Georgetown Waitlist 2012 Forum

[PoliticalJunkie73]

I just looked on the status checker, and apparently I have a 6/22/2012 mailing. What does this mean? Anyone else?

That seems odd, given that it is GULC's policy not to post mailing details. From the status checker page:

Due to the volume of our correspondence with applicants, Georgetown is unable to post mailing details.

Good catch.

Meanwhile, still no update!?!? Maybe they plan ion working late. Otherwise, sensing a credibility issue brewing.

I hope they are working late! I could get a partial refund on my tuition deposit at another school if I withdraw by June 30.

[weiweilt]

I just looked on the status checker, and apparently I have a 6/22/2012 mailing. What does this mean? Anyone else?

That seems odd, given that it is GULC's policy not to post mailing details. From the status checker page:

Due to the volume of our correspondence with applicants, Georgetown is unable to post mailing details.

Good catch.

Meanwhile, still no update!?!? Maybe they plan ion working late. Otherwise, sensing a credibility issue brewing.

I don't think credibility is one of their issues.

[ned]

I just looked on the status checker, and apparently I have a 6/22/2012 mailing. What does this mean? Anyone else?

That seems odd, given that it is GULC's policy not to post mailing details. From the status checker page:

Due to the volume of our correspondence with applicants, Georgetown is unable to post mailing details.

Good catch.

Meanwhile, still no update!?!? Maybe they plan ion working late. Otherwise, sensing a credibility issue brewing.

I don't think credibility is one of their issues.

Care to elaborate?

[weiweilt]

I don't think credibility is one of their issues.

Care to elaborate?[/quote]
Simple. What happened to their promise of a more definitive answer by the 25th? As WLed applicants we have zero bargain power against them.

[emly]

I just looked on the status checker, and apparently I have a 6/22/2012 mailing. What does this mean? Anyone else?

That seems odd, given that it is GULC's policy not to post mailing details. From the status checker page:

Due to the volume of our correspondence with applicants, Georgetown is unable to post mailing details.

Good catch.

Meanwhile, still no update!?!? Maybe they plan ion working late. Otherwise, sensing a credibility issue brewing.

noticed that too. it is also strange how a 6/22 mailing fits into the contact timeline. it's taking everything i have not to skip my yoga class and run straight home to see if I've gotten whatever it is was allegedly sent to me.

Given that GTown has been pretty good at sticking to their update deadlines, even if to say we have nothing meaningful to tell you, I suspect that there are open spots and instead of spending time drafting/sending these emails, Andy's sifting through his cache of WL candidates.

[ned]

I don't think credibility is one of their issues.

Care to elaborate?

Simple. What happened to their promise of a more definitive answer by the 25th? As WLed applicants we have zero bargain power against them.[/quote]

Non sequitur. Someone makes a promise they don't keep, then makes another promise they don't keep. Naturally, they lose credibility. Yes they have all the power. If you think power equals credibility, then I guess this exchange is over.

[weiweilt]

This is interesting. The absence of their heart-breaking email is also something to cry out loud about.
I do think positively for the 6/22 mailing (although I don't have one).

[weiweilt]

Power does not equal credibility; it cancels the consequences of losing credibility.

[ned]

Power does not equal credibility; it cancels the consequences of losing credibility.

Oh, so you're not challenging the loss of credibility, but just whether there are consequences. I don't recall asserting there were any consequences.

But you see what happens now? We get to have pointless debates in order to distract from our frustrations!

(BTW, the messed up quote syntax in the posts above actually has us reversing sides, attributing my statements to you and yours to me. Strange.)

[weiweilt]

Power does not equal credibility; it cancels the consequences of losing credibility.

Oh, so you're not challenging the loss of credibility, but just whether there are consequences. I don't recall asserting there were any consequences.

But you see what happens now? We get to have pointless debates in order to distract from our frustrations!

(BTW, the messed up quote syntax in the posts above actually has us reversing sides, attributing my statements to you and yours to me. Strange.)

Did I ever challenge the loss of credibility?
I was just saying that it is not something we can hold against them, hence the not caring/responding on their part.

[vynckster]

I'm going to get Ice Cream... You're all invited...

[ned]

I'm going to get Ice Cream... You're all invited...

I literally just got an ice-cream cone on my way home. With chocolate sprinkles.

[vynckster]

I'm going to get Ice Cream... You're all invited...

I literally just got an ice-cream cone on my way home. With chocolate sprinkles.

Good work, my friend. It will be Mint Chocolate Chip for the vynckster tonight... Maybe we'll all get our cherry on top tomorrow?

[bobloblawlawblog89]

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m4pfvsSviB1r22lig.gif

[emly]

I'm going to get Ice Cream... You're all invited...

I literally just got an ice-cream cone on my way home. With chocolate sprinkles.

Meanwhile, I am off to yoga. Need some stress relief right about now.

[ned]

Good catch.

Meanwhile, still no update!?!? Maybe they plan ion working late. Otherwise, sensing a credibility issue brewing.

I don't think credibility is one of their issues.

Dude, I read this precisely as challenging that they lost credibility. If that wasn't your point, but rather, you felt that they were free to do so with impunity, I would have worded it differently....

[ned]

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m4pfvsSviB1r22lig.gif

[weiweilt]

Good catch.

Meanwhile, still no update!?!? Maybe they plan ion working late. Otherwise, sensing a credibility issue brewing.

I don't think credibility is one of their issues.

Dude, I read this precisely as challenging that they lost credibility. If that wasn't your point, but rather, you felt that they were free to do so with impunity, I would have worded it differently....

Oh I realized that on second reading...

[ttho520]

If you are not happy about the current status or which ever law school you are in, please watch:

One of the TED's talks:
"Dan Gilbert asks, Why are we happy?"
http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_gilbert_as ... happy.html

[illy22]

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m4pfvsSviB1r22lig.gif

ah-mazing.

The coffee shop i'm in keeps playing Adele's "someone like you." Over. And over. Again.

Really makes me feel a certain way about Andy and all of his "promises."

psshhhh

[Law4889]

So, when do we think WL people are going to hear?

[ned]

So, when do we think WL people are going to hear?

All bets are off at this point. I don't think they are deliberating though. They may be waiting for counter-offer responses from folks talking about withdrawing. They may know how many seats are in danger, but it might be taking longer to find out who is really leaving.

Of course, sending us a simple update regarding new uncertainties and shifting outlooks would have been the gentlemanly thing to do. So maybe the silent treatment is a new tactic to shake loose the less serious waitlisters.

I feel like Meatloaf or Jared Leto in Fight Club. Didn't end up so good for them though.

[vynckster]

Attriting the waitlist by pissing people off? I've suspected it all along...

[ned]

Ug. Just got the new waiting deadline of July 23.

[goldeneye]

.