3.48/180

Not sure where your numbers will get you? Dying to know where you stand? Come have your palms read by your fellow posters!
User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby romothesavior » Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:45 pm

paratactical wrote:Women are best when silent.


Finally, a woman who gets it!

Also, IBTL?

User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby paratactical » Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:47 pm

d34dluk3 wrote:To be fair, it's sad that you can't use the accepted nomenclature of your field of study without sounding like a douchebag.


If my engineer friends went around using tech speak all the time, I would want them to STFU. Professional language is for professional settings. It is not good for casual conversation because then you sound like a douchecanoe. Same goes for picking up girls.

romothesavior wrote:
paratactical wrote:Women are best when silent.


Finally, a woman who gets it!

Also, IBTL?


:lol:

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby romothesavior » Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:49 pm

rad law wrote:
romothesavior wrote:
Everything para has ever said


<3


Yall would make a great couple.


They just don't make girls as cool as Para in the midwest. Must be something in the water out east.

User avatar
straxen
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:39 am

Re: 3.48/180

Postby straxen » Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:49 pm

Realizing that I'm interjecting into a flame war to give my two cents:

Some people here are fixating waaay too much on this concept of "chance" of getting into a school at a given set of numbers. If you know 3.48, 180, and non-urm and that's ALL you know, then indeed there may be some slight chance of admission I'd say on the order of 5-15%. But OP clearly indicated that his or her softs were average to below average.

It's not like HYS put all the 3.48/180/Non-URM applicants into a bag draw 5% and say let's give admission to those people. You may have some chance there with extraordinary softs, but those are absent in OP's case (not to put down the OP, I was pretty much in the same category, just trying to get a reality check). Assuming a modicum of rationality, why on earth would HYS reject a sea of people with significantly better numbers and let OP in for the hell of it. I think the problem is that people with solid 3.6/3.7 GPAs are blinded by the 180 which they see as a magic bullet that will get you in anywhere and forget that the equation is different even a couple of GPA points lower.

Plain and simple, the application fee to at least YS is a waste of money, and the effort to complete the application is a waste of time, which is what the OP's question was. Out of the three, Harvard is the only one I'd even entertain the idea of throwing an app too and only with one of the best personal statements ever written.

User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby paratactical » Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:50 pm

romothesavior wrote:They just don't make girls as cool as Para in the midwest. Must be something in the water out east.


To be fair, I did grow up on a cattle farm in rural PA. It's not really midwest, but it's not also east coast either. Not sure how you'd say it. But growing up shoveling cow shit will keep you from getting a big ego.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby romothesavior » Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:55 pm

d34dluk3 wrote:To be fair, it's sad that you can't use the accepted nomenclature of your field of study without sounding like a douchebag.


The only reason anyone would ever use a term like that in casual conversation is to sound smart. That makes using it douchey.

User avatar
NayBoer
Posts: 1013
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 3:24 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby NayBoer » Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:57 pm

paratactical wrote:
romothesavior wrote:They just don't make girls as cool as Para in the midwest. Must be something in the water out east.


To be fair, I did grow up on a cattle farm in rural PA. It's not really midwest, but it's not also east coast either. Not sure how you'd say it. But growing up shoveling cow shit will keep you from getting a big ego.
For para:
Image

User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby paratactical » Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:58 pm

NayBoer wrote:
paratactical wrote:
romothesavior wrote:They just don't make girls as cool as Para in the midwest. Must be something in the water out east.


To be fair, I did grow up on a cattle farm in rural PA. It's not really midwest, but it's not also east coast either. Not sure how you'd say it. But growing up shoveling cow shit will keep you from getting a big ego.
For para:
Image


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
<3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
<3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
<3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
<3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3

User avatar
johnnyutah
Posts: 1709
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2010 6:00 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby johnnyutah » Fri Sep 17, 2010 2:59 pm

paratactical wrote:
romothesavior wrote:They just don't make girls as cool as Para in the midwest. Must be something in the water out east.


To be fair, I did grow up on a cattle farm in rural PA. It's not really midwest, but it's not also east coast either. Not sure how you'd say it. But growing up shoveling cow shit will keep you from getting a big ego.

Pennsyltucky FTW.

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby d34d9823 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 3:00 pm

romothesavior wrote:
d34dluk3 wrote:To be fair, it's sad that you can't use the accepted nomenclature of your field of study without sounding like a douchebag.


The only reason anyone would ever use a term like that in casual conversation is to sound smart. That makes using it douchey.

That's what's sad. Life would be so much cooler if it was socially acceptable to be sincere about academics.

User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby paratactical » Fri Sep 17, 2010 3:01 pm

d34dluk3 wrote:
romothesavior wrote:
d34dluk3 wrote:To be fair, it's sad that you can't use the accepted nomenclature of your field of study without sounding like a douchebag.


The only reason anyone would ever use a term like that in casual conversation is to sound smart. That makes using it douchey.

That's what's sad. Life would be so much cooler if it was socially acceptable to be sincere about academics.


But it isn't said sincerely, it's said to show off.

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby d34d9823 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 3:02 pm

paratactical wrote:But it isn't said sincerely, it's said to show off.

d34dluk3 wrote:To be fair, it's sad that you can't use the accepted nomenclature of your field of study without sounding like a douchebag.

Now we're going in circles.

User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby paratactical » Fri Sep 17, 2010 3:05 pm

d34dluk3 wrote:
paratactical wrote:But it isn't said sincerely, it's said to show off.

d34dluk3 wrote:To be fair, it's sad that you can't use the accepted nomenclature of your field of study without sounding like a douchebag.

Now we're going in circles.


Let me try to clarify:

If I was sitting with someone in a bar and we were having a conversation about a legal case and they used legal terminology, that would not be douchtastic because it's being done because the language is appropriate to the conversation. If I am talking with someone about what schools to apply to, or some girl I like and they start using legal terminology, that's douchtastic because it has fuck all do to with the conversation and is done to show off.

Using intelligent language in a conversation about a relevant topic = appropriate.
Using complex terminology in a simple conversation where someone just wants advice = douchtastic.

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby d34d9823 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 3:06 pm

paratactical wrote:If I was sitting with someone in a bar and we were having a conversation about a legal case and they used legal terminology, that would not be douchtastic because it's being done because the language is appropriate to the conversation. If I am talking with someone about what schools to apply to, or some girl I like and they start using legal terminology, that's douchtastic because it has fuck all do to with the conversation and is done to show off.

Using intelligent language in a conversation about a relevant topic = appropriate.
Using complex terminology in a simple conversation where someone just wants advice = douchtastic.

I know, I want everyone to be a polymath so that that would be normal.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18402
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby bk1 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 3:12 pm

d34dluk3 wrote:I know, I want everyone to be a polymath so that that would be normal.


Shit I'd be happy if the average person had at least two firing neurons.

User avatar
johnnyutah
Posts: 1709
Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2010 6:00 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby johnnyutah » Fri Sep 17, 2010 3:13 pm

d34dluk3 wrote:I know, I want everyone to be a polymath so that that would be normal.

You keep that deviant poly lifestyle to yourself.

User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby paratactical » Fri Sep 17, 2010 3:13 pm

d34dluk3 wrote:I know, I want everyone to be a polymath so that that would be normal.

Okay. I get it, but in my experience, the most polymathic people I've known are also those least likely to engage in deliberately talking over the heads of the other people around them.

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby d34d9823 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 3:16 pm

paratactical wrote:
d34dluk3 wrote:I know, I want everyone to be a polymath so that that would be normal.

Okay. I get it, but in my experience, the most polymathic people I've known are also those least likely to engage in deliberately talking over the heads of the other people around them.

That's what's cool. I've had a few circles of friends where people can randomly make lit jokes / physics references / econ puns and it's cool because (almost) everyone gets it, which makes it even funnier.

User avatar
NDPhil
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 6:30 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby NDPhil » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:04 pm

Putting aside the fact that romothesavior cannot even spell ceteris paribus, much less knows what it means...

If I was sitting with someone in a bar and we were having a conversation about a legal case and they used legal terminology, that would not be douchtastic because it's being done because the language is appropriate to the conversation. If I am talking with someone about what schools to apply to, or some girl I like and they start using legal terminology, that's douchtastic because it has fuck all do to with the conversation and is done to show off.

Using intelligent language in a conversation about a relevant topic = appropriate.
Using complex terminology in a simple conversation where someone just wants advice = douchtastic.


...it does not seem to me that "ceteris paribus" was used inappropriately. After all, this is a LAW SCHOOL forum where we discuss all things pertaining to LAW school. That's pretty different than talking with "some girl." Besides, I come across this phrase all the time. Maybe it doesn't carry the currency in common conversation that a term like "per se" does, but still I don't see how it is inappropriate to use even in some common conversation, and I certainly don't think its inappropriate to use it in a forum where law school is being discussed. Besides, the phrase isn't even unique to legal talk.

Paulocaster gave what looks like bad advice and it was pointed out by several people. That should be the end of it. I think d34dluk3 is probably on to something. If phrases like "ceteris paribus" cause such a raucous, then maybe those who get ruffled over them aren't as smart as they like to seem (or think they are). If it's that unnatural sounding to you in a law school forum, then it sounds like you're not too bright. Just go over to the bar with paratactical and have all the bland, ordinary, unintelligent conversations you like with the fabled "some girl."

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18402
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby bk1 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:09 pm

NDPhil wrote:...it does not seem to me that "ceteris paribus" was used inappropriately. After all, this is a LAW SCHOOL forum where we discuss all things pertaining to LAW school. That's pretty different than talking with "some girl." Besides, I come across this phrase all the time. Maybe it doesn't carry the currency in common conversation that a term like "per se" does, but still I don't see how it is inappropriate to use even in some common conversation, and I certainly don't think its inappropriate to use it in a forum where law school is being discussed. Besides, the phrase isn't even unique to legal talk.

Paulocaster gave what looks like bad advice and it was pointed out by several people. That should be the end of it. I think d34dluk3 is probably on to something. If phrases like "ceteris paribus" cause such a raucous, then maybe those who get ruffled over them aren't as smart as they like to seem (or think they are). If it's that unnatural sounding to you in a law school forum, then it sounds like you're not too bright. Just go over the bar with d34dluk3 and have all the bland, ordinary, unintelligent conversations you like with the fabled "some girl."


When people say ridiculously stupid things, they deserve ridicule and shame. This is the internet, not Miss Polly's kindergarten class.

Also, you do realize this subforum, and most of TLS in general, is geared towards law school applicants and not students? That makes a big difference in the kind of language used. But what para said is most apt, that you use different language in different situations. We are talking about admissions here, not briefing a case or reading a memo. Human beings who have the least sense of decency understand that you need to be able to shift your language depending on the context you are in, but it is idiots like the attacked poster who try and reinforce their image of superiority by using language just to show off.

User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby paratactical » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:10 pm

NDPhil wrote:If it's that unnatural sounding to you in a law school forum, then it sounds like you're not too bright. Just go over to the bar with paratactical and have all the bland, ordinary, unintelligent conversations you like with the fabled "some girl."


Oh man, this made my laugh more than anything else I've read today.

--ImageRemoved--

User avatar
NDPhil
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 6:30 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby NDPhil » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:11 pm

Oh man, this made my laugh more than anything else I've read today.


Since it's your life?

User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby paratactical » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:11 pm

NDPhil wrote:
Oh man, this made my laugh more than anything else I've read today.


Since it's your life?


And it's now or never?

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby d34d9823 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:12 pm

bk1 wrote:When people say ridiculously stupid things, they deserve ridicule and shame. This is the internet, not Miss Polly's kindergarten class.

Also, you do realize this subforum, and most of TLS in general, is geared towards law school applicants and not students? That makes a big difference in the kind of language used. But what para said is most apt, that you use different language in different situations. We are talking about admissions here, not briefing a case or reading a memo. Human beings who have the least sense of decency understand that you need to be able to shift your language depending on the context you are in, but it is idiots like the attacked poster who try and reinforce their image of superiority by using language just to show off.

Agree with your sentiment, but the ad homs take away from it IMO.

(Please don't call me pretentious for saying ad hom! :P)

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18402
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby bk1 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:12 pm

Para, this is a LAW SCHOOL forum. Memes are inappropriate here, Latin is the official language of top-douches.com.




Return to “What are my chances?”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: chargers21 and 1 guest