Eh, that was sort of the point.gahthelaw wrote:i read this as "CAPITAL LETTERS = SOMETHING THAT MATTERS"crackberry wrote:HEY GUYS!!!! WHEN DO YOU THINK WE'LL START HEARING BACK?!?!
unfortunately i was wrong.
Columbia 2010 Forum
- crackberry
- Posts: 3252
- Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
-
- Posts: 333
- Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 7:49 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
but seriously, at least it seems like the office is really getting to work. i, too, got an email asking to clarify some stuff. it did seem weird to me that they asked me to just email the information back. like, is there someone really going through admissions@law.columbia.edu checking individual emails? that's gotta be a nightmare inbox.
- gahthelaw
- Posts: 727
- Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 11:30 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
it sort of makes me sad that they haven't emailed me for anything. like 'oh, there's nothing more we want to hear about this girl.'
-
- Posts: 333
- Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 7:49 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
i dunno, i see the update thing as something that now delays my app, which is sort of a bummer. so of course, i dropped all work and got them everything they needed within an hour.gahthelaw wrote:it sort of makes me sad that they haven't emailed me for anything. like 'oh, there's nothing more we want to hear about this girl.'
- WhiskeyGuy
- Posts: 361
- Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:34 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
Hey everyone, any word on decisions?
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- gahthelaw
- Posts: 727
- Joined: Sun May 17, 2009 11:30 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
DID WE ALL GET INTO COLUMBIA YET?!
- UrbanAchievers
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 4:02 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
georgina wrote:i dunno, i see the update thing as something that now delays my app, which is sort of a bummer. so of course, i dropped all work and got them everything they needed within an hour.gahthelaw wrote:it sort of makes me sad that they haven't emailed me for anything. like 'oh, there's nothing more we want to hear about this girl.'
nm
Last edited by UrbanAchievers on Sat Aug 21, 2010 10:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
- crackberry
- Posts: 3252
- Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
Have we established that Columbia is the biggest LSAT whore of them all (with the possible exception of Harvard)?
- Lurkster
- Posts: 190
- Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 12:00 am
Re: Columbia 2010
I don't think so, because I'm over their 75th and they probably wouldn't even let me lick the boots of their adcom members, let alone let me in the school.crackberry wrote:Have we established that Columbia is the biggest LSAT whore of them all (with the possible exception of Harvard)?
- crackberry
- Posts: 3252
- Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
Do you have like a 2.2?Lurkster wrote:I don't think so, because I'm over their 75th and they probably wouldn't even let me lick the boots of their adcom members, let alone let me in the school.crackberry wrote:Have we established that Columbia is the biggest LSAT whore of them all (with the possible exception of Harvard)?
Let me rephrase: Have we established that Columbia is the biggest LSAT whore of them all, provided you have at least a 3.4 or 3.5 (with the possible exception of Harvard)?
- WhiskeyGuy
- Posts: 361
- Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:34 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
Hey everyone. It's been a couple hours, just seeing if anyone has heard anything.
- Lurkster
- Posts: 190
- Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 12:00 am
Re: Columbia 2010
3.1. I'm sending an app anyway. Should be fun!crackberry wrote:Do you have like a 2.2?Lurkster wrote:I don't think so, because I'm over their 75th and they probably wouldn't even let me lick the boots of their adcom members, let alone let me in the school.crackberry wrote:Have we established that Columbia is the biggest LSAT whore of them all (with the possible exception of Harvard)?
Let me rephrase: Have we established that Columbia is the biggest LSAT whore of them all, provided you have at least a 3.4 or 3.5 (with the possible exception of Harvard)?
- Hattori Hanzo
- Posts: 659
- Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 12:17 am
Re: Columbia 2010
Only if that was true of Harvard.....crackberry wrote:Do you have like a 2.2?Lurkster wrote:I don't think so, because I'm over their 75th and they probably wouldn't even let me lick the boots of their adcom members, let alone let me in the school.crackberry wrote:Have we established that Columbia is the biggest LSAT whore of them all (with the possible exception of Harvard)?
Let me rephrase: Have we established that Columbia is the biggest LSAT whore of them all, provided you have at least a 3.4 or 3.5 (with the possible exception of Harvard)?
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- UrbanAchievers
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 4:02 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
Nope. How 'bout you?WhiskeyGuy wrote:Hey everyone. It's been a couple hours, just seeing if anyone has heard anything.
- AngryAvocado
- Posts: 774
- Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:22 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
I think this year might be a bit different. If the ED pool this year was any indication, Columbia's selectivity is going to make a pretty noticeable jump. I have >175 LSAT and a 3.4x from a T30 UG, and I was deferred ED (along with a couple others with similar stats). I also have pretty decent softs, including some atypical corporate work experience and such. Keep in mind that, in the past, ED plus a >173 LSAT was almost an autoadmit provided a non-horrific GPA.crackberry wrote:Do you have like a 2.2?Lurkster wrote:I don't think so, because I'm over their 75th and they probably wouldn't even let me lick the boots of their adcom members, let alone let me in the school.crackberry wrote:Have we established that Columbia is the biggest LSAT whore of them all (with the possible exception of Harvard)?
Let me rephrase: Have we established that Columbia is the biggest LSAT whore of them all, provided you have at least a 3.4 or 3.5 (with the possible exception of Harvard)?
-
- Posts: 1645
- Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:10 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
In at COLUMBIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- AngryAvocado
- Posts: 774
- Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:22 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
I stand corrected.hopefulundergrad wrote:In at COLUMBIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 181
- Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 2:02 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
hopefulundergrad wrote:In at COLUMBIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Eh, once you try it in another thread, it doesn't really work anymore.
Last edited by psychomohel on Tue Jan 19, 2010 9:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- rockchalk86
- Posts: 528
- Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 10:16 am
Re: Columbia 2010
Twice... really?psychomohel wrote:[hopefulundergrad wrote:In at COLUMBIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Eh, once you try it in another thread, it doesn't really work anymore.
-
- Posts: 181
- Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 2:02 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
Yeah, in the NYU thread he posted a fake IN message. It got everyone freaked out for a bit.rockchalk86 wrote:Twice... really?psychomohel wrote:hopefulundergrad wrote:In at COLUMBIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Eh, once you try it in another thread, it doesn't really work anymore.
- Emma.
- Posts: 2408
- Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:57 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
Wait, what?hopefulundergrad wrote:In at COLUMBIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- rockchalk86
- Posts: 528
- Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 10:16 am
Re: Columbia 2010
Oh yeah... that was bullshit. This one isn't even close to believable.psychomohel wrote:Yeah, in the NYU thread he posted a fake IN message. It got everyone freaked out for a bit.rockchalk86 wrote:Twice... really?psychomohel wrote:hopefulundergrad wrote:In at COLUMBIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Eh, once you try it in another thread, it doesn't really work anymore.
-
- Posts: 1645
- Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 5:10 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
psychomohel wrote:Yeah, in the NYU thread he posted a fake IN message. It got everyone freaked out for a bit.rockchalk86 wrote:Twice... really?psychomohel wrote:hopefulundergrad wrote:In at COLUMBIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Eh, once you try it in another thread, it doesn't really work anymore.
- Emma.
- Posts: 2408
- Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 7:57 pm
Re: Columbia 2010
psychomohel wrote:Yeah, in the NYU thread he posted a fake IN message. It got everyone freaked out for a bit.rockchalk86 wrote:Twice... really?psychomohel wrote:hopefulundergrad wrote:In at COLUMBIA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Eh, once you try it in another thread, it doesn't really work anymore.
- Nom Sawyer
- Posts: 913
- Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 1:28 am
Re: Columbia 2010
LoL yeah.. isn't this a bannable offense?emrose wrote:
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login