U Chicago 2010

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
rockchalk86
Posts: 528
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 10:16 am

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby rockchalk86 » Mon Feb 08, 2010 11:06 pm

TheWire wrote:
booboo wrote:
managamy wrote:
jumpinjackflash wrote:does "within the next few days" from twitter mean that could be tomorrow?


Theoretically, it does, but I would imagine that they would have explicitly said "tomorrow" if they meant "tomorrow."


I think they want to keep it an open possibility. For all we know, they could've wished to have made the calls today, but since they were busy, they had to put it off. This could also happen tomorrow. (Not sure why I am saying they, when I really mean her/she...)


It is optimism like this that has destroyed my life over the last 3 months


Nice Avatar change :D

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

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby crackberry » Mon Feb 08, 2010 11:50 pm

rockchalk86 wrote:Nice Avatar change :D

Yeah but didn't he say he didn't like Dark Side?

User avatar
rockchalk86
Posts: 528
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 10:16 am

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby rockchalk86 » Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:19 am

crackberry wrote:
rockchalk86 wrote:Nice Avatar change :D

Yeah but didn't he say he didn't like Dark Side?


Liked it the least... there is no way to dislike Dark Side

User avatar
TheWire
Posts: 480
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 9:24 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby TheWire » Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:09 am

rockchalk86 wrote:
crackberry wrote:
rockchalk86 wrote:Nice Avatar change :D

Yeah but didn't he say he didn't like Dark Side?


Liked it the least... there is no way to dislike Dark Side


That was the point of the change...I am a HUGE fan, in general. Saying Dark side is my least favorite album shouldn't discredit dark side...it just shows the genius of the other albums and the band in general.

BTW...I have mad respect for "Meddle (especially the first and last track of the album; but dark side, wish u were here, animals, and the wall receive a "t4" status similar to "t14" due to their heightened popularity amongst lay people

rockchalk86 wrote:
crackberry wrote:
rockchalk86 wrote:Nice Avatar change :D

Yeah but didn't he say he didn't like Dark Side?


Liked it the least... there is no way to dislike Dark Side


+1

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

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby CardinalRules » Tue Feb 09, 2010 3:44 am

Apropos of nothing: my avatar is in the new SI Swimsuit Issue. Go check her out.

User avatar
Dignan
Posts: 1110
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 5:52 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby Dignan » Tue Feb 09, 2010 4:17 am

managamy wrote:Apropos of nothing: my avatar is in the new SI Swimsuit Issue. Go check her out.

Sorry, Managamy. She's only into guys who get accepted by Chicago and UVA. It's too bad you withdrew your applications.

tamlyric
Posts: 656
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 10:21 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby tamlyric » Tue Feb 09, 2010 10:25 am

Dignan wrote:
managamy wrote:Apropos of nothing: my avatar is in the new SI Swimsuit Issue. Go check her out.

Sorry, Managamy. She's only into guys who get accepted by Chicago and UVA. It's too bad you withdrew your applications.


:lol:

User avatar
booboo
Posts: 1032
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:39 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby booboo » Tue Feb 09, 2010 10:31 am

managamy wrote:Apropos of nothing: my avatar is in the new SI Swimsuit Issue. Go check her out.


Sorry, Jelena wins.

http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/wp-conten ... vic_81.jpg

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

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby somewhatwayward » Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:20 pm

you know, i applied to uchicago around the turn of the new year after reading some more about it. it wasn't originally on my list.

since then, i actually forgot i did it until yesterday when my mother reminded me bc i have heard absolutely nothing from them.....not even application received. i see from this thread that they seem to have a long lag time, but realizing i completely forgot about it was pretty amusing.

User avatar
holybartender
Posts: 435
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 2:06 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby holybartender » Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:31 pm

TheWire wrote:
crackberry wrote:Are the girls at UCSB hot? I've heard mixed reviews. How do they compare to USC?


The girls at UCSB are less attractive, about equally as intelligent, much poorer, and more infested with STDs.

IN GENERAL and in all seriousness...


That is utter trash. UCSB girls are hotter, and know how to have fun. We have 10,000 of them on a square mile that runs along a beach. STD rate? That's one of those absurd rumors you start hearing in 10th grade when you start thinking about college that gets repeated over, and over again until it just becomes 'truth'. It's on par with colleges nationwide. Much rather have the girls at Santa Barbara than any other UC. Also, lol at the poorer comment. I hate when the beautiful girl I hook up with is wearing stuff from Nordstrom instead of Nieman Marcus!

User avatar
puppleberry finn
Posts: 1036
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby puppleberry finn » Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:38 pm

sooo..... any decisions today?

User avatar
D Brooks
Posts: 585
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2008 1:02 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby D Brooks » Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:48 pm

I got an email that said "Update received." In response to the LOCI I sent yesterday afternoon.

arb44
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Oct 03, 2009 11:53 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby arb44 » Tue Feb 09, 2010 2:58 pm

D Brooks wrote:I got an email that said "Update received." In response to the LOCI I sent yesterday afternoon.


I received an "Update received" email as well, for something I sent them over a week ago. Looks like they are catching up on emails.

insidethetwenty
Posts: 221
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 8:00 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby insidethetwenty » Tue Feb 09, 2010 4:00 pm

I'm pretty pessimistic right now, but I can't help but think that if they were just going to fire off a bunch of WL/rejects to the 2/4 and 2/5 bunch, they'd have done it already. On the 1/28-1/29 WL/ding batch, the WL/ding e-mail came within a few hours of the 1/29 update. There hasn't been another WL/ding since then, despite the fact that several people updated from 2/4 to 2/5.

On the other hand, if they were going to accept a few more people from that batch, why wouldn't they have gone ahead and called yesterday? I mean if there were just a few leftovers after an afternoon of calling, you'd think they would've been called yesterday.

The only conclusion, then, must be that a few people from the 2/4 and 2/5 groups are being held or reviewed again. Otherwise, why the nearly two day (and counting) gap?

It doesn't mean anyone in this group is safe, but I don't think it means anyone is definitely out yet, either.

User avatar
Jericwithers
Posts: 2194
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 9:34 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby Jericwithers » Tue Feb 09, 2010 4:07 pm

insidethetwenty wrote:I'm pretty pessimistic right now, but I can't help but think that if they were just going to fire off a bunch of WL/rejects to the 2/4 and 2/5 bunch, they'd have done it already. On the 1/28-1/29 WL/ding batch, the WL/ding e-mail came within a few hours of the 1/29 update. There hasn't been another WL/ding since then, despite the fact that several people updated from 2/4 to 2/5.

On the other hand, if they were going to accept a few more people from that batch, why wouldn't they have gone ahead and called yesterday? I mean if there were just a few leftovers after an afternoon of calling, you'd think they would've been called yesterday.

The only conclusion, then, must be that a few people from the 2/4 and 2/5 groups are being held or reviewed again. Otherwise, why the nearly two day (and counting) gap?

It doesn't mean anyone in this group is safe, but I don't think it means anyone is definitely out yet, either.


I'll say this is good analysis. Makes me hopeful, too. Either they didn't review all 2/4s before the previous admit batch or they are reviewing other people (maybe scholarship essay people) to include with the decision batch for the rest of the 2/4s.

User avatar
JollyGreenGiant
Posts: 995
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:12 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby JollyGreenGiant » Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:23 pm

...
Last edited by JollyGreenGiant on Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Tangerine Gleam
Posts: 1349
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 4:50 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby Tangerine Gleam » Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:24 pm

Crossing my fingers for you, JGG!

EDIT: When they called me, I said "Who the f*ck is 773?" and pressed ignore, certain that no schools could be calling me. I then Googled the area code, slapped myself, and spent the rest of the afternoon trying to call them back (to no avail). 8 hours later, e-mail.

User avatar
JollyGreenGiant
Posts: 995
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 9:12 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby JollyGreenGiant » Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:28 pm

:D :D :D :D :D

TLS was right. My pessimism was wrong. I've never been happier to be wrong.

User avatar
booboo
Posts: 1032
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:39 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby booboo » Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:30 pm

JollyGreenGiant wrote::D :D :D :D :D

TLS was right. My pessimism was wrong. I've never been happier to be wrong.


And I am happy TLS was right and you were wrong. Congrats!

User avatar
Jericwithers
Posts: 2194
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 9:34 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby Jericwithers » Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:30 pm

JollyGreenGiant wrote::D :D :D :D :D

TLS was right. My pessimism was wrong. I've never been happier to be wrong.


You got called?!?

User avatar
Fancy Pants
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 5:32 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby Fancy Pants » Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:32 pm

JollyGreenGiant wrote::D :D :D :D :D

TLS was right. My pessimism was wrong. I've never been happier to be wrong.

WIN!

User avatar
Emma.
Posts: 2401
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:57 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby Emma. » Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:35 pm

JollyGreenGiant wrote::D :D :D :D :D

TLS was right. My pessimism was wrong. I've never been happier to be wrong.

Woot!

Congrats, JGG!

User avatar
mochafury
Posts: 112
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:32 am

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby mochafury » Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:35 pm

holybartender wrote:
crackberry wrote:That said, it is the place where fun goes to die. My sister went to Chicago for UG. It was perfect for her. I think I would enjoy it for law school. But for UG, man oh man. She had a shirt that said, on the front, "The Top 5 Party Schools in the U.S." and the list was something like:

1. University of Wisconsin, Madison
2. University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
3. University of Southern California
4. University of Texas, Austin
5. University of Florida




Blatant anti-Santa Barbara trolling.


Rancid anti-Penn State trolling. Seriously, at least people in Santa Barbara, Austin and USC have locations that offer things to do that don't involve binge drinking.

Empirical evidence supplemented by a heavy course of anecdotal testimony will show that PSU should be on, if not on top, of this list.

insidethetwenty
Posts: 221
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 8:00 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby insidethetwenty » Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:37 pm

Jericwithers wrote:
JollyGreenGiant wrote::D :D :D :D :D

TLS was right. My pessimism was wrong. I've never been happier to be wrong.


You got called?!?

User avatar
maudlinstreet
Posts: 360
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: U Chicago 2010

Postby maudlinstreet » Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:40 pm

JollyGreenGiant wrote::D :D :D :D :D

TLS was right. My pessimism was wrong. I've never been happier to be wrong.

congrats dude!




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