Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

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

Where are you in the Harvard application process?

I'm applying next year, just reading this thread to prepare
38
12%
Applying this year, I got an extension on my application
1
0%
I applied and haven't gotten a JS1 yet
64
20%
I applied and got a JS1, but haven't had it yet.
7
2%
I had my JS1 but I'm waiting for a magical phone call
43
13%
Already had my JS2, just here to help
62
19%
Waitlisted
61
19%
Dinged D:
49
15%
 
Total votes: 325

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

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby kershka » Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:46 am

lawschool22 wrote:
koalacity wrote:
lawschool22 wrote:I'm just thinking of using it in every day life.

Friend: Dude, I think that party is going to be crazy.
Me: Yeah, but I hope not in a Penn way...
Friend: :?

I have to say that the potential Penn State association wasn't the first thing that came to mind when considering the reasons one should probably avoid using TLS lingo IRL...


Lol I would never do that, and my friends would have no idea it was TLS, they don't know what TLS is. I really have no law school/law-realated friends whatsoever lol

That hurts LS22. Are we not your closest and most beloved internet friends :P

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

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby lawschool22 » Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:49 am

kershka wrote:
lawschool22 wrote:
koalacity wrote:
lawschool22 wrote:I'm just thinking of using it in every day life.

Friend: Dude, I think that party is going to be crazy.
Me: Yeah, but I hope not in a Penn way...
Friend: :?

I have to say that the potential Penn State association wasn't the first thing that came to mind when considering the reasons one should probably avoid using TLS lingo IRL...


Lol I would never do that, and my friends would have no idea it was TLS, they don't know what TLS is. I really have no law school/law-realated friends whatsoever lol

That hurts LS22. Are we not your closest and most beloved internet friends :P


You know what I meannnn :)

User avatar
neprep
Posts: 1066
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:16 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby neprep » Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:18 am

JSW is hot on the heels of the crowd favorite — come on people, save JSjk!

Also, WTR, can you perhaps compile JS1 prep sources in the OP? I'm thinking the two or three posts in kappycaft1's thread + LS22's So You Want to Glam Up Your Skype Interview lighting guide.

Peadish
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2013 11:56 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby Peadish » Fri Jan 17, 2014 3:11 am

lowdmouse wrote:
Peadish wrote:JS1! Received at around 6 EST.


When did you go complete?


Mid December! My stats are 3.61/176.

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

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby lawschool22 » Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:30 am

JSW, JSW, JSW.

Folks, you want an efficient abbreviation. That's the whole point of shorthand. Who wants to type that extra letter for JSJK? Think of all the cumulative time saved if we elect JSW.

:)

User avatar
neprep
Posts: 1066
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:16 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby neprep » Fri Jan 17, 2014 8:53 am

lawschool22 wrote:JSW, JSW, JSW.

Folks, you want an efficient abbreviation. That's the whole point of shorthand. Who wants to type that extra letter for JSJK? Think of all the cumulative time saved if we elect JSW.

:)


No, stop flogging the canard that any of this has ever been about efficiency. We give cutesy, mawkish names to the various steps of the HLS application because of some relentless need to fetishize and decorate a painfully dry and cutthroat process. The reason it's "JS1" and "JS2" and not "H1" and "H2" is not that it matters who the current CAO is at HLS, but that using those terms gives us a sense of human connection; in short, these abbrevs are all about feelings. Our collective feelings. If JSjk makes people feel good, they should vote for it.

In any case, the "cumulative time saved" is going to be wasted hitting refresh one more time anyway. :wink:

P.S. 100 LSACPoints for anyone who can spot 2 points of disagreement and 2 points of agreement between me and LS22 (looking at you, December takers).

User avatar
W$RKliveWELL
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 1:17 am

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby W$RKliveWELL » Fri Jan 17, 2014 10:40 am

quick question... since theirs no held list this year can you be waitlisted without a JS1? AND when did the first wave of rejection letters come out in the past? Trying to remain optomistic :|

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

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby lawschool22 » Fri Jan 17, 2014 10:46 am

W$RKliveWELL wrote:quick question... since theirs no held list this year can you be waitlisted without a JS1? AND when did the first wave of rejection letters come out in the past? Trying to remain optomistic :|


Yes you can. Then at some point they may ask you to do a JS1.

User avatar
MrMileyCyrus
Posts: 191
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 3:23 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby MrMileyCyrus » Fri Jan 17, 2014 10:47 am

lawschool22 wrote:JSW, JSW, JSW.

Folks, you want an efficient abbreviation. That's the whole point of shorthand. Who wants to type that extra letter for JSJK? Think of all the cumulative time saved if we elect JSW.

:)


I actually think that "JSJK" is faster anyway. Your finger is already on the "J" key and then the "K" is right next to it. When you type it, it's a beautiful, fluid motion. But adding the "W" is bulky because you have to lift up your ring finger on your left hand, which for 95% of people is literally the worst finger in terms of mobility, usefulness, and overall coolness.

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

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby lawschool22 » Fri Jan 17, 2014 10:49 am

MrMileyCyrus wrote:
lawschool22 wrote:JSW, JSW, JSW.

Folks, you want an efficient abbreviation. That's the whole point of shorthand. Who wants to type that extra letter for JSJK? Think of all the cumulative time saved if we elect JSW.

:)


I actually think that "JSJK" is faster anyway. Your finger is already on the "J" key and then the "K" is right next to it. When you type it, it's a beautiful, fluid motion. But adding the "W" is bulky because you have to lift up your ring finger on your left hand, which for 95% of people is literally the worst finger in terms of mobility, usefulness, and overall coolness.


I just did a controlled scientific time trial and confirmed that JSW is in fact faster than JSJK. Although I was unable to test the coolness of my ring finger. :D

Pau.C.
Posts: 90
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 5:46 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby Pau.C. » Fri Jan 17, 2014 11:04 am

.
Last edited by Pau.C. on Sun Jul 17, 2016 6:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby lawschool22 » Fri Jan 17, 2014 11:35 am

Pau.C. wrote:
lawschool22 wrote:
MrMileyCyrus wrote:
lawschool22 wrote:JSW, JSW, JSW.

Folks, you want an efficient abbreviation. That's the whole point of shorthand. Who wants to type that extra letter for JSJK? Think of all the cumulative time saved if we elect JSW.

:)


I actually think that "JSJK" is faster anyway. Your finger is already on the "J" key and then the "K" is right next to it. When you type it, it's a beautiful, fluid motion. But adding the "W" is bulky because you have to lift up your ring finger on your left hand, which for 95% of people is literally the worst finger in terms of mobility, usefulness, and overall coolness.


I just did a controlled scientific time trial and confirmed that JSW is in fact faster than JSJK. Although I was unable to test the coolness of my ring finger. :D



I don't post often... But I've just got to say: I like you guys! You are all keeping me from going crazy!


Image

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

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby lawschool22 » Fri Jan 17, 2014 11:36 am

neprep wrote:JSW is hot on the heels of the crowd favorite — come on people, save JSjk!

Also, WTR, can you perhaps compile JS1 prep sources in the OP? I'm thinking the two or three posts in kappycaft1's thread + LS22's So You Want to Glam Up Your Skype Interview lighting guide.


Just saw this - love it lol :D

ETA: Here's the actual guide for anyone looking for it:

Professional lighting on the cheap for Skype interviews:
Change your computer background to a nice amber/orange color so your face looks warm and isn't washed out by the blue LED backlight. Get a lamp, take the lamp shade off, and position it to your left (about 10 o'clock position) and about three feet away - a 40-60 watt bulb is best for this. Turn on the overhead light in the room you're in (it will act as a "hair light" (technical term) and illuminate the top of your head with some shine to give depth). Then get a floor lamp (or put it on a shelf or something) with, preferably, a brighter bulb than the lamp on your desk (75 watts is good). Place it in the 4 or 5 o'clock position, about 5 feet away from where you are seated. For the best effect, place a white poster board or sheet behind the lamp pointed towards the back right of your head.

If you can do this setup in a room with window (covered w/ blinds or a light curtain) that is even better. Set it up so the window is to the right of you. This will give a pleasing contrast, as the lamp to your left will read on screen as a warm color, and the window will read as a cool color. This provides good definition to your face and is a pleasing set up. It is also important to only use one "type" of light in the room. By that I mean, mixing fluorescent with regular tungsten bulbs will cause color issues, as Skype cannot set the white balance properly. I would recommend using all tungsten (or "warm" CFL's) bulbs, plus the window, and you will get a nice contrast but proper color.

Keep your chin slightly up, with your face turned just ever so slightly to the right. But then relax and be natural :). You should always have a slight smile, and you should appear engaged, happy, enthusiastic, etc.

Also - make sure your background is free of clutter. This is very important. A simple, clean room as a backdrop is best. And by setting up the lighting as described above, the room will appear slightly dimmer than you, making you the part that stands out, and causing the background to be less distracting.

Finally, feel free to experiment! All rooms are different. Go to the preferences of Skype and you can see how you will appear. Play around with the angle and distance of the lights until it looks good to you.

User avatar
vuthy
Posts: 379
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 8:55 am

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby vuthy » Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:18 pm

LSN now indicates an HLS rejection today:

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/merp

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

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby koalacity » Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:19 pm

vuthy wrote:LSN now indicates an HLS rejection today:

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/merp

BRACE YOURSELVES

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

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby JD1776 » Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:20 pm

JSNo. But ya'll shouldn't panick - it was a reach for me.

LSAT & GPA both below medians. Complete 11/25.

User avatar
andapieceoftoast
Posts: 439
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2013 11:18 am

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby andapieceoftoast » Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:22 pm

JD1776 wrote:JSNo. But ya'll shouldn't panick - it was a reach for me.

LSAT & GPA both below medians. Complete 11/25.


Just now? Via email?

*hides under desk*

Edited for being hella rude: Very sorry to hear that -- the very best of luck to you in the rest of your cycle!
Last edited by andapieceoftoast on Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby koalacity » Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:23 pm

JD1776 wrote:JSNo. But ya'll shouldn't panick - it was a reach for me.

LSAT & GPA both below medians. Complete 11/25.

So sorry-even if it was a reach, that's still rough :(. How'd you get the news? Email or status checker? Also, did you receive a JS1?

lsatnoob
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:42 am

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby lsatnoob » Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:23 pm

Access denied! $85 lottery ticket

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

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby lawschool22 » Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:24 pm

Oh god

User avatar
midwest17
Posts: 1686
Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2013 5:27 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby midwest17 » Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:24 pm

JD1776 wrote:JSNo. But ya'll shouldn't panick - it was a reach for me.

LSAT & GPA both below medians. Complete 11/25.


lsatnoob wrote:Access denied! $85 lottery ticket


Sorry dudes. :(

User avatar
OliveBC
Posts: 490
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 9:41 am

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby OliveBC » Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:24 pm

just got dinged as well, via email. K-JD at both 25th so definitely not a shock.

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

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby JD1776 » Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:24 pm

koalacity wrote:So sorry-even if it was a reach, that's still rough :(. How'd you get the news? Email or status checker? Also, did you receive a JS1?


Thanks. It was via email, and no, I didn't have a JS1.

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

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby lawschool22 » Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:24 pm

lsatnoob wrote:Access denied! $85 lottery ticket


So sorry :(. Gotta give us stats, complete date, JS1 date (if applicable), etc.

edwardt1988
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 9:59 pm

Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)

Postby edwardt1988 » Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:24 pm

Oh, they're coming?

Oh noesss




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