Top Law Schools

I went to the the law school forum hosted by LSAC in Houston recently and was surprised to find an (assistant?) dean of admissions of a t14 school with a terrible understanding of basic logic. Here is the dialogue between him/her and I. I obviously don't remember it verbatim, but am not distorting anything for the purpose of making my point. I'll name the person X.


Me: I read some student opinions online describing the law building and environment as sort of dull and gloomy. What do you think about it?


X tells me a bit about the law building, shows me a picture, and assures me that the inside has been redone with more "soft chairs, if that's what you're looking for."


Feeling somewhat patronized, ME: I'm not going to compromise rank for something like physical aesthetic, but I still think it's important.

X: Well, you're saying two different things now! What is it? You just said you don't care, now you say you care.. What is it?

Me: Uhh, I said I wouldn't compromise rank, but I still want to know what I'm walking into.

A later conversation, ME: So, I want to ask you another question. I'm not sure if I will actually like the study of law; did you have any worries about not enjoying it when you were considering law school, and how were your expectations met?

X: No, I didn't, and you should seriously reconsider law school if you're just going to assume you're not going to like it.

Me: What? I'm not assuming I'm not going to like it-- I'm just also not assuming that I am going to like it.

X: You're saying two different things again!

Me: Huh? How?...



Maybe this is understandable from the average person, but from a LAWYER?? And from a t14 admissions person??? I am uncomfortable with the idea that people like this will determine which schools I will get into. I know that it's primarily a numbers game, but how can I expect someone like this not to make terrible logic mistakes in judging the contents of my personal statement or addendum? I'm not trying to be provocative here. All I'm saying is, maybe we should all be safe and try to make our addenda and personal statements less vulnerable to misjudgments, perhaps getting them reviewed, not only by those we find intelligent with worthy advice, but also by your dumb and critical cousin Joe.


And yes, I understand that most of you will guess which school I am talking about. I wish it were otherwise, but can't really avoid it.

8spottedforester wrote:
Maybe this is understandable from the average person, but from a LAWYER?? And from a t14 admissions person??? I am uncomfortable with the idea that people like this will determine which schools I will get into. I know that it's primarily a numbers game, but how can I expect someone like this not to make terrible logic mistakes in judging the contents of my personal statement or addendum? I'm not trying to be provocative here. All I'm saying is, maybe we should all be safe and try to make our addenda and personal statements less vulnerable to misjudgments, perhaps getting them reviewed, not only by those we find intelligent with worthy advice, but also by your dumb and critical cousin Joe.


And yes, I understand that most of you will guess which school I am talking about. I wish it were otherwise, but can't really avoid it.

Well, you are saying two different things now. Are the numbers important or is the personal statement/addendum important? lol.

TTTennis wrote:

8spottedforester wrote:
Maybe this is understandable from the average person, but from a LAWYER?? And from a t14 admissions person??? I am uncomfortable with the idea that people like this will determine which schools I will get into. I know that it's primarily a numbers game, but how can I expect someone like this not to make terrible logic mistakes in judging the contents of my personal statement or addendum? I'm not trying to be provocative here. All I'm saying is, maybe we should all be safe and try to make our addenda and personal statements less vulnerable to misjudgments, perhaps getting them reviewed, not only by those we find intelligent with worthy advice, but also by your dumb and critical cousin Joe.


And yes, I understand that most of you will guess which school I am talking about. I wish it were otherwise, but can't really avoid it.

Well, you are saying two different things now. Are the numbers important or is the personal statement/addendum important? lol.

lmao


don't worry about it man, important people don't go to thinkgs like that... that guy was probably the school's janitor

kinda scary. sounds like you had pretty reasonable questions to me.

i don't think basic logic was the problem with that guy. the problem was that he was snarky and defensive. i sort of wonder about your tone when you asked, or what sort of day the guy was having, but he really may have simply been a dick.

Curious, which school? Duke?
I don't know which one of the T14 just had their law building redone.

I never went to one of these forums, but I can only imagine the stupid questions they get put their nerves on the edge, so give them a break. Also, this is one of the busiest, if not the busiest, year so far for applications.

8spottedforester wrote:
Me: I read some student opinions online describing the law building and environment as sort of dull and gloomy. What do you think about it?


X tells me a bit about the law building, shows me a picture, and assures me that the inside has been redone with more "soft chairs, if that's what you're looking for."


Feeling somewhat patronized, ME: I'm not going to compromise rank for something like physical aesthetic, but I still think it's important.

To be honest, his response to that first question seems reasonable to me, and I'm not sure why you felt patronized by it. You asked if the law building and environment was gloomy, he told you about the law building, said they had redone the inside a bit and there were more "comfy chairs." Did that not answer your question?

5ky wrote:

8spottedforester wrote:
Me: I read some student opinions online describing the law building and environment as sort of dull and gloomy. What do you think about it?


X tells me a bit about the law building, shows me a picture, and assures me that the inside has been redone with more "soft chairs, if that's what you're looking for."


Feeling somewhat patronized, ME: I'm not going to compromise rank for something like physical aesthetic, but I still think it's important.

To be honest, his response to that first question seems reasonable to me, and I'm not sure why you felt patronized by it. You asked if the law building and environment was gloomy, he told you about the law building, said they had redone the inside a bit and there were more "comfy chairs." Did that not answer your question?

Yes, it was answered. When did I say otherwise? Are you suggesting that it is impossible to answer a question patronizingly? How was it patronizing? Tone.

twert wrote:i don't think basic logic was the problem with that guy. the problem was that he was snarky and defensive. i sort of wonder about your tone when you asked, or what sort of day the guy was having, but he really may have simply been a dick.

I asked nicely. It is a school I am considering and the first table I went to. But you're right, X may have just been having a bad day, and took it out on me since I am a sensitive idiot who sees straight through bad logic. Seriously, I don't think a lawyer should make faulty assumptions just because he's frustrated. How would that fare in court? Or while having to review thousands of applications?

8spottedforester wrote:

twert wrote:i don't think basic logic was the problem with that guy. the problem was that he was snarky and defensive. i sort of wonder about your tone when you asked, or what sort of day the guy was having, but he really may have simply been a dick.

I asked nicely. It is a school I am considering and the first table I went to. But you're right, X may have just been having a bad day, and took it out on me since I am a sensitive idiot who sees straight through bad logic. Seriously, I don't think a lawyer should make faulty assumptions just because he's frustrated. How would that fare in court? Or while having to review thousands of applications?

i think you are being really demanding of a person, lawyer or not. perhaps if you were a little more charitable toward people you wouldn't get upset so easily

8spottedforester wrote:

twert wrote:i don't think basic logic was the problem with that guy. the problem was that he was snarky and defensive. i sort of wonder about your tone when you asked, or what sort of day the guy was having, but he really may have simply been a dick.

I asked nicely. It is a school I am considering and the first table I went to. But you're right, X may have just been having a bad day, and took it out on me since I am a sensitive idiot who sees straight through bad logic. Seriously, I don't think a lawyer should make faulty assumptions just because he's frustrated. How would that fare in court? Or while having to review thousands of applications?

First off, he's a lawyer and a human, not god. All humans are prone to using bad logic. Therefore, he's prone to using bad logic (take that LSAT). He probably wouldn't fare too well in court. Luckily for you, he's not your lawyer and just because you may go to a school he's associated with does not mean you too will start using faulty logic. Try not to use any faulty logic, or I guess in this case good logic, in your PS and you won't have to worry about it.

Verdict: It's one person, who really cares. Laugh at the situation, it's kinda funny.

You sound like an asshole. First thing out of your mouth to someone who took the time to go to a law-school fair is "Your school is fucking ugly"

twert wrote:

8spottedforester wrote:

twert wrote:i don't think basic logic was the problem with that guy. the problem was that he was snarky and defensive. i sort of wonder about your tone when you asked, or what sort of day the guy was having, but he really may have simply been a dick.

I asked nicely. It is a school I am considering and the first table I went to. But you're right, X may have just been having a bad day, and took it out on me since I am a sensitive idiot who sees straight through bad logic. Seriously, I don't think a lawyer should make faulty assumptions just because he's frustrated. How would that fare in court? Or while having to review thousands of applications?

i think you are being really demanding of a person, lawyer or not. perhaps if you were a little more charitable toward people you wouldn't get upset so easily

I'm not upset. I'll dilute my language so as to avoid accidentally expressing myself as upset. Maybe I should throw in some lol's now and then too. LOL. Oh, and I don't really expect much from people. I'm just suggesting that we should anticipate dicks (or the logically impaired ) in the admissions committees-- not that dicks (or the logically impaired) are bad people or anything.

Cupidity wrote:You sound like an asshole. First thing out of your mouth to someone who took the time to go to a law-school fair is "Your school is fucking ugly"

Actually he said he heard it was sort of dull and gloomy. A far cry from "f*cking ugly." You must be single on this lovely V-Day. Me too lol.

TTTennis wrote:

8spottedforester wrote:

twert wrote:i don't think basic logic was the problem with that guy. the problem was that he was snarky and defensive. i sort of wonder about your tone when you asked, or what sort of day the guy was having, but he really may have simply been a dick.

I asked nicely. It is a school I am considering and the first table I went to. But you're right, X may have just been having a bad day, and took it out on me since I am a sensitive idiot who sees straight through bad logic. Seriously, I don't think a lawyer should make faulty assumptions just because he's frustrated. How would that fare in court? Or while having to review thousands of applications?

First off, he's a lawyer and a human, not god. All humans are prone to using bad logic. Therefore, he's prone to using bad logic (take that LSAT). He probably wouldn't fare too well in court. Luckily for you, he's not your lawyer and just because you may go to a school he's associated with does not mean you too will start using faulty logic. Try not to use any faulty logic, or I guess in this case good logic, in your PS and you won't have to worry about it.

Verdict: It's one person, who really cares. Laugh at the situation, it's kinda funny.

Yeah, I hope it's one person; don't know though.

8spottedforester wrote:

twert wrote:

8spottedforester wrote:

twert wrote:i don't think basic logic was the problem with that guy. the problem was that he was snarky and defensive. i sort of wonder about your tone when you asked, or what sort of day the guy was having, but he really may have simply been a dick.

I asked nicely. It is a school I am considering and the first table I went to. But you're right, X may have just been having a bad day, and took it out on me since I am a sensitive idiot who sees straight through bad logic. Seriously, I don't think a lawyer should make faulty assumptions just because he's frustrated. How would that fare in court? Or while having to review thousands of applications?

i think you are being really demanding of a person, lawyer or not. perhaps if you were a little more charitable toward people you wouldn't get upset so easily

I'm not upset. I'll dilute my language so as to avoid accidentally expressing myself as upset. Maybe I should throw in some lol's now and then too. LOL. Oh, and I don't really expect much from people. I'm just suggesting that we should anticipate dicks (or the logically impaired ) in the admissions committees-- not that dicks (or the logically impaired) are bad people or anything.

Admissions people are not always lawyers. I have had interview with admissions people that were marketing and business majors in college.

8spottedforester wrote:

twert wrote:

8spottedforester wrote:

twert wrote:i don't think basic logic was the problem with that guy. the problem was that he was snarky and defensive. i sort of wonder about your tone when you asked, or what sort of day the guy was having, but he really may have simply been a dick.

I asked nicely. It is a school I am considering and the first table I went to. But you're right, X may have just been having a bad day, and took it out on me since I am a sensitive idiot who sees straight through bad logic. Seriously, I don't think a lawyer should make faulty assumptions just because he's frustrated. How would that fare in court? Or while having to review thousands of applications?

i think you are being really demanding of a person, lawyer or not. perhaps if you were a little more charitable toward people you wouldn't get upset so easily

I'm not upset. I'll dilute my language so as to avoid accidentally expressing myself as upset. Maybe I should throw in some lol's now and then too. LOL. Oh, and I don't really expect much from people. I'm just suggesting that we should anticipate dicks (or the logically impaired ) in the admissions committees-- not that dicks (or the logically impaired) are bad people or anything.

If you aren't anticipating dicks or logically impaired=LR Fail! Of course they are going to be dicks. How you would feel if you had to spend your days reading personal statements like many of those that appear on my site? And addenda that try and excuse a bunch of crap that they really don't even care about. I give them credit for not shooting themselves

We are definitely talking about Cornell.

Desert Fox wrote:We are definitely talking about Cornell.

Blatant anti-Cornell trolling

TTTennis wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:We are definitely talking about Cornell.

Blatant anti-Cornell trolling

Doll and Gloomy is a step up for Cornell, from excruciating and suicide causing.

Desert Fox wrote:

TTTennis wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:We are definitely talking about Cornell.

Blatant anti-Cornell trolling

Doll and Gloomy is a step up for Cornell, from excruciating and suicide causing.

LOL! Touche.

charlesjd wrote:

Admissions people are not always lawyers. I have had interview with admissions people that were marketing and business majors in college.

She said she is a lawyer and used to practice.

dull and gloomy would apply to stanford's building too, imo.

but yea, its cornell

Cupidity wrote:You sound like an asshole. First thing out of your mouth to someone who took the time to go to a law-school fair is "Your school is fucking ugly"

I am an asshole, but not because of what you misread in my post.

Omg. TICR. If my job consisted of reading whiny ps all day - and ensuring that an admitted student's miniscule gpa/lsat disparity from the median didn't negatively affect the class profile (lest my employers USNWR ranking fall), id end myself. This is a far worse fate than shitlaw employment post grad.