"Third Tier Reality" Website? Forum

[Gail]

It's kind of repetitive. "School x says 98% graduates found jobs, but only 40% responded! Tuition costs $30,000 a year!" *rinse, repeat*

He does go a overboard. Everything from his images, tone to even his anti-capitalist avatar make him questionable.

I like his conditions one should satisfy before going to school, though: 1) You've got connections that will help you get a job, 2) you understand the risks of law school, 3) you're going to a top8 school, although I think top14 is better accurate.

Check. Check. Ugh. Cornell. Shit...

[mewalke1]

To me, these kinds of posts (or in this case, entire websites) can almost be counterproductive. Obviously, the message needs to get out that, for a ton of people, law school is a bad investment. However, the target audience is the people who got into these schools and are seriously considering attending them. When you talk about what a festering pile of dung each school is, I think a lot of people take that personally. These are the schools in their intellectual range, and when you use that kind of nasty language, people are going to see that as nothing more than someone who must have gotten into a better school and therefore think they have the right to talk down to anyone who didn't get into the schools they got into (like adding GULC to the list comes across as snobbish). I think that's why there's such a push against the "elitism" of TLS; it's not the message that people object to, it's the way it's presented. Telling people that they shouldn't go to a non-T14 school without lots of scholarship money, and a good idea that where they go will determine where they practice, is very good. It's what people need to hear. But with the way some people come across, it just sounds like a bunch of people who got 170+ on their LSAT and want to tell other people how much they suck for not going to an "elite" school.


It's kind of strange to me that a group of future lawyers don't understand how it's not necessarily what you say, but how you say it that matters. It's fantastic to tell someone considering a TTT about the realities of the money and time they'll lose to pursuit a JD that most likely won't yield meaningful job prospects and they should seriously reconsider law school in general. It's another thing to tell someone that the law school they're considering is a festering pile of shit and is worthless. People may see that less as a criticism of the law school and more of a criticism of them as a candidate. Just my two cents though.

I agree with what you wrote. But I think maybe he is a graduate of a TTT school and has an axe to grind. I don't think he would spent that kind of time and energy to piss on people he thought were stupider than him.

[lovejopd]

Oops...not great images to have a dinner with

I was surprised that Georgetown was one of the lists...

[JCFindley]

To me, these kinds of posts (or in this case, entire websites) can almost be counterproductive. Obviously, the message needs to get out that, for a ton of people, law school is a bad investment. However, the target audience is the people who got into these schools and are seriously considering attending them. When you talk about what a festering pile of dung each school is, I think a lot of people take that personally. These are the schools in their intellectual range, and when you use that kind of nasty language, people are going to see that as nothing more than someone who must have gotten into a better school and therefore think they have the right to talk down to anyone who didn't get into the schools they got into (like adding GULC to the list comes across as snobbish). I think that's why there's such a push against the "elitism" of TLS; it's not the message that people object to, it's the way it's presented. Telling people that they shouldn't go to a non-T14 school without lots of scholarship money, and a good idea that where they go will determine where they practice, is very good. It's what people need to hear. But with the way some people come across, it just sounds like a bunch of people who got 170+ on their LSAT and want to tell other people how much they suck for not going to an "elite" school.

It's kind of strange to me that a group of future lawyers don't understand how it's not necessarily what you say, but how you say it that matters. It's fantastic to tell someone considering a TTT about the realities of the money and time they'll lose to pursuit a JD that most likely won't yield meaningful job prospects and they should seriously reconsider law school in general. It's another thing to tell someone that the law school they're considering is a festering pile of shit and is worthless. People may see that less as a criticism of the law school and more of a criticism of them as a candidate. Just my two cents though.

One of the most insightful posts I have seen on here..... Bravo.

[briviere]

To me, these kinds of posts (or in this case, entire websites) can almost be counterproductive. Obviously, the message needs to get out that, for a ton of people, law school is a bad investment. However, the target audience is the people who got into these schools and are seriously considering attending them. When you talk about what a festering pile of dung each school is, I think a lot of people take that personally. These are the schools in their intellectual range, and when you use that kind of nasty language, people are going to see that as nothing more than someone who must have gotten into a better school and therefore think they have the right to talk down to anyone who didn't get into the schools they got into (like adding GULC to the list comes across as snobbish). I think that's why there's such a push against the "elitism" of TLS; it's not the message that people object to, it's the way it's presented. Telling people that they shouldn't go to a non-T14 school without lots of scholarship money, and a good idea that where they go will determine where they practice, is very good. It's what people need to hear. But with the way some people come across, it just sounds like a bunch of people who got 170+ on their LSAT and want to tell other people how much they suck for not going to an "elite" school.

It's kind of strange to me that a group of future lawyers don't understand how it's not necessarily what you say, but how you say it that matters. It's fantastic to tell someone considering a TTT about the realities of the money and time they'll lose to pursuit a JD that most likely won't yield meaningful job prospects and they should seriously reconsider law school in general. It's another thing to tell someone that the law school they're considering is a festering pile of shit and is worthless. People may see that less as a criticism of the law school and more of a criticism of them as a candidate. Just my two cents though.

One of the most insightful posts I have seen on here..... Bravo.

1. Nando and his site have been discussed ad-nauseum on TLS, there are probably some megathreads from a few years ago where he defends himself and his schtick.

2. Although you might not agree with his delivery, the stats he reports are the only important part of any of his posts. If they are correct (and accurately characterized) perspective law students should be sophisticated enough as consumers to separate the valuable info from the chaff.

3. As many have said before me, it's call Top law schools for a reason, douchebaggery comes with the territory.


born and bred for success and achievement!

[PaulKriske]

It's kind of strange to me that a group of future lawyers don't understand how it's not necessarily what you say, but how you say it that matters.

*insert assburgers meme here*

[Mad Hatter]

The message is commendable, but his delivery and pictures of feces are disgusting (and frankly undermine his credibility in the eyes of the very people he's trying to convince). Also, GULC does NOT belong on that list

^
(goes to GULC)

And yeah, GULC does deserve to be on that list because it takes in 650 students per class, of which 200 get big law, and still charge 50k+ because they can grab the borderline T14 prestige-whore and "I want to be a politician" crowds.

[DerekTokaz]

GULC?

Yeah, GULC.

644 grads in 2011. 35 unemployed-seeking, 106 in jobs either short term or part time, 84 jobs funded by the school.

I don't think you can say out of hand that it's a bad school, but rather that you should be very careful if you're considering going here at sticker price. Full debt financing will put you in the hole about $260,000.

[TMC116]

His all-caps warning at the top of each page seems odd. "Don't go to law school unless (1) you go to a top 8 school (2)...

Top 8?

[westinghouse60]

Personally I think it's kind of shitty (get it?) he attacks schools like Nebraska, for example. They're charging $12-13k per year for in state students and average graduate debt is $49k, which seems pretty reasonable. The school isn't making some huge profit margin by charging 37k and ripping off students like Cooley etc, yet he attacks them like they are. States like Nebraska still have need for lawyers, and opening up 1 public law school in the state and keeping tuition/enrollment limited and not pretending the school is a biglaw feeder is pretty responsible.

Disclaimer: I don't go to Nebraska

Edit: I guess the fact they have a space law program is kind of lulz worthy though

[DerekTokaz]

Edit: I guess the fact they have a space law program is kind of lulz worthy though

...I've done some space law. Transfer of comm satellite stuff.