PSA: striking out means no offers, not "I only got cbs/offers that I think are beneath me" Forum

[cron1834]

But a lot of ppl are stressed bc they're strivers and stuff. Their lack of perspective rightfully rubs ppl in actual danger the wrong way.

[Anonymous User]

People without offers at the moment can be as stressed as they want

[MCFC]

Striking out in [particular market] seems like common, unobjectionable language.

[anyriotgirl]

People without offers at the moment can be as stressed as they want

what a brave post

[xael]

I guess I don't see the point of judging people (at least, judging people for writing things like in the u chi quotes)

[smaug]

I guess I don't see the point of judging people (at least, judging people for writing things like in the u chi quotes)

I guess it's more a question of whether you judge people for being painfully, obnoxiously naïve in other contexts, and whether you judge people for being tactless, because both of those things hold.

Idk maybe they had different reasons for wanting to be in a certain city or something. Not everyone is stressed because they are strivers and stuff.

If they have a city that they really want to be in, that's fair/it's fair to be disappointed about that. I think I've posted about it on here before, but I was iced out of two markets that I thought I might want to work in. (I think I would have made the same decisions in the end and happy where I am, but I empathize with people who end up in a different market than they planned on.) But also, let's be clear—it's one thing if you hate the city that your offer is in, or if you have strong personal reasons to want to be in a city. Wanting SF to have SF, or wanting DC to have DC is generally pretty silly. (Less silly if your dream is tech transactions or regulatory stuff respectively, obviously)

You can't control every aspect of legal hiring, including where you get offers (both geographically and in terms of the firms themselves). But, that's any job hunt. That's life. It sucks sometimes. It's fine to have hopes and plans and it's frustrating when they get fucked up. But, I don't really think that's what this thread is about (right riot?) and it's certainly not what I'm talking about when I talk about law school striverism.

Do people need to justify why they get anxious about things? No. I'm not entitled to an explanation of a seemingly tactless thing that someone does. But, if you think that there isn't a lot of astoundingly tactless, naïve, wasteful, self-important bullshit that goes on during this process, I'm astounded. And, generally, thinking that the job you got handed to you on a silver platter through the asinine legal hiring process is beneath you is all of those things.

[star fox]

I fail to see anyone complaining about jobs being beneath them

[smaug]

I fail to see anyone complaining about jobs being beneath them

(1) I just flatly disagree—I remember conversations about this. I'm not trying to say this is a thing that always happens on TLS, but was totally part of my job hunt experience.
(2) I think what the OP is directed at, and what I loathe with a burning passion, is when people continue to strive for more and more job offers because they are incapable of making decisions in life/just want the thrill of turning someone down.

I get that thrill—it's like when you can tell someone is really into you and you have power and you get to say "no thanks." But it's shitty. Maybe I'm projecting, but I think a lot of that goes on during job hunting.

#tearingnails

(sorry jbagelboy, you know I love you)

[anyriotgirl]

I can't remember specific examples to quote, but its happened. and I have heard it in conversations IRL and it is really not a good look.

this is a thread about entitlement, tactlessness, naivety and the fact that people really do go through OCI and fail completely

edit and yes smaug it is a direct attack on the "pokemoning" impulse

[El Pollito]

i remember this shrew going around telling people outside of various interviews (for the same firm) that it was her safety and she's not even sure why she's here HA HA

oci is the best

[El Pollito]

she'd also suck lots of LR cock as a 1L

at least she's going to die alone bc she can't find a man to tolerate her

[anyriotgirl]

i remember this shrew going around telling people outside of various interviews (for the same firm) that it was her safety and she's not even sure why she's here HA HA

oci is the best

I bet her grades were mediocre at best and this was an effort to make herself seem more prestigious to her peers

[El Pollito]

i remember this shrew going around telling people outside of various interviews (for the same firm) that it was her safety and she's not even sure why she's here HA HA

oci is the best

I bet her grades were mediocre at best and this was an effort to make herself seem more prestigious to her peers

nah she had good grades but not good enough for susman which she told everyone she was qualified for during OCI

[smaug]

i remember this shrew going around telling people outside of various interviews (for the same firm) that it was her safety and she's not even sure why she's here HA HA

oci is the best

I bet her grades were mediocre at best and this was an effort to make herself seem more prestigious to her peers

I remember having an awkward moment with someone where a friend was like oh, my friend has an offer at [firm I summered at], you should talk to him. Friend of friend didn't know that we were asked to reach out to people who had offers and talk to them about it. He wasn't on the list of people we were given. (because he lied about having an offer)

MORE OFFERS MEANS MORE PRESTIGE. GOTTA CATCH THEM ALL.

[El Pollito]

woow

[anyriotgirl]

damn lol

[xael]

I fail to see anyone complaining about jobs being beneath them

(1) I just flatly disagree—I remember conversations about this. I'm not trying to say this is a thing that always happens on TLS, but was totally part of my job hunt experience.
(2) I think what the OP is directed at, and what I loathe with a burning passion, is when people continue to strive for more and more job offers because they are incapable of making decisions in life/just want the thrill of turning someone down.

I get that thrill—it's like when you can tell someone is really into you and you have power and you get to say "no thanks." But it's shitty. Maybe I'm projecting, but I think a lot of that goes on during job hunting.

#tearingnails

(sorry jbagelboy, you know I love you)

I really don't think it is some thrill of getting to say "no thanks," whatever that means.

Law students went to law school because they are risk adverse. No one wants to make the wrong choice. So yeah, people are incapable of making decisions. I guess I don't see why that's a bad thing. I definitely don't see why worrying that you haven't gotten enough callbacks to get one offer, or that you haven't gotten callbacks in the city you want, is something to judge.

This is definitely a consider the source moment, though. or maybe I just surround myself with less obnoxious friends or something.

[lavarman84]

she'd also suck lots of LR cock as a 1L

at least she's going to die alone bc she can't find a man to tolerate her

Wait...is this a real thing?

Hypothetically, how does a person on LR stumble into these?

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

It's not those people. It's the ones who keep open, or even try for, offers they know they'd never take. If you are essentially sure you prefer Firm A to Firm B, doing anything besides releasing Firm B's offer promptly is a dick move.

[pancakes3]

I think there's a fair bit of over-villainization going on here, or at least overreaction to the typical LS douchebaggery that we're all accustomed to. These are eye-roll infractions, not pearl-clutching infractions.

[smaug]

(1) I'm not just talking about my friends. I love my friends and forgive them when they do toolish things/love them because they're going to be tools now and then. This is wider reaching than that and (I think) is endemic to top law schools. Maybe it doesn't bother you or your aren't clued in to the obnoxious things people do, though.

(2) Yeah, "risk averse" is one thing, but people also continue to do callbacks well after they've found what they want. It's one thing to keep trying for something you think is better. It's another to have a Cravath offer in hand, know you're going to take it, and to do the K&L Gates (sorry K&L Gates people, not trying to be mean, just sayin') callback anyway because, you know, they might really like the people there.

That's why I say naïve. If it isn't the sort of self-important, self-indulgent "power of no" thing above (which, again, I actually get and understand the appeal of) it's just kinda silly, because although I've seen people choose less prestigious firms over more prestigious ones, there are limits to that when it isn't informed by a very concrete practice area or geographic preference.

Put another way, if you're just going to ask TLS/your friends which offer you should take, you know the answer in advance, and you decide you need to ask anyway, it's kinda funny/foolish.

(3) It's not actually risk averse. People waste their time and energy that could be put to preparing for other interviews, or time that could be spent on second looks, or many other things. I know I disagree with TLS (and your class year in particular) on this, but more data isn't always better. Sometimes that extra datapoint is just noise. Striving for that tenth offer, if it's one you know you won't take, is bad data. Maybe it's because I'm more cynical than others, but I don't think there's a magical moment where you meet the law firm of dreams, and it's just love at first interview. Or, more accurately, even if you get that impression, I hope that people know rationally it's a silly thing to fixate on. Negative experiences are meaningful, but positive ones don't give you that much information. The bad is probably just hidden away. (and generally, the way you get a real impression about something is by going around recruiting and talking to people who actually work there who aren't afraid to say something negative)

[anyriotgirl]

I think there's a fair bit of over-villainization going on here, or at least overreaction to the typical LS douchebaggery that we're all accustomed to. These are eye-roll infractions, not pearl-clutching infractions.

this is just garden variety norm policing

tls has a long history of behavior modification through shame

[smaug]

I think there's a fair bit of over-villainization going on here, or at least overreaction to the typical LS douchebaggery that we're all accustomed to. These are eye-roll infractions, not pearl-clutching infractions.

I'm not pearl-clutching. I think it's tactless and funny. The fact that there's pushback to wanting to LOL @ law students is itself funny here.

C'mon. We know that tact generally isn't a strong suit of law students.

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

I think there's a fair bit of over-villainization going on here, or at least overreaction to the typical LS douchebaggery that we're all accustomed to. These are eye-roll infractions, not pearl-clutching infractions.

The difference is that this shit might actually be costing another student a job they want, and it's basically all for the offeree's ego.

[Tiago Splitter]

Striking out in [particular market] seems like common, unobjectionable language.

I thought this pretty well covered the original complaint.