Harvard 2010!

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby crackberry » Tue Jan 19, 2010 8:39 pm

mockstar wrote:
Hattori Hanzo wrote:
T14forME wrote:
Hattori Hanzo wrote:So what's the latest UR date for which people have received the hold email?


1/19


I meant the UR date for people who got held :) Last week they were sending hold emails to people who went UR in Oct. if I remember correctly.


Not for me...

But I digress. For those of you who've been held, what is your status on the application status checker?

UR 1/15/2010. First time it updated since UR 9/28/2009.

mockstar
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 5:59 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby mockstar » Tue Jan 19, 2010 8:52 pm

crackberry wrote:
UR 1/15/2010. First time it updated since UR 9/28/2009.



And that's the day you were held, right?
See, mine reset to 1/6. I must have been held and they forgot to e-mail me or something. So freaking confuuuuuuuuuuused.

User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby crackberry » Tue Jan 19, 2010 8:54 pm

mockstar wrote:
crackberry wrote:
UR 1/15/2010. First time it updated since UR 9/28/2009.



And that's the day you were held, right?
See, mine reset to 1/6. I must have been held and they forgot to e-mail me or something. So freaking confuuuuuuuuuuused.

Yes, that is the day I was held. The fact that you updated with no email is definitely strange. If you're losing sleep over it, you could always call/email admissions.

User avatar
somewhatwayward
Posts: 1446
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby somewhatwayward » Tue Jan 19, 2010 10:16 pm

Held with a 180 and 3.7+? No JR1 either?

What the what!?!?


...and there's also another poster with a 180 and ~3.8 who had JR1 with no JR2

the only thing i can think of is maybe they thought you should've had a higher GPA given your LSAT?...not that a 3.8 isn't high, but it isn't really in terms of HLS

MTC87
Posts: 98
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 2:07 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby MTC87 » Tue Jan 19, 2010 11:23 pm

somewhatwayward wrote:
Held with a 180 and 3.7+? No JR1 either?

What the what!?!?


...and there's also another poster with a 180 and ~3.8 who had JR1 with no JR2

the only thing i can think of is maybe they thought you should've had a higher GPA given your LSAT?...not that a 3.8 isn't high, but it isn't really in terms of HLS


e: to contribute, i heard about a friend of a friend with a 177/3.8 (H undergrad) who was dinged without JR1. supposedly he had some kind of disciplinary thing on his record, not sure what it was or if that made a difference.
Last edited by MTC87 on Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
WhiskeyGuy
Posts: 376
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:34 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby WhiskeyGuy » Tue Jan 19, 2010 11:34 pm

Not being accepted is clearly unfortunate, especially for folks who have worked hard and have a sincere desire to attend. With that said, isn't it hypocritical for these forums to chastise law schools for being number whores (Harvard being one of the top targets) and then complain when an "auto admit" isn't admitted?

User avatar
Nom Sawyer
Posts: 933
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 1:28 am

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby Nom Sawyer » Tue Jan 19, 2010 11:38 pm

WhiskeyGuy wrote:Not being accepted is clearly unfortunate, especially for folks who have worked hard and have a sincere desire to attend. With that said, isn't it hypocritical for these forums to chastise law schools for being number whores (Harvard being one of the top targets) and then complain when an "auto admit" isn't admitted?


Being Hypocritical:

Image

Kulax22
Posts: 149
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 1:23 am

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby Kulax22 » Tue Jan 19, 2010 11:43 pm

WhiskeyGuy wrote:Not being accepted is clearly unfortunate, especially for folks who have worked hard and have a sincere desire to attend. With that said, isn't it hypocritical for these forums to chastise law schools for being number whores (Harvard being one of the top targets) and then complain when an "auto admit" isn't admitted?



+1. Do we really want it to solely be a numbers game? I like the fact that the adcomms take some time to consider people as possibly being individuals 8) .

User avatar
englawyer
Posts: 1270
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:57 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby englawyer » Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:00 am

Kulax22 wrote:
WhiskeyGuy wrote:Not being accepted is clearly unfortunate, especially for folks who have worked hard and have a sincere desire to attend. With that said, isn't it hypocritical for these forums to chastise law schools for being number whores (Harvard being one of the top targets) and then complain when an "auto admit" isn't admitted?



+1. Do we really want it to solely be a numbers game? I like the fact that the adcomms take some time to consider people as possibly being individuals 8) .


-1. numbers-based admissions is very transparent, and in a way fair. if the process was dominated by non-number factors, people "in the know" would have a huge advantage. it would also mean hiring expensive admissions consultants to have a fair shot. at least this way, you can see quite clearly what LSAT is needed for X school.

User avatar
CoaltoNewCastle
Posts: 316
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 5:40 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby CoaltoNewCastle » Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:12 am

I think most if not all of the people with what seem like guaranteed admission numbers who have been held will be admitted eventually, so don't assume yet that it's a much tougher cycle. Harvard may be as unsure about this cycle as we are and I think that's why they're waiting until more people have their apps in before they start accepting 3.75-3.8/179-180 people. I still think they'll all get in.

Edit: Obviously I'm biased because those are my numbers, but I still believe this!

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby DoubleChecks » Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:20 am

englawyer wrote:
Kulax22 wrote:
WhiskeyGuy wrote:Not being accepted is clearly unfortunate, especially for folks who have worked hard and have a sincere desire to attend. With that said, isn't it hypocritical for these forums to chastise law schools for being number whores (Harvard being one of the top targets) and then complain when an "auto admit" isn't admitted?



+1. Do we really want it to solely be a numbers game? I like the fact that the adcomms take some time to consider people as possibly being individuals 8) .


-1. numbers-based admissions is very transparent, and in a way fair. if the process was dominated by non-number factors, people "in the know" would have a huge advantage. it would also mean hiring expensive admissions consultants to have a fair shot. at least this way, you can see quite clearly what LSAT is needed for X school.


lol i hope that was sarcasm, or else you're just really skewing words. poster never said the process should be "dominated" by non-number factors, just that "adcomms take some time to consider people as possibly being individuals" and not let it devolve into solely a numbers game

there's a lot more to being a qualified applicant than simply the numbers haha. this whole process w/ HLS has been a lot more personalized than i thought it would be, leading me to think they may actually read your PS and LORs to get a better feel of you as a person...and if those are off, even w/ seemingly auto admit numbers, they may hold or ding you. not saying those held or dinged were for those reasons

User avatar
englawyer
Posts: 1270
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:57 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby englawyer » Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:27 am

DoubleChecks wrote:lol i hope that was sarcasm, or else you're just really skewing words. poster never said the process should be "dominated" by non-number factors, just that "adcomms take some time to consider people as possibly being individuals" and not let it devolve into solely a numbers game

there's a lot more to being a qualified applicant than simply the numbers haha. this whole process w/ HLS has been a lot more personalized than i thought it would be, leading me to think they may actually read your PS and LORs to get a better feel of you as a person...and if those are off, even w/ seemingly auto admit numbers, they may hold or ding you. not saying those held or dinged were for those reasons


no sarcasm, i guess i was overly defensive about that point. i think 1/3 GPA, 1/3 LSAT, 1/3 other makes plenty of sense and wouldn't want to see it changed. i can go on a whole tirade about my view in PMs if you want, but I don't want to distract from this thread.

User avatar
fidesverita
Posts: 274
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 9:04 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby fidesverita » Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:46 am

Kulax22 wrote:
WhiskeyGuy wrote:Not being accepted is clearly unfortunate, especially for folks who have worked hard and have a sincere desire to attend. With that said, isn't it hypocritical for these forums to chastise law schools for being number whores (Harvard being one of the top targets) and then complain when an "auto admit" isn't admitted?



+1. Do we really want it to solely be a numbers game? I like the fact that the adcomms take some time to consider people as possibly being individuals 8) .


+ 1^10000

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby DoubleChecks » Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:59 am

englawyer wrote:
DoubleChecks wrote:lol i hope that was sarcasm, or else you're just really skewing words. poster never said the process should be "dominated" by non-number factors, just that "adcomms take some time to consider people as possibly being individuals" and not let it devolve into solely a numbers game

there's a lot more to being a qualified applicant than simply the numbers haha. this whole process w/ HLS has been a lot more personalized than i thought it would be, leading me to think they may actually read your PS and LORs to get a better feel of you as a person...and if those are off, even w/ seemingly auto admit numbers, they may hold or ding you. not saying those held or dinged were for those reasons


no sarcasm, i guess i was overly defensive about that point. i think 1/3 GPA, 1/3 LSAT, 1/3 other makes plenty of sense and wouldn't want to see it changed. i can go on a whole tirade about my view in PMs if you want, but I don't want to distract from this thread.


yeah that definitely makes the most sense to me as well and i think that system generally works

User avatar
CardinalRules
Posts: 2332
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby CardinalRules » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:01 am

fidesverita wrote:
Kulax22 wrote:
WhiskeyGuy wrote:Not being accepted is clearly unfortunate, especially for folks who have worked hard and have a sincere desire to attend. With that said, isn't it hypocritical for these forums to chastise law schools for being number whores (Harvard being one of the top targets) and then complain when an "auto admit" isn't admitted?



+1. Do we really want it to solely be a numbers game? I like the fact that the adcomms take some time to consider people as possibly being individuals 8) .


+ 1^10000


1 raised to the 100000th power is still 1.

APimpNamedSlickback
Posts: 1126
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:33 am

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby APimpNamedSlickback » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:07 am

managamy wrote:
fidesverita wrote:
Kulax22 wrote:
WhiskeyGuy wrote:Not being accepted is clearly unfortunate, especially for folks who have worked hard and have a sincere desire to attend. With that said, isn't it hypocritical for these forums to chastise law schools for being number whores (Harvard being one of the top targets) and then complain when an "auto admit" isn't admitted?



+1. Do we really want it to solely be a numbers game? I like the fact that the adcomms take some time to consider people as possibly being individuals 8) .


+ 1^10000


1 raised to the 100000th power is still 1.



i laughed

02082010
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby 02082010 » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:19 am

talibkweli wrote:
managamy wrote:
fidesverita wrote:+ 1^10000


1 raised to the 100000th power is still 1.



i laughed


I go to every thread talib is in bc there will either be an argument or something funny has happened.

User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby crackberry » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:23 am

hopefulundergrad wrote:I go to every thread talib is in bc there will either be an argument or something funny has happened.

I just bit my tongue re. the incredible array of ibanking/consulting dropouts/layoffs who are applying this cycle and making it way way way harder for the rest of us pithy "humanities" types because they can take the LSAT with their eyes closed in 20 minutes and get 178s apparently.

APimpNamedSlickback
Posts: 1126
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:33 am

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby APimpNamedSlickback » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:36 am

crackberry wrote:
hopefulundergrad wrote:I go to every thread talib is in bc there will either be an argument or something funny has happened.

I just bit my tongue re. the incredible array of ibanking/consulting dropouts/layoffs who are applying this cycle and making it way way way harder for the rest of us pithy "humanities" types because they can take the LSAT with their eyes closed in 20 minutes and get 178s apparently.


i am utterly no joke stunned. do you realize that you've just picked up and carried on an argument that we had several months ago like nothing happened?

02082010
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby 02082010 » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:39 am

Ran here.



Summary of argument?


And crackberry, if that was some kind of dig, you got into Stanford so...

APimpNamedSlickback
Posts: 1126
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:33 am

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby APimpNamedSlickback » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:43 am

...
Last edited by APimpNamedSlickback on Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

02082010
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby 02082010 » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:45 am

talibkweli wrote:
hopefulundergrad wrote:Ran here.



Summary of argument?


And crackberry, if that was some kind of dig, you got into Stanford so...


i'm just glad i can keep you entertained. its the only reason i'm on here.

we were argued in like october about how much tougher this cycle was going to be. then we finished, i got laid a few times, watched a few movies, ect ect....basically went on with my life thinking we were done.

now low an behold, he or she fires another salvo as though we've been arguing this entire time.


He. Stanford UG, most likely SLS in his future.

Crackberry, what do you have to say?

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby DoubleChecks » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:48 am

talibkweli wrote:
hopefulundergrad wrote:Ran here.



Summary of argument?


And crackberry, if that was some kind of dig, you got into Stanford so...


i'm just glad i can keep you entertained. its the only reason i'm on here.

we were argued in like october about how much tougher this cycle was going to be. i got laid a few times, then i finished, watched a few movies, ect ect....basically went on with my life thinking we were done.

now low an behold, he or she fires another salvo as though we've been arguing this entire time.


FTFY

User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby crackberry » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:53 am

hopefulundergrad wrote:
talibkweli wrote:
hopefulundergrad wrote:Ran here.



Summary of argument?


And crackberry, if that was some kind of dig, you got into Stanford so...


i'm just glad i can keep you entertained. its the only reason i'm on here.

we were argued in like october about how much tougher this cycle was going to be. then we finished, i got laid a few times, watched a few movies, ect ect....basically went on with my life thinking we were done.

now low an behold, he or she fires another salvo as though we've been arguing this entire time.


He. Stanford UG, most likely SLS in his future.

Crackberry, what do you have to say?

Haha, I love TLS. I was making fun of talib for fear-mongering about his ibanking and consulting friends who apparently decided to take the LSAT on a whim, get 175+s and screw the rest of us out of spots at HYS. Nearly every one of my friends from Stanford went into ibanking and consulting, some much smarter than others. I just thought it was ridiculous to assume that a job at Morgan Stanley, etc. somehow qualifies as a great soft and one that is some sort of magic bullet for law school admissions.

Not trying to reignite an argument.

02082010
Posts: 2034
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: Harvard 2010!

Postby 02082010 » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:58 am

talib hiding under a rock?




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: carlos_danger, chasima, csess, finaciardi, genjustice, glockov, Houzy, itshandled, lillawyer2, malysh, mcvizz, root_beer and 20 guests