michigan 2010 applicants

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
rondemarino
Posts: 529
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 12:29 am

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby rondemarino » Fri Dec 11, 2009 7:57 pm

logging in 100 times a day for a month? Damn.....

Michiganapp2010
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 5:28 pm

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby Michiganapp2010 » Fri Dec 11, 2009 7:59 pm

rondemarino wrote:logging in 100 times a day for a month? Damn.....


It wasn't 100 times a day. It was just multiple times per day. :lol:

User avatar
YCrevolution
Posts: 4714
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 1:25 am

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby YCrevolution » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:09 pm

..

User avatar
Unitas
Posts: 1387
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby Unitas » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:16 pm

Zearfoss wrote:Hello all--

Oy. I feel terrible about all the apparent anxiety I unintentionally engineered. In my telephone call with the original poster, I did indeed ask him to post some information, but I'm afraid a lot got lost in the translation. I hope this format works a little better, and that I am able to clear up some confusion.

First, and most importantly: I am not mad about people trying to log in! We are not tracking people. We are not penalizing people. Nothing untoward along those lines is occurring.

Now, some background: yesterday we received an email from an applicant telling us that he had tried to log into the site and had been successful for 20 minutes. He tried again, though, and could not log in. Was he, he wanted to know, admitted or not? well--he wasn't admitted. So if he had been able to log in, as he said, that would have indicated a serious problem with our site. I asked one member of my staff to get the specific details from him, and another member to confab with the IT staff and see what the story was. As a result of all this investigating, we learned that the candidate in question had actually tried to log in an extraordinary number of times--many, many times a day, every day for more than a month. We also learned that while a number of people had tried to log in, he had done so about 100 times more than anyone else--and that only a handful of people had tried to log in a number of times that struck us really unusual. But we didn't go piecing together who all those people were, nor did we have any interest in contacting them--we only wanted to respond to the original candidate. In any event, the upshot of the investigation was the IT staff's firm conviction that the site was working exactly as it should, and people who weren't admitted would not be able to log on.

So I called the candidate, and explained what I had learned. I also explained that the site only refreshed once a day, so multiple daily log-in attempts weren't worthwhile. And then I explained why we have the system we do (about which I can post later), and that while we don't mind people trying to log in, we just have an old-fashioned hope that they will learn of their admission through a big exciting packet in the mail, rather than a website--but that I understand there's a generation gap there. And finally, I explained how this year's new phenomenon of checking has led to some unforeseen consequences: namely, people calling us to say, "I logged in; am I admitted?," and relatedly, emailing us a lot to ask when they'll get their status check email. Both of those, particularly in a year where we're seeing an increase in applicants, have been absolutely crushing to our workload; we're actually processing apps more slowly, and making decisions more slowly, because of the increased work in these other areas.

And finally--I asked him to explain all this on TLS, which is where he told me he'd gotten the log-in idea in the first place. And so here we are.

This is my first time ever posting on TLS or similar sites, and I am hopeful that we can clear this up and I can get back to reading my apps and leaving all of you in peace. I'm off now to drive my children to various evening activities, but I'll check back later to see if other questions need answering!

(I have been advised to tell you all that I won't be monitoring my TLS message inbox. In other words, you'll be free of me after this.)


+1 Michigan. I am impressed.

Veritas wrote:
Helmholtz wrote:Dean Zearfoss, thanks so much for the post clearing this up. You taking the time out of your day to post on here is immensely appreciated and helpfulness is something I've come to expect from your office.

+1 and my LSAC # is L000 and I <3 Mich with an undying love


I hope that isn't your real number.....

User avatar
Veritas
Posts: 2722
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby Veritas » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:17 pm

Kakarot wrote:
Veritas wrote:
Helmholtz wrote:Dean Zearfoss, thanks so much for the post clearing this up. You taking the time out of your day to post on here is immensely appreciated and helpfulness is something I've come to expect from your office.

+1 and my LSAC # is L000 and I <3 Mich with an undying love


I hope that isn't your real number.....

srsly....? are you really asking that?

yes, I have over 12k posts on TLS and I'm stupid enough to post my real LSAC account number.

User avatar
Unitas
Posts: 1387
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby Unitas » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:20 pm

Veritas wrote:
Kakarot wrote:
Veritas wrote:
Helmholtz wrote:Dean Zearfoss, thanks so much for the post clearing this up. You taking the time out of your day to post on here is immensely appreciated and helpfulness is something I've come to expect from your office.

+1 and my LSAC # is L000 and I <3 Mich with an undying love


I hope that isn't your real number.....

srsly....? are you really asking that?

yes, I have over 12k posts on TLS and I'm stupid enough to post my real LSAC account number.


I didn't realize that was you and didn't pay much attention through my laughing over the last few pages of this thread... New avatar right?

User avatar
Veritas
Posts: 2722
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby Veritas » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:22 pm

Kakarot wrote:
I didn't realize that was you and didn't pay much attention through my laughing over the last few pages of this thread... New avatar right?

now I feel like a jerk, sry that was unnecessary.

I did get a new tar, which now makes me feel extremely juvenile.

User avatar
MC Southstar
Posts: 1238
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 3:27 pm

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby MC Southstar » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:24 pm

Veritas wrote:
Kakarot wrote:
I didn't realize that was you and didn't pay much attention through my laughing over the last few pages of this thread... New avatar right?

now I feel like a jerk, sry that was unnecessary.

I did get a new tar, which now makes me feel extremely juvenile.


Makes you seem like an angry person.

User avatar
Veritas
Posts: 2722
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby Veritas » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:26 pm

shadowfrost000 wrote:
Veritas wrote:
Kakarot wrote:
I didn't realize that was you and didn't pay much attention through my laughing over the last few pages of this thread... New avatar right?

now I feel like a jerk, sry that was unnecessary.

I did get a new tar, which now makes me feel extremely juvenile.


Makes you seem like an angry person.

I know, it's made me feel angry all day. I think I need to change it.

User avatar
Bronte
Posts: 2128
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 10:44 pm

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby Bronte » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:27 pm

Veritas wrote:I know, it's made me feel angry all day. I think I need to change it.


Maybe you should change it to a heart with a big M in the middle.

Amelie
Posts: 814
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 12:19 pm

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby Amelie » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:30 pm

.
Last edited by Amelie on Fri Mar 05, 2010 11:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
tintin
Posts: 952
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 12:26 am

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby tintin » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:39 pm

maggiebre wrote:Good God. I leave TLS for 3 hours, and all hell seems to have broken loose.


+1, i should just pull up a chair and grab the popcorn :lol:

User avatar
Unitas
Posts: 1387
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby Unitas » Fri Dec 11, 2009 8:49 pm

tintin wrote:
maggiebre wrote:Good God. I leave TLS for 3 hours, and all hell seems to have broken loose.


+1, i should just pull up a chair and grab the popcorn :lol:


Pretty sure once Dean Zearfoss posted the hell was contained. Still fun to go through and read it all....

awesomepossum
Posts: 928
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 12:49 am

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby awesomepossum » Fri Dec 11, 2009 9:27 pm

HAHAHAHAHAHA....good job Matlock.




Dear Dean Z...



HAPPY HOLIDAYS!!!!


A tired 2L.

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

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby Emma. » Fri Dec 11, 2009 10:02 pm

Zearfoss wrote:Hello all--

Oy. I feel terrible about all the apparent anxiety I unintentionally engineered. In my telephone call with the original poster, I did indeed ask him to post some information, but I'm afraid a lot got lost in the translation. I hope this format works a little better, and that I am able to clear up some confusion.

First, and most importantly: I am not mad about people trying to log in! We are not tracking people. We are not penalizing people. Nothing untoward along those lines is occurring.

Now, some background: yesterday we received an email from an applicant telling us that he had tried to log into the site and had been successful for 20 minutes. He tried again, though, and could not log in. Was he, he wanted to know, admitted or not? well--he wasn't admitted. So if he had been able to log in, as he said, that would have indicated a serious problem with our site. I asked one member of my staff to get the specific details from him, and another member to confab with the IT staff and see what the story was. As a result of all this investigating, we learned that the candidate in question had actually tried to log in an extraordinary number of times--many, many times a day, every day for more than a month. We also learned that while a number of people had tried to log in, he had done so about 100 times more than anyone else--and that only a handful of people had tried to log in a number of times that struck us really unusual. But we didn't go piecing together who all those people were, nor did we have any interest in contacting them--we only wanted to respond to the original candidate. In any event, the upshot of the investigation was the IT staff's firm conviction that the site was working exactly as it should, and people who weren't admitted would not be able to log on.

So I called the candidate, and explained what I had learned. I also explained that the site only refreshed once a day, so multiple daily log-in attempts weren't worthwhile. And then I explained why we have the system we do (about which I can post later), and that while we don't mind people trying to log in, we just have an old-fashioned hope that they will learn of their admission through a big exciting packet in the mail, rather than a website--but that I understand there's a generation gap there. And finally, I explained how this year's new phenomenon of checking has led to some unforeseen consequences: namely, people calling us to say, "I logged in; am I admitted?," and relatedly, emailing us a lot to ask when they'll get their status check email. Both of those, particularly in a year where we're seeing an increase in applicants, have been absolutely crushing to our workload; we're actually processing apps more slowly, and making decisions more slowly, because of the increased work in these other areas.

And finally--I asked him to explain all this on TLS, which is where he told me he'd gotten the log-in idea in the first place. And so here we are.

This is my first time ever posting on TLS or similar sites, and I am hopeful that we can clear this up and I can get back to reading my apps and leaving all of you in peace. I'm off now to drive my children to various evening activities, but I'll check back later to see if other questions need answering!

(I have been advised to tell you all that I won't be monitoring my TLS message inbox. In other words, you'll be free of me after this.)


I wasn't sure it was possible, but this post made me even more excited about Mich. <33333333333333333

User avatar
thalassocrat
Posts: 488
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 8:07 pm

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby thalassocrat » Fri Dec 11, 2009 10:05 pm

emrose wrote:
Zearfoss wrote:Hello all--

Oy. I feel terrible about all the apparent anxiety I unintentionally engineered. In my telephone call with the original poster, I did indeed ask him to post some information, but I'm afraid a lot got lost in the translation. I hope this format works a little better, and that I am able to clear up some confusion.

First, and most importantly: I am not mad about people trying to log in! We are not tracking people. We are not penalizing people. Nothing untoward along those lines is occurring.

Now, some background: yesterday we received an email from an applicant telling us that he had tried to log into the site and had been successful for 20 minutes. He tried again, though, and could not log in. Was he, he wanted to know, admitted or not? well--he wasn't admitted. So if he had been able to log in, as he said, that would have indicated a serious problem with our site. I asked one member of my staff to get the specific details from him, and another member to confab with the IT staff and see what the story was. As a result of all this investigating, we learned that the candidate in question had actually tried to log in an extraordinary number of times--many, many times a day, every day for more than a month. We also learned that while a number of people had tried to log in, he had done so about 100 times more than anyone else--and that only a handful of people had tried to log in a number of times that struck us really unusual. But we didn't go piecing together who all those people were, nor did we have any interest in contacting them--we only wanted to respond to the original candidate. In any event, the upshot of the investigation was the IT staff's firm conviction that the site was working exactly as it should, and people who weren't admitted would not be able to log on.

So I called the candidate, and explained what I had learned. I also explained that the site only refreshed once a day, so multiple daily log-in attempts weren't worthwhile. And then I explained why we have the system we do (about which I can post later), and that while we don't mind people trying to log in, we just have an old-fashioned hope that they will learn of their admission through a big exciting packet in the mail, rather than a website--but that I understand there's a generation gap there. And finally, I explained how this year's new phenomenon of checking has led to some unforeseen consequences: namely, people calling us to say, "I logged in; am I admitted?," and relatedly, emailing us a lot to ask when they'll get their status check email. Both of those, particularly in a year where we're seeing an increase in applicants, have been absolutely crushing to our workload; we're actually processing apps more slowly, and making decisions more slowly, because of the increased work in these other areas.

And finally--I asked him to explain all this on TLS, which is where he told me he'd gotten the log-in idea in the first place. And so here we are.

This is my first time ever posting on TLS or similar sites, and I am hopeful that we can clear this up and I can get back to reading my apps and leaving all of you in peace. I'm off now to drive my children to various evening activities, but I'll check back later to see if other questions need answering!

(I have been advised to tell you all that I won't be monitoring my TLS message inbox. In other words, you'll be free of me after this.)


I wasn't sure it was possible, but this post made me even more excited about Mich. <33333333333333333


+1

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

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby APimpNamedSlickback » Fri Dec 11, 2009 10:07 pm

emrose wrote:
Zearfoss wrote:Hello all--

Oy. I feel terrible about all the apparent anxiety I unintentionally engineered. In my telephone call with the original poster, I did indeed ask him to post some information, but I'm afraid a lot got lost in the translation. I hope this format works a little better, and that I am able to clear up some confusion.

First, and most importantly: I am not mad about people trying to log in! We are not tracking people. We are not penalizing people. Nothing untoward along those lines is occurring.

Now, some background: yesterday we received an email from an applicant telling us that he had tried to log into the site and had been successful for 20 minutes. He tried again, though, and could not log in. Was he, he wanted to know, admitted or not? well--he wasn't admitted. So if he had been able to log in, as he said, that would have indicated a serious problem with our site. I asked one member of my staff to get the specific details from him, and another member to confab with the IT staff and see what the story was. As a result of all this investigating, we learned that the candidate in question had actually tried to log in an extraordinary number of times--many, many times a day, every day for more than a month. We also learned that while a number of people had tried to log in, he had done so about 100 times more than anyone else--and that only a handful of people had tried to log in a number of times that struck us really unusual. But we didn't go piecing together who all those people were, nor did we have any interest in contacting them--we only wanted to respond to the original candidate. In any event, the upshot of the investigation was the IT staff's firm conviction that the site was working exactly as it should, and people who weren't admitted would not be able to log on.

So I called the candidate, and explained what I had learned. I also explained that the site only refreshed once a day, so multiple daily log-in attempts weren't worthwhile. And then I explained why we have the system we do (about which I can post later), and that while we don't mind people trying to log in, we just have an old-fashioned hope that they will learn of their admission through a big exciting packet in the mail, rather than a website--but that I understand there's a generation gap there. And finally, I explained how this year's new phenomenon of checking has led to some unforeseen consequences: namely, people calling us to say, "I logged in; am I admitted?," and relatedly, emailing us a lot to ask when they'll get their status check email. Both of those, particularly in a year where we're seeing an increase in applicants, have been absolutely crushing to our workload; we're actually processing apps more slowly, and making decisions more slowly, because of the increased work in these other areas.

And finally--I asked him to explain all this on TLS, which is where he told me he'd gotten the log-in idea in the first place. And so here we are.

This is my first time ever posting on TLS or similar sites, and I am hopeful that we can clear this up and I can get back to reading my apps and leaving all of you in peace. I'm off now to drive my children to various evening activities, but I'll check back later to see if other questions need answering!

(I have been advised to tell you all that I won't be monitoring my TLS message inbox. In other words, you'll be free of me after this.)


I wasn't sure it was possible, but this post made me even more excited about Mich. <33333333333333333


I agree!
Last edited by APimpNamedSlickback on Fri Dec 11, 2009 10:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
NancyBotwin
Posts: 1085
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:43 pm

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby NancyBotwin » Fri Dec 11, 2009 10:42 pm

jayzon wrote:
thalassocrat wrote:
emrose wrote:
Zearfoss wrote:Hello all--

Oy. I feel terrible about all the apparent anxiety I unintentionally engineered. In my telephone call with the original poster, I did indeed ask him to post some information, but I'm afraid a lot got lost in the translation. I hope this format works a little better, and that I am able to clear up some confusion.

First, and most importantly: I am not mad about people trying to log in! We are not tracking people. We are not penalizing people. Nothing untoward along those lines is occurring.

Now, some background: yesterday we received an email from an applicant telling us that he had tried to log into the site and had been successful for 20 minutes. He tried again, though, and could not log in. Was he, he wanted to know, admitted or not? well--he wasn't admitted. So if he had been able to log in, as he said, that would have indicated a serious problem with our site. I asked one member of my staff to get the specific details from him, and another member to confab with the IT staff and see what the story was. As a result of all this investigating, we learned that the candidate in question had actually tried to log in an extraordinary number of times--many, many times a day, every day for more than a month. We also learned that while a number of people had tried to log in, he had done so about 100 times more than anyone else--and that only a handful of people had tried to log in a number of times that struck us really unusual. But we didn't go piecing together who all those people were, nor did we have any interest in contacting them--we only wanted to respond to the original candidate. In any event, the upshot of the investigation was the IT staff's firm conviction that the site was working exactly as it should, and people who weren't admitted would not be able to log on.

So I called the candidate, and explained what I had learned. I also explained that the site only refreshed once a day, so multiple daily log-in attempts weren't worthwhile. And then I explained why we have the system we do (about which I can post later), and that while we don't mind people trying to log in, we just have an old-fashioned hope that they will learn of their admission through a big exciting packet in the mail, rather than a website--but that I understand there's a generation gap there. And finally, I explained how this year's new phenomenon of checking has led to some unforeseen consequences: namely, people calling us to say, "I logged in; am I admitted?," and relatedly, emailing us a lot to ask when they'll get their status check email. Both of those, particularly in a year where we're seeing an increase in applicants, have been absolutely crushing to our workload; we're actually processing apps more slowly, and making decisions more slowly, because of the increased work in these other areas.

And finally--I asked him to explain all this on TLS, which is where he told me he'd gotten the log-in idea in the first place. And so here we are.

This is my first time ever posting on TLS or similar sites, and I am hopeful that we can clear this up and I can get back to reading my apps and leaving all of you in peace. I'm off now to drive my children to various evening activities, but I'll check back later to see if other questions need answering!

(I have been advised to tell you all that I won't be monitoring my TLS message inbox. In other words, you'll be free of me after this.)


I wasn't sure it was possible, but this post made me even more excited about Mich. <33333333333333333


+1


+2. I am even more excited to hope against all odds.


+eleventy billion! <3

06072010
Posts: 1468
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 2:30 pm

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby 06072010 » Fri Dec 11, 2009 10:50 pm

^^ gunner

User avatar
NancyBotwin
Posts: 1085
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 5:43 pm

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby NancyBotwin » Fri Dec 11, 2009 10:52 pm

PKSebben wrote:^^ gunner


:lol: I was actually referring to the hope against all odds part. I don't stand a chance, unfortunately. :oops:

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

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby 02082010 » Sat Dec 12, 2009 12:04 am

Wow.

Dean Z,

Did you happen to browse through this thread and see all the times I pleaded for you to admit me and said nothing but great things about Michigan?!?! Did you??? PLEASE ADMIT ME!!!!

THANKS,
hopefulundergrad

ankit
Posts: 226
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 7:48 am

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby ankit » Sat Dec 12, 2009 12:07 am

Just woke up in this part of the world and Wow!!.....that was some day!!

User avatar
Corsair
Posts: 3997
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 1981 12:25 am

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby Corsair » Sat Dec 12, 2009 2:10 am

..

06072010
Posts: 1468
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 2:30 pm

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby 06072010 » Sat Dec 12, 2009 2:36 am

Why limit yourself to just Michigan 0L? I'm a 3L, and I've drank the Michigan kool-aid.

GO BLUE!

Split5
Posts: 168
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:49 am

Re: michigan 2010 applicants

Postby Split5 » Sat Dec 12, 2009 3:02 am

Zearfoss wrote:Hello all--

Oy. I feel terrible about all the apparent anxiety I unintentionally engineered. In my telephone call with the original poster, I did indeed ask him to post some information, but I'm afraid a lot got lost in the translation. I hope this format works a little better, and that I am able to clear up some confusion.

First, and most importantly: I am not mad about people trying to log in! We are not tracking people. We are not penalizing people. Nothing untoward along those lines is occurring.

Now, some background: yesterday we received an email from an applicant telling us that he had tried to log into the site and had been successful for 20 minutes. He tried again, though, and could not log in. Was he, he wanted to know, admitted or not? well--he wasn't admitted. So if he had been able to log in, as he said, that would have indicated a serious problem with our site. I asked one member of my staff to get the specific details from him, and another member to confab with the IT staff and see what the story was. As a result of all this investigating, we learned that the candidate in question had actually tried to log in an extraordinary number of times--many, many times a day, every day for more than a month. We also learned that while a number of people had tried to log in, he had done so about 100 times more than anyone else--and that only a handful of people had tried to log in a number of times that struck us really unusual. But we didn't go piecing together who all those people were, nor did we have any interest in contacting them--we only wanted to respond to the original candidate. In any event, the upshot of the investigation was the IT staff's firm conviction that the site was working exactly as it should, and people who weren't admitted would not be able to log on.

So I called the candidate, and explained what I had learned. I also explained that the site only refreshed once a day, so multiple daily log-in attempts weren't worthwhile. And then I explained why we have the system we do (about which I can post later), and that while we don't mind people trying to log in, we just have an old-fashioned hope that they will learn of their admission through a big exciting packet in the mail, rather than a website--but that I understand there's a generation gap there. And finally, I explained how this year's new phenomenon of checking has led to some unforeseen consequences: namely, people calling us to say, "I logged in; am I admitted?," and relatedly, emailing us a lot to ask when they'll get their status check email. Both of those, particularly in a year where we're seeing an increase in applicants, have been absolutely crushing to our workload; we're actually processing apps more slowly, and making decisions more slowly, because of the increased work in these other areas.

And finally--I asked him to explain all this on TLS, which is where he told me he'd gotten the log-in idea in the first place. And so here we are.

This is my first time ever posting on TLS or similar sites, and I am hopeful that we can clear this up and I can get back to reading my apps and leaving all of you in peace. I'm off now to drive my children to various evening activities, but I'll check back later to see if other questions need answering!

(I have been advised to tell you all that I won't be monitoring my TLS message inbox. In other words, you'll be free of me after this.)


The site refreshes once a day...at what time?

An answer to that question would do wonders for our collective blood pressure and carpal tunnel :) Thanks again.




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Assasindowntheavenue, curry1, danid83, Exabot [Bot], hopeful applicant, jprath2, mav1993, mlp12, NotAGolfer, VapidP and 27 guests