SMU 2010!

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
justsmu10
Posts: 31
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 2:22 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby justsmu10 » Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:43 pm

Believe me, if everyone who is admitted, going forward, is notified by a "small letter," and not by phone call...I will take back everything I said and extend various apologies for my crass and presumptuous comments. Yet, when that elusive day comes, we all know that phones will begin to ring just as they have every year. I don't get the vitriol; I'm simply telling it like it is.

User avatar
UTL_plz
Posts: 156
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 11:48 am

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby UTL_plz » Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:46 pm

Thirteen wrote:--ImageRemoved--



:lol: :lol: :lol:

LOL

jgrin
Posts: 295
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 4:07 am

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby jgrin » Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:47 pm

justsmu10 wrote:
Thirteen wrote:
justsmu10 wrote:
helpmerhonda wrote:Interesting news...
My bff knew how depressed I've been, so she just called admissions today and spoke to a girl who said not to pay attention to anything on these boards.
She said that the committee is still reviewing apps, but for those who got a DR and are FT, they should just be looking for small letters in the mail by 4/30
My bff asked if they would be receiving calls if they were admitted, and she said "no" and that everyone who is admitted will be getting a letter, not a packet???????
So I don't know what is going on, but this was different from what we've all heard and experienced before, so who knows..maybe we are all still in the game!


Pardon my forwardness, but one of three things is true: 1.) Your "bff" is playing a sick joke on you; 2.) The "girl in admissions" is a fucking idiot; 3.) You are completely full of shit.

I lean toward the latter.


Don't be a dick. I hope you really aren't "just smu", as I do not look forward to being classmates with someone that takes shots at a stranger while hiding behind the anonymity of the internet.


It goes without saying that you don't know me, but just so you know: if someone came up to me in person with such a far-fetched story, I would have the exact same reaction. Further, if a critical approach to a claim bothers you so much, perhaps you should choose a dfferent profession. Just saying....


You weren't critically approaching a claim though. You were attacking their character. If you can't distinguish between these two, then maybe you should choose a different profession. Just saying....

justsmu10
Posts: 31
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 2:22 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby justsmu10 » Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:00 pm

You weren't critically approaching a claim though. You were attacking their character. If you can't distinguish between these two, then maybe you should choose a different profession. Just saying....


So you would disagree with the statement that one method of discrediting the testimony of a witness is to question their character/credibility? Surely you jest!

DavidB
Posts: 126
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:28 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby DavidB » Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:07 pm

A quick question on the May 20th ASD--I think I remember being told on the phone that I was allowed to bring one guest to the ASD, but I can't be sure since I was lost in the excitement of the moment.

Does anyone else remember being told that a guest is okay?

jgrin
Posts: 295
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 4:07 am

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby jgrin » Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:09 pm

justsmu10 wrote:
You weren't critically approaching a claim though. You were attacking their character. If you can't distinguish between these two, then maybe you should choose a different profession. Just saying....


So you would disagree with the statement that one method of discrediting the testimony of a witness is to question their character/credibility? Surely you jest!


Surely I would disagree if the claims were made outright without evidence. You are assuming that because this is not the traditional method, then it must be wrong, and thus the person who rights it a dumbass. I believe the comments to be out of line and with out merit. Additionally, the OP was just conveying a message. The statement was not their own, so how could you automatically assume something about someone when they are merely conveying a message from a third party?

User avatar
fathergoose
Posts: 853
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:36 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby fathergoose » Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:12 pm

DavidB wrote:A quick question on the May 20th ASD--I think I remember being told on the phone that I was allowed to bring one guest to the ASD, but I can't be sure since I was lost in the excitement of the moment.

Does anyone else remember being told that a guest is okay?

There were a number of people who had significant others or parents with them at the first ASD. HTH

justsmu10
Posts: 31
Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 2:22 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby justsmu10 » Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:14 pm

jgrin wrote:
justsmu10 wrote:
You weren't critically approaching a claim though. You were attacking their character. If you can't distinguish between these two, then maybe you should choose a different profession. Just saying....


So you would disagree with the statement that one method of discrediting the testimony of a witness is to question their character/credibility? Surely you jest!


Surely I would disagree if the claims were made outright without evidence. You are assuming that because this is not the traditional method, then it must be wrong, and thus the person who rights it a dumbass. I believe the comments to be out of line and with out merit. Additionally, the OP was just conveying a message. The statement was not their own, so how could you automatically assume something about someone when they are merely conveying a message from a third party?


You make a valid point; I see the error of my ways. Carry on.

tarheel354
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 1:20 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby tarheel354 » Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:23 pm

so am i the only one who got DR'd today? Anyone else???

DavidB
Posts: 126
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:28 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby DavidB » Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:29 pm

fathergoose wrote:
DavidB wrote:A quick question on the May 20th ASD--I think I remember being told on the phone that I was allowed to bring one guest to the ASD, but I can't be sure since I was lost in the excitement of the moment.

Does anyone else remember being told that a guest is okay?

There were a number of people who had significant others or parents with them at the first ASD. HTH


Great, thanks!

SMU10
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:45 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby SMU10 » Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:52 pm

Rejected Today.
DR 4/19
FT: 159, 3.37
Currently an undergrad

User avatar
Thirteen
Posts: 23852
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 4:53 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby Thirteen » Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:54 pm

SMU10 wrote:Rejected Today.
DR 4/19
FT: 159, 3.37
Currently an undergrad


Sorry to hear that.

jgrin
Posts: 295
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 4:07 am

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby jgrin » Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:01 pm

tarheel354 wrote:so am i the only one who got DR'd today? Anyone else???


if you don't mind me asking, what are your stats?

Katherine
Posts: 66
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 1:42 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby Katherine » Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:02 pm

SMU10 wrote:Rejected Today.
DR 4/19
FT: 159, 3.37
Currently an undergrad



Are you serious? I cannot believe they would reject someone with those numbers that was an undergrad. I am an undergrad too and am now freaking out, we have similar numbers. I'm so sorry.

tarheel354
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 1:20 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby tarheel354 » Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:04 pm

156, 3.1

SMU10
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:45 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby SMU10 » Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:06 pm

Katherine wrote:
SMU10 wrote:Rejected Today.
DR 4/19
FT: 159, 3.37
Currently an undergrad



Are you serious? I cannot believe they would reject someone with those numbers that was an undergrad. I am an undergrad too and am now freaking out, we have similar numbers. I'm so sorry.


Thanks! Good luck to you. I think it's a good sign that you have not heard from them yet. I hope you get accepted :)

jgrin
Posts: 295
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 4:07 am

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby jgrin » Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:06 pm

SMU10 wrote:
Katherine wrote:
SMU10 wrote:Rejected Today.
DR 4/19
FT: 159, 3.37
Currently an undergrad



Are you serious? I cannot believe they would reject someone with those numbers that was an undergrad. I am an undergrad too and am now freaking out, we have similar numbers. I'm so sorry.


Thanks! Good luck to you. I think it's a good sign that you have not heard from them yet. I hope you get accepted :)


Why do you believe it is a good sign if one has not heard yet?

User avatar
Yacht_Party
Posts: 119
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 8:35 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby Yacht_Party » Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:43 pm

jgrin wrote:Why do you believe it is a good sign if one has not heard yet?


Because (for FT) you haven't been rejected; i.e. the alternative is worse.

LawMuns
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby LawMuns » Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:53 pm

DR today, 4/22

jgrin
Posts: 295
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 4:07 am

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby jgrin » Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:56 pm

LawMuns wrote:DR today, 4/22


Stats, if you don't mind? And when do you think you went DR (at what time of day)?

and one more: ft/pt?

User avatar
Yacht_Party
Posts: 119
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 8:35 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby Yacht_Party » Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:57 pm

LawMuns wrote:DR today, 4/22


Stats (if willing), FT or PT?

LawMuns
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby LawMuns » Thu Apr 22, 2010 4:59 pm

FT- undergrad gpa 2.37 (graduated 1999), lsat 161. Not real hopeful, but Dallas would be great!

User avatar
Bustang
Posts: 439
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 4:26 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby Bustang » Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:05 pm

It seems as though the blood bath prediction was a correct one. Here's to hoping we're wrong.

LawMuns
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:04 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby LawMuns » Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:06 pm

Time of day was probably 2:00 CDT.

Stryka
Posts: 87
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 1:52 pm

Re: SMU 2010!

Postby Stryka » Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:09 pm

Bustang wrote:It seems as though the blood bath prediction was a correct one. Here's to hoping we're wrong.


???looks like these DR may be rejections?




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AustinLu, eyetelyuhwhut, okf731 and 18 guests