Rarely talked about schools on TLS... Forum

[reasonabledoubt]

This thread is multi-dimensional genius. I started it to serve an underrepresented demand for topical discussion and consideration of lesser-discussed schools on TLS.

This attempt invariably (but not crucially) involved some lower tier schools relative to the radical ranking fundamentalists' USNWR bible. In any case, predictably, someone entered with a Yale vs. Valparaiso comparison. Then the sycophantic herd of the rank-obsessed overwhelmed any potential for rational discussion or exploration. A crude mathematical comparison of Yale vs. ND later followed with constants that would make Fermat facepalm himself in his grave.

Flame/trolling ensued and Matlock even borrowed one of my lines for use as his profile signature. This much, I appreciate. Here's what I think it going on: The thread became controversial because it was interpreted as a face-slap to conventional views which infuriated those who's self-worth relies desperately on being able to think they're superior to others because of the institution they are trying to associate themselves with. They also want to protect the comforting notion that they'll be more likely to secure better/higher-paid employment than others based on arbitrary rankings, etc.

Ultimately, this thread incited a violent "i'm better than you" reaction from the ranking sycophants because if they accepted the idea that it's not the school that defines you, but it's you that defines you, they'd be lost. Their entire self-worth is desperately tied to irrational notions and if any of the underlying premises are challenged, it almost short circuits their entire ideology. I think it's a defense mechanism; if the idea that a legal education is essentially what you make of it spread and the reliance on rankings, prestige or pretension faded, then all those who relied on being able to think they're better than someone who went to Valpo, for example, would have zero self-worth. Their vanity would have been stolen. All their comforting notions, lost. We can't let that happen, can we?

But, what do I know starting a thread to discuss lesser-discussed schools? I seem to have the glitch of investigating faculty more than rankings which randomly led to this prof: http://www.valpo.edu/law/faculty/rstith/index.php
But, then again, what does he know as well? He's just a Harvard, Berkeley, Yale M, JD & PhD that's hanging out at a TTtoilet. Surely all the 0L's here know far more than him. They read USNWR - biglaw 160k first year, here they come!

Most of you flames won't realize the genius of this thread for another 10 years.

[D. H2Oman]

But, what do I know starting a thread to discuss lesser-discussed schools? I seem to have the glitch of investigating faculty more than rankings which randomly led to this prof: http://www.valpo.edu/law/faculty/rstith/index.php
But, then again, what does he know as well? He's just a Harvard, Berkeley, Yale M, JD & PhD that's hanging out at a TTtoilet. Surely all the 0L's here know far more than him. They read USNWR - biglaw 160k first year, here they come!

Impressive in its complete irrelevance.

[reasonabledoubt]

But, what do I know starting a thread to discuss lesser-discussed schools? I seem to have the glitch of investigating faculty more than rankings which randomly led to this prof: http://www.valpo.edu/law/faculty/rstith/index.php
But, then again, what does he know as well? He's just a Harvard, Berkeley, Yale M, JD & PhD that's hanging out at a TTtoilet. Surely all the 0L's here know far more than him. They read USNWR - biglaw 160k first year, here they come!

Impressive in its complete irrelevance.

I'm impressed that you didn't strike the entire post out. You're growing, as a person.

[beef wellington]

OP, I respect your intentions here, but you do realize that the amount of T14 graduates teaching at TTTs in fact reflects the breadth of career paths available to T14 graduates? I haven't seen anyone argue that the teachers are worse at TTTs, only the job prospects.

[dood]

...

[oneforship]

[strike]This thread is multi-dimensional genius. I started it to serve an underrepresented demand for topical discussion and consideration of lesser-discussed schools on TLS.

This attempt invariably (but not crucially) involved some lower tier schools relative to the radical ranking fundamentalists' USNWR bible. In any case, predictably, someone entered with a Yale vs. Valparaiso comparison. Then the sycophantic herd of the rank-obsessed overwhelmed any potential for rational discussion or exploration. A crude mathematical comparison of Yale vs. ND later followed with constants that would make Fermat facepalm himself in his grave.

Flame/trolling ensued and Matlock even borrowed one of my lines for use as his profile signature. This much, I appreciate. Here's what I think it going on: The thread became controversial because it was interpreted as a face-slap to conventional views which infuriated those who's self-worth relies desperately on being able to think they're superior to others because of the institution they are trying to associate themselves with. They also want to protect the comforting notion that they'll be more likely to secure better/higher-paid employment than others based on arbitrary rankings, etc.

Ultimately, this thread incited a violent "i'm better than you" reaction from the ranking sycophants because if they accepted the idea that it's not the school that defines you, but it's you that defines you, they'd be lost. Their entire self-worth is desperately tied to irrational notions and if any of the underlying premises are challenged, it almost short circuits their entire ideology. I think it's a defense mechanism; if the idea that a legal education is essentially what you make of it spread and the reliance on rankings, prestige or pretension faded, then all those who relied on being able to think they're better than someone who went to Valpo, for example, would have zero self-worth. Their vanity would have been stolen. All their comforting notions, lost. We can't let that happen, can we?

But, what do I know starting a thread to discuss lesser-discussed schools? I seem to have the glitch of investigating faculty more than rankings which randomly led to this prof: http://www.valpo.edu/law/faculty/rstith/index.php
But, then again, what does he know as well? He's just a Harvard, Berkeley, Yale M, JD & PhD that's hanging out at a TTtoilet. Surely all the 0L's here know far more than him. They read USNWR - biglaw 160k first year, here they come!

Most of you flames won't realize the genius of this thread for another 10 years.[/strike]

seriously, stfu.

[kittenmittons]

[strike]This thread is multi-dimensional genius. I started it to serve an underrepresented demand for topical discussion and consideration of lesser-discussed schools on TLS.

This attempt invariably (but not crucially) involved some lower tier schools relative to the radical ranking fundamentalists' USNWR bible. In any case, predictably, someone entered with a Yale vs. Valparaiso comparison. Then the sycophantic herd of the rank-obsessed overwhelmed any potential for rational discussion or exploration. A crude mathematical comparison of Yale vs. ND later followed with constants that would make Fermat facepalm himself in his grave.

Flame/trolling ensued and Matlock even borrowed one of my lines for use as his profile signature. This much, I appreciate. Here's what I think it going on: The thread became controversial because it was interpreted as a face-slap to conventional views which infuriated those who's self-worth relies desperately on being able to think they're superior to others because of the institution they are trying to associate themselves with. They also want to protect the comforting notion that they'll be more likely to secure better/higher-paid employment than others based on arbitrary rankings, etc.

Ultimately, this thread incited a violent "i'm better than you" reaction from the ranking sycophants because if they accepted the idea that it's not the school that defines you, but it's you that defines you, they'd be lost. Their entire self-worth is desperately tied to irrational notions and if any of the underlying premises are challenged, it almost short circuits their entire ideology. I think it's a defense mechanism; if the idea that a legal education is essentially what you make of it spread and the reliance on rankings, prestige or pretension faded, then all those who relied on being able to think they're better than someone who went to Valpo, for example, would have zero self-worth. Their vanity would have been stolen. All their comforting notions, lost. We can't let that happen, can we?

But, what do I know starting a thread to discuss lesser-discussed schools? I seem to have the glitch of investigating faculty more than rankings which randomly led to this prof: http://www.valpo.edu/law/faculty/rstith/index.php
But, then again, what does he know as well? He's just a Harvard, Berkeley, Yale M, JD & PhD that's hanging out at a TTtoilet. Surely all the 0L's here know far more than him. They read USNWR - biglaw 160k first year, here they come!

Most of you flames won't realize the genius of this thread for another 10 years.[/strike]

seriously, stfu.

I never get tired of this shtick

[Kobe_Teeth]

You still never answered the question of whether you would take a full-ride at Valpo over Yale.

[oneforship]

[strike]This thread is multi-dimensional genius. I started it to serve an underrepresented demand for topical discussion and consideration of lesser-discussed schools on TLS.

This attempt invariably (but not crucially) involved some lower tier schools relative to the radical ranking fundamentalists' USNWR bible. In any case, predictably, someone entered with a Yale vs. Valparaiso comparison. Then the sycophantic herd of the rank-obsessed overwhelmed any potential for rational discussion or exploration. A crude mathematical comparison of Yale vs. ND later followed with constants that would make Fermat facepalm himself in his grave.

Flame/trolling ensued and Matlock even borrowed one of my lines for use as his profile signature. This much, I appreciate. Here's what I think it going on: The thread became controversial because it was interpreted as a face-slap to conventional views which infuriated those who's self-worth relies desperately on being able to think they're superior to others because of the institution they are trying to associate themselves with. They also want to protect the comforting notion that they'll be more likely to secure better/higher-paid employment than others based on arbitrary rankings, etc.

Ultimately, this thread incited a violent "i'm better than you" reaction from the ranking sycophants because if they accepted the idea that it's not the school that defines you, but it's you that defines you, they'd be lost. Their entire self-worth is desperately tied to irrational notions and if any of the underlying premises are challenged, it almost short circuits their entire ideology. I think it's a defense mechanism; if the idea that a legal education is essentially what you make of it spread and the reliance on rankings, prestige or pretension faded, then all those who relied on being able to think they're better than someone who went to Valpo, for example, would have zero self-worth. Their vanity would have been stolen. All their comforting notions, lost. We can't let that happen, can we?

But, what do I know starting a thread to discuss lesser-discussed schools? I seem to have the glitch of investigating faculty more than rankings which randomly led to this prof: http://www.valpo.edu/law/faculty/rstith/index.php
But, then again, what does he know as well? He's just a Harvard, Berkeley, Yale M, JD & PhD that's hanging out at a TTtoilet. Surely all the 0L's here know far more than him. They read USNWR - biglaw 160k first year, here they come!

Most of you flames won't realize the genius of this thread for another 10 years.[/strike]

seriously, stfu.

I never get tired of this shtick

Agreed.

[Kobe_Teeth]

I think it's worth talking about.... T-14 does not = instajob nor does it necessarily mean (a) better education (b) better long-term income potential (c) better lawyer (d) better anything, really.

In a recession, people, firms, etc, are looking for bargains.... "undervalued assets," so to speak. Lower tier grads might be considered undervalued assets. They also might consider the fact that a lower tier grad might be more likely to stick around for the long term as opposed to the prestige-obsessed top-tier grad who might skip out on the firm as soon as the economy recovers and he/she can sneak into biglaw.

[/quote]

This is where you screwed up your own thread.

Starting a thread discussing T2 and lower schools WAS a decent idea. However, most people on a board called top-law-schools are probably not overly concerned with the subject. Discussing a specific institution you are interested in or bargain schools in a specific region might have been a better idea though.

The claim above that T-14 does not guarantee anything that can't be had at a TTTT is technically true. However, you have to realize that the A-D you discuss sounds silly in regards to Yale or UChicago vs Valpo (the institution you brought up) or even ND vs Valpo etc.

The undervalued asset argument is terrible. Most firms have starting salaries, so even if the prospective lawyer is "undervalued" from his TTTT it still does not mean he's a bargain for that company to hire. That seems to be the argument you are implying.

Another thing, all of your arguments are haphazard and unclear, such as the aforementioned. You constantly claim "RC fail" when really i think its a "Writing w/ Clarity Fail."

Lastly, I'm going to a Tier-2 and am excited. However, the claims that you make about lower-ranked institutions are stupid even to other TLS-ers who don't have the best numbers aren't headed to the t-14. It seems like you're in the Chicago market, if you want to discuss Loyola, Kent, DePaul, NIU, Valpo, UIUC, Iowa, WI and other non-T14 options, I'm probably your guy. However, you're such an idiot it makes me embarrassed that I could go to a school with someone like you.

[reasonabledoubt]

OP, I respect your intentions here, but you do realize that the amount of T14 graduates teaching at TTTs in fact reflects the breadth of career paths available to T14 graduates? I haven't seen anyone argue that the teachers are worse at TTTs, only the job prospects.

Yes, and do you also realize the flame-war began when someone made the Yale vs. Valpo comparison which wasn't the purpose of this thread. Taking into consideration the actual title and premise of this thread, what exactly ARE people arguing here? If you don't want to discuss lesser-known/discussed under-ranked schools throughout the US, then leave and don't participate in this thread. Simple.

[reasonabledoubt]

Don't worry Kobe, you're going to DePaul, I got into IU.

[beef wellington]

Yeah I guess I have no idea what's being argued here.

[Kobe_Teeth]

I think it's worth talking about.... T-14 does not = instajob nor does it necessarily mean (a) better education (b) better long-term income potential (c) better lawyer (d) better anything, really.

In a recession, people, firms, etc, are looking for bargains.... "undervalued assets," so to speak. Lower tier grads might be considered undervalued assets. They also might consider the fact that a lower tier grad might be more likely to stick around for the long term as opposed to the prestige-obsessed top-tier grad who might skip out on the firm as soon as the economy recovers and he/she can sneak into biglaw.

This is where you screwed up your own thread.

Starting a thread discussing T2 and lower schools WAS a decent idea. However, most people on a board called top-law-schools are probably not overly concerned with the subject. Discussing a specific institution you are interested in or bargain schools in a specific region might have been a better idea though.

The claim above that T-14 does not guarantee anything that can't be had at a TTTT is technically true. However, you have to realize that the A-D you discuss sounds silly in regards to Yale or UChicago vs Valpo (the institution you brought up) or even ND vs Valpo etc.

The undervalued asset argument is terrible. Most firms have starting salaries, so even if the prospective lawyer is "undervalued" from his TTTT it still does not mean he's a bargain for that company to hire. That seems to be the argument you are implying.

Another thing, all of your arguments are haphazard and unclear, such as the aforementioned. You constantly claim "RC fail" when really i think its a "Writing w/ Clarity Fail."

Lastly, I'm going to a Tier-2 and am excited. However, the claims that you make about lower-ranked institutions are stupid even to other TLS-ers who don't have the best numbers aren't headed to the t-14. It seems like you're in the Chicago market, if you want to discuss Loyola, Kent, DePaul, NIU, Valpo, UIUC, Iowa, WI and other non-T14 options, I'm probably your guy. However, you're such an idiot it makes me embarrassed that I could go to a school with someone like you.

Don't worry, you're going to DePaul, I got into IU.[/quote]

Congratulations.

However, you realize your attitude there just totally undermined everything you've been arguing in your thread.

(PS i'm still waiting on my IU app...so lets wait to get cocky...idiot)

[D. H2Oman]

[strike]Don't worry Kobe, you're going to DePaul, I got into IU[/strike]I'm not very good at bragging.

[reasonabledoubt]

I think it's worth talking about.... T-14 does not = instajob nor does it necessarily mean (a) better education (b) better long-term income potential (c) better lawyer (d) better anything, really.

In a recession, people, firms, etc, are looking for bargains.... "undervalued assets," so to speak. Lower tier grads might be considered undervalued assets. They also might consider the fact that a lower tier grad might be more likely to stick around for the long term as opposed to the prestige-obsessed top-tier grad who might skip out on the firm as soon as the economy recovers and he/she can sneak into biglaw.

This is where you screwed up your own thread.

Starting a thread discussing T2 and lower schools WAS a decent idea. However, most people on a board called top-law-schools are probably not overly concerned with the subject. Discussing a specific institution you are interested in or bargain schools in a specific region might have been a better idea though.

The claim above that T-14 does not guarantee anything that can't be had at a TTTT is technically true. However, you have to realize that the A-D you discuss sounds silly in regards to Yale or UChicago vs Valpo (the institution you brought up) or even ND vs Valpo etc.

The undervalued asset argument is terrible. Most firms have starting salaries, so even if the prospective lawyer is "undervalued" from his TTTT it still does not mean he's a bargain for that company to hire. That seems to be the argument you are implying.

Another thing, all of your arguments are haphazard and unclear, such as the aforementioned. You constantly claim "RC fail" when really i think its a "Writing w/ Clarity Fail."

Lastly, I'm going to a Tier-2 and am excited. However, the claims that you make about lower-ranked institutions are stupid even to other TLS-ers who don't have the best numbers aren't headed to the t-14. It seems like you're in the Chicago market, if you want to discuss Loyola, Kent, DePaul, NIU, Valpo, UIUC, Iowa, WI and other non-T14 options, I'm probably your guy. However, you're such an idiot it makes me embarrassed that I could go to a school with someone like you.

Don't worry, you're going to DePaul, I got into IU.

Congratulations.

However, you realize your attitude there just totally undermined everything you've been arguing in your thread.

(PS i'm still waiting on my IU app...so lets wait to get cocky...idiot)[/quote]

What a insufferable hypocrite you are.... "you're such an idiot it makes me embarrased that I could go to a school with someone like you." That's what YOU said. Then, I defend myself and ensure you that you won't have to worry about that, and you claim i've undermined what I've been arguing about? Lol.

[JustDude]

This thread is multi-dimensional genius.

This thread may be not. But you, certainly are.

I started it to serve an underrepresented demand for topical discussion and consideration of lesser-discussed schools on TLS.

"Under-represented demand". New type of underepresentation.

This attempt invariably (but not crucially) involved some lower tier schools relative to the radical ranking fundamentalists' USNWR bible.

I disagree. USBWR are not radical fundamentalists. They dont force thier views on anyone else. You are free touse other ranking systems. There is alternative at cooley website.

In any case, predictably, someone entered with a Yale vs. Valparaiso comparison.

If it were predictable, then why are you bitching??

Then the sycophantic herd of the rank-obsessed overwhelmed any potential for rational discussion or exploration.

Exploration you say?

A crude mathematical comparison of Yale vs. ND later followed with constants that would make Fermat facepalm himself in his grave.

I can assure you Fermat wouldnt care. Like at all!!

Flame/trolling ensued and Matlock even borrowed one of my lines for use as his profile signature.

While I congratulate you on that, it still doesnt give much credibility

This much, I appreciate. Here's what I think it going on: The thread became controversial because it was interpreted as a face-slap to conventional views which infuriated those who's self-worth relies desperately on being able to think they're superior to others because of the institution they are trying to associate themselves with.

What is "who's".?. Infuriated or Amused? And your school self-worth apparently relies on the fact that GWBush visited you 5 years ago??? Dude, even being a Bush supporter, I am still disturbed

They also want to protect the comforting notion that they'll be more likely to secure better/higher-paid employment than others based on arbitrary rankings, etc.

Honestly, who is here protecting conforming notions???. Huh???..

Ultimately, this thread incited a violent "i'm better than you" reaction from the ranking sycophants because if they accepted the idea that it's not the school that defines you, but it's you that defines you, they'd be lost.

Then why did you start with "Poor man Harvard"???

Their entire self-worth is desperately tied to irrational notions and if any of the underlying premises are challenged, it almost short circuits their entire ideology. I think it's a defense mechanism;

Your response is the defense mechanism.

if the idea that a legal education is essentially what you make of it spread and the reliance on rankings, prestige or pretension faded, then all those who relied on being able to think they're better than someone who went to Valpo, for example, would have zero self-worth. Their vanity would have been stolen. All their comforting notions, lost. We can't let that happen, can we?

No we cannot

But, what do I know starting a thread to discuss lesser-discussed schools? I seem to have the glitch of investigating faculty more than rankings which randomly led to this prof: http://www.valpo.edu/law/faculty/rstith/index.php
But, then again, what does he know as well? He's just a Harvard, Berkeley, Yale M, JD & PhD that's hanging out at a TTtoilet.

Thats funny. You bash ranking and then defend your schools by citing top ranking schools thier faculty graduated from. Plus remember, faculty is a car, but racer is a student. If you put retard in a formula 1 ferrari, he still will lose.

Plus most of the colleges have faculty from top 5 schools. Its kinda given. And why is it surprising that Yale JD would pick up a teaching job, where he makes 300K and teaches 5-10 hours a week, and spends the rest for hi "researxch" and writing papers. Are you saying it too low for Yale grad???

Surely all the 0L's here know far more than him. They read USNWR - biglaw 160k first year, here they come!

I didnt see any 0L having disagreements with this guy. They dont even disagree with you. They just kinda laugh at you.

Most of you flames won't realize the genius of this thread for another 10 years.

In my case - never

[JusticeHarlan]

ITT: Someone uses the T-14 education of a professor at Valpo to prove that Valpo is comparable to the T14. Good Lord, what excellent trolling. Never seen its like before. Good thing that professor didn't take your advice and turn down Yale for a T4, otherwise you couldn't make your argument that a T4 is just as good as Yale.

[vanwinkle]

ITT: Someone uses the T-14 education of a professor at Valpo to prove that Valpo is comparable to the T14. Good Lord, what excellent trolling. Never seen its like before. Good thing that professor didn't take your advice and turn down Yale for a T4, otherwise you couldn't make your argument that a T4 is just as good as Yale.

Bahahahaha.

[Kobe_Teeth]

What a insufferable hypocrite you are.... "you're such an idiot it makes me embarrased that I could go to a school with someone like you." That's what YOU said. Then, I defend myself and ensure you that you won't have to worry about that, and you claim i've undermined what I've been arguing about? Lol.

You have been arguing against prestige whores for the entirety of this thread and saying that prestige has nothing to do with quality.

I am arguing that I am excited about law school at wherever I go, except would be embarrassed to attend school with you, a moron.

You then put down a possible school I might attend and bragged about your higher-ranked more prestigious school.

I said "congratulations" but pointed out the connotation behind your IU-B comment undermined your original point in starting this thread.

You then tried to play it off as not bragging about prestige but merely pointing out we wouldn't be at the same institution.

Nothing hypocritical about it, you just can't read, or write.

[reasonabledoubt]

ITT: Someone uses the T-14 education of a professor at Valpo to prove that Valpo is comparable to the T14. Good Lord, what excellent trolling. Never seen its like before. Good thing that professor didn't take your advice and turn down Yale for a T4, otherwise you couldn't make your argument that a T4 is just as good as Yale.

With all due respect, you are deluded. Show me where I claimed that Valpo was comparable to Yale or any other T-14. Deduction fail. I thought it was absurd to introduce the Yale vs. Valpo argument, as you'll find if you scroll up and backwards through several other of the pages ITT. I was simply trying to defend the right to develop a thread about lesser-known schools before the trolling ensued by rank sychophants. For observation in thier natural habitat, refer to the threads where they spend pages upon pages arranging 14 capitalized letters in hundreds of different ways. That's smart.

[oneforship]

ITT: Someone uses the T-14 education of a professor at Valpo to prove that Valpo is comparable to the T14. Good Lord, what excellent trolling. Never seen its like before. Good thing that professor didn't take your advice and turn down Yale for a T4, otherwise you couldn't make your argument that a T4 is just as good as Yale.

[strike]With all due respect, you are deluded. Show me where I claimed that Valpo was comparable to Yale or any other T-14. Deduction fail. I thought it was absurd to introduce the Yale vs. Valpo argument, as you'll find if you scroll up and backwards through several other of the pages ITT. I was simply trying to defend the right to develop a thread about lesser-known schools before the trolling ensued by rank sychophants. For observation in thier natural habitat, refer to the threads where they spend pages upon pages arranging 14 capitalized letters in hundreds of different ways. That's smart.[/strike]

I'll give you credit: you sure are persistent.

[Kobe_Teeth]

ITT: Someone uses the T-14 education of a professor at Valpo to prove that Valpo is comparable to the T14. Good Lord, what excellent trolling. Never seen its like before. Good thing that professor didn't take your advice and turn down Yale for a T4, otherwise you couldn't make your argument that a T4 is just as good as Yale.

I know, it almost seems as if OP is a clever spinner of logical fallacy threads but really he's just an idiot.

[Kobe_Teeth]

I think it's worth talking about.... T-14 does not = instajob nor does it necessarily mean (a) better education (b) better long-term income potential (c) better lawyer (d) better anything, really.

In a recession, people, firms, etc, are looking for bargains.... "undervalued assets," so to speak. Lower tier grads might be considered undervalued assets. They also might consider the fact that a lower tier grad might be more likely to stick around for the long term as opposed to the prestige-obsessed top-tier grad who might skip out on the firm as soon as the economy recovers and he/she can sneak into biglaw.

Again, I was kind enough to point out to you where you left yourself open for the Yale v. Valpo tangent.

[Kobe_Teeth]

I think it's worth talking about.... T-14 does not = instajob nor does it necessarily mean (a) better education (b) better long-term income potential (c) better lawyer (d) better anything, really.

In a recession, people, firms, etc, are looking for bargains.... "undervalued assets," so to speak. Lower tier grads might be considered undervalued assets. They also might consider the fact that a lower tier grad might be more likely to stick around for the long term as opposed to the prestige-obsessed top-tier grad who might skip out on the firm as soon as the economy recovers and he/she can sneak into biglaw.

This is where you screwed up your own thread.

Starting a thread discussing T2 and lower schools WAS a decent idea. However, most people on a board called top-law-schools are probably not overly concerned with the subject. Discussing a specific institution you are interested in or bargain schools in a specific region might have been a better idea though.

The claim above that T-14 does not guarantee anything that can't be had at a TTTT is technically true. However, you have to realize that the A-D you discuss sounds silly in regards to Yale or UChicago vs Valpo (the institution you brought up) or even ND vs Valpo etc.

The undervalued asset argument is terrible. Most firms have starting salaries, so even if the prospective lawyer is "undervalued" from his TTTT it still does not mean he's a bargain for that company to hire. That seems to be the argument you are implying.

Another thing, all of your arguments are haphazard and unclear, such as the aforementioned. You constantly claim "RC fail" when really i think its a "Writing w/ Clarity Fail."
[/quote]

I then kindly explained it to you.