, completely true. I was stuck for some months. But the date does update, which is reassuring.




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Nickel94 and 11 guests