Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.

Have you been admitted?

Yes
76
21%
No
288
79%
 
Total votes: 364

Kimikho
Posts: 3971
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:01 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby Kimikho » Wed Jan 29, 2014 4:44 pm

koalacity wrote:
drawstring wrote:So who else here didn't submit a LOR tailored to Furd?

Apparently they like those, but I couldn't find a professor of mine that was connected to the school in any way so I didn't think it was appropriate.

The better question is who did. I wouldn't worry about it.


What does tailored to Furd mean?

User avatar
China Spy
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 1:10 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby China Spy » Wed Jan 29, 2014 4:46 pm

scoobers wrote:
koalacity wrote:
drawstring wrote:So who else here didn't submit a LOR tailored to Furd?

Apparently they like those, but I couldn't find a professor of mine that was connected to the school in any way so I didn't think it was appropriate.

The better question is who did. I wouldn't worry about it.


What does tailored to Furd mean?


Someone who wrote you a LOR specifically mentioning why you would be a great fit for Stanford.

User avatar
The-Specs
Posts: 1037
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 12:55 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby The-Specs » Wed Jan 29, 2014 4:47 pm

scoobers wrote:
koalacity wrote:
drawstring wrote:So who else here didn't submit a LOR tailored to Furd?

Apparently they like those, but I couldn't find a professor of mine that was connected to the school in any way so I didn't think it was appropriate.

The better question is who did. I wouldn't worry about it.


What does tailored to Furd mean?


Furd is Stanford.

User avatar
drawstring
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:52 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby drawstring » Wed Jan 29, 2014 4:57 pm

scoobers wrote:
koalacity wrote:
drawstring wrote:So who else here didn't submit a LOR tailored to Furd?

Apparently they like those, but I couldn't find a professor of mine that was connected to the school in any way so I didn't think it was appropriate.

The better question is who did. I wouldn't worry about it.


What does tailored to Furd mean?


love the avatar

User avatar
barrelofmonkeys
Posts: 1906
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:41 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby barrelofmonkeys » Wed Jan 29, 2014 5:04 pm

scoobers wrote:
koalacity wrote:
drawstring wrote:So who else here didn't submit a LOR tailored to Furd?

Apparently they like those, but I couldn't find a professor of mine that was connected to the school in any way so I didn't think it was appropriate.

The better question is who did. I wouldn't worry about it.


What does tailored to Furd mean?


OMFG YOU STOLE MY AVATAR GOD DAMN YOU

User avatar
thechancellor
Posts: 584
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 1:01 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby thechancellor » Wed Jan 29, 2014 5:08 pm

scoobers wrote:
koalacity wrote:
drawstring wrote:So who else here didn't submit a LOR tailored to Furd?

Apparently they like those, but I couldn't find a professor of mine that was connected to the school in any way so I didn't think it was appropriate.

The better question is who did. I wouldn't worry about it.


What does tailored to Furd mean?


woah almost didint recognize you there scoobs. didja give up on waiting for 2800 post?

Kimikho
Posts: 3971
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:01 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby Kimikho » Wed Jan 29, 2014 5:09 pm

alex.cm wrote:
scoobers wrote:
koalacity wrote:
drawstring wrote:So who else here didn't submit a LOR tailored to Furd?

Apparently they like those, but I couldn't find a professor of mine that was connected to the school in any way so I didn't think it was appropriate.

The better question is who did. I wouldn't worry about it.


What does tailored to Furd mean?


woah almost didint recognize you there scoobs. didja give up on waiting for 2800 post?


I used it in gtown for scotty :(

User avatar
JD1776
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2013 3:08 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby JD1776 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 5:22 pm

koalacity wrote:
drawstring wrote:So who else here didn't submit a LOR tailored to Furd?

Apparently they like those, but I couldn't find a professor of mine that was connected to the school in any way so I didn't think it was appropriate.

The better question is who did. I wouldn't worry about it.


I did. But I'm lucky enough to work with several of their alumni. They say they place "high value" on such letters, I just wish I knew how much.

User avatar
angels2fly
Posts: 428
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:15 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby angels2fly » Wed Jan 29, 2014 5:29 pm

koalacity wrote:
drawstring wrote:So who else here didn't submit a LOR tailored to Furd?

Apparently they like those, but I couldn't find a professor of mine that was connected to the school in any way so I didn't think it was appropriate.

The better question is who did. I wouldn't worry about it.


I had both LOR targeted but I don't have the #s so I am really grasping at straws.

User avatar
wowhio
Posts: 163
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 4:52 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby wowhio » Wed Jan 29, 2014 6:46 pm

The-Specs wrote:
wealtheow wrote:People, please convince me to apply here, before the deadline makes the decision for me. I keep telling myself it isn't worth it w/ my 3.75.


I applied with a 3.58. hth


Same boat.

3.75 is a great GPA! Put your game face on! You've got this!
Last edited by wowhio on Wed Jan 29, 2014 6:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
wowhio
Posts: 163
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 4:52 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby wowhio » Wed Jan 29, 2014 6:50 pm

drawstring wrote:So who else here didn't submit a LOR tailored to Furd?


*sheepishly raises hand*

FWIW, I think it's stupid that Stanford likes tailored letters. Tailored letters are stupid. Basically all it shows is that the person asked really nicely and their professor/letter-writer was very, very generous and agreed to write a special letter so Stanford could feel all coddled and loved.

User avatar
JD1776
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2013 3:08 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby JD1776 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 7:00 pm

wowhio wrote:
drawstring wrote:So who else here didn't submit a LOR tailored to Furd?


*sheepishly raises hand*

FWIW, I think it's stupid that Stanford likes tailored letters. Tailored letters are stupid. Basically all it shows is that the person asked really nicely and their professor/letter-writer was very, very generous and agreed to write a special letter so Stanford could feel all coddled and loved.


For me, Stanford is my top choice. It's also a reach, so if they want to be coddled and loved -- then I shall coddle and love them.

User avatar
kershka
Posts: 630
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2013 2:45 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby kershka » Wed Jan 29, 2014 7:21 pm

JD1776 wrote:
wowhio wrote:
drawstring wrote:So who else here didn't submit a LOR tailored to Furd?


*sheepishly raises hand*

FWIW, I think it's stupid that Stanford likes tailored letters. Tailored letters are stupid. Basically all it shows is that the person asked really nicely and their professor/letter-writer was very, very generous and agreed to write a special letter so Stanford could feel all coddled and loved.


For me, Stanford is my top choice. It's also a reach, so if they want to be coddled and loved -- then I shall coddle and love them.

Well, that's fine for you lucky bastards who know SLS alums :P

In all honesty, I would have if I had known any alums who could have written a good, targeted letter. SLS is my first choice as well so I'm willing to jump through just about any hoops necessary. However, getting a letter out of one of my profs was a huge deal due to circumstances and asking for a targeted letter just seemed too much of an additional imposition given those circumstances. He wrote me an amazing letter though, so I can't complain.

User avatar
lawschool22
Posts: 3875
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby lawschool22 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:25 pm

kershka wrote:
JD1776 wrote:
wowhio wrote:
drawstring wrote:So who else here didn't submit a LOR tailored to Furd?


*sheepishly raises hand*

FWIW, I think it's stupid that Stanford likes tailored letters. Tailored letters are stupid. Basically all it shows is that the person asked really nicely and their professor/letter-writer was very, very generous and agreed to write a special letter so Stanford could feel all coddled and loved.


For me, Stanford is my top choice. It's also a reach, so if they want to be coddled and loved -- then I shall coddle and love them.

Well, that's fine for you lucky bastards who know SLS alums :P

In all honesty, I would have if I had known any alums who could have written a good, targeted letter. SLS is my first choice as well so I'm willing to jump through just about any hoops necessary. However, getting a letter out of one of my profs was a huge deal due to circumstances and asking for a targeted letter just seemed too much of an additional imposition given those circumstances. He wrote me an amazing letter though, so I can't complain.


Is there a way of seeing said letter without violating the agreement you make w/ LSAC not to see it?

Kimikho
Posts: 3971
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:01 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby Kimikho » Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:29 pm

scoobers wrote:
so..............¿tomorrow?

only time I'm doing that, folks. I'm a BIG believer in jinxing


It's stuff like this that reinforces my fear of jinxes :|

User avatar
barrelofmonkeys
Posts: 1906
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:41 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby barrelofmonkeys » Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:31 pm

scoobers wrote:
scoobers wrote:
so..............¿tomorrow?

only time I'm doing that, folks. I'm a BIG believer in jinxing


It's stuff like this that reinforces my fear of jinxes :|


but i thought the 30th was the big day
:P

Kimikho
Posts: 3971
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 7:01 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby Kimikho » Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:34 pm

barrelofmonkeys wrote:
scoobers wrote:
scoobers wrote:
so..............¿tomorrow?

only time I'm doing that, folks. I'm a BIG believer in jinxing


It's stuff like this that reinforces my fear of jinxes :|


but i thought the 30th was the big day
:P


the 30th was on a Wednesday last year :?

User avatar
barrelofmonkeys
Posts: 1906
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:41 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby barrelofmonkeys » Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:35 pm

scoobers wrote:
barrelofmonkeys wrote:
scoobers wrote:
scoobers wrote:
so..............¿tomorrow?

only time I'm doing that, folks. I'm a BIG believer in jinxing


It's stuff like this that reinforces my fear of jinxes :|


but i thought the 30th was the big day
:P


the 30th was on a Wednesday last year :?


whatever. i don't even know why i'm ITT.

User avatar
kershka
Posts: 630
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2013 2:45 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby kershka » Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:42 pm

lawschool22 wrote:
Is there a way of seeing said letter without violating the agreement you make w/ LSAC not to see it?

Yeah, you're only waiving your right to demand the letter from whatever school you matriculate to after you are a student. You can always ask your recommender if they are willing to show it to you, though they are under no obligation to do so. However, my previous statement was a bit ambiguous; I never actually read my letter. He just told me what he had written after he had sent it in.

User avatar
lawschool22
Posts: 3875
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby lawschool22 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:44 pm

kershka wrote:
lawschool22 wrote:
Is there a way of seeing said letter without violating the agreement you make w/ LSAC not to see it?

Yeah, you're only waiving your right to demand the letter from whatever school you matriculate to after you are a student. You can always ask your recommender if they are willing to show it to you, though they are under no obligation to do so. However, my previous statement was a bit ambiguous; I never actually read my letter. He just told me what he had written after he had sent it in.


Gotcha. Thanks!

teenybean
Posts: 134
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:51 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby teenybean » Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:45 pm

All my recommenders just sent me their letters in an email once I thanked them. They must've known I was super curious. It's definitely worth asking, it's such a peace of mind.

User avatar
lawschool22
Posts: 3875
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby lawschool22 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:50 pm

teenybean wrote:All my recommenders just sent me their letters in an email once I thanked them. They must've known I was super curious. It's definitely worth asking, it's such a peace of mind.


Lol, for extremely specific but uninteresting reasons I sort of want my recommenders to forget I am even going to law school for the time being, so I probably won't ask for now. Although I am very curious to read what they wrote.

User avatar
DonnaPaulsen
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:09 am

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby DonnaPaulsen » Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:54 pm

At least 9 people have been admitted this week.

User avatar
kershka
Posts: 630
Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2013 2:45 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby kershka » Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:55 pm

lawschool22 wrote:
teenybean wrote:All my recommenders just sent me their letters in an email once I thanked them. They must've known I was super curious. It's definitely worth asking, it's such a peace of mind.


Lol, for extremely specific but uninteresting reasons I sort of want my recommenders to forget I am even going to law school for the time being, so I probably won't ask for now. Although I am very curious to read what they wrote.

lol, you probably phrased it that way "specific but uninteresting" so as not to elicit questions from us but you failed. Now I am even more curious to know why you want them to forget you are applying to law school :P

*Disclaimer: I'm not actually asking you to answer this question; it sounds like it could out you. It is just going to bug me for the rest of the night (yes, my life is that uninteresting)

User avatar
koalacity
Posts: 1162
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:56 pm

Re: Stanford c/o 2017 (2013-2014 applicants)

Postby koalacity » Wed Jan 29, 2014 8:56 pm

DonnaPaulsen wrote:At least 9 people have been admitted this week.

:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:
What?!? How do you know?!?!?




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Justtrying2help and 10 guests