Top Law Schools

I saw this:
--LinkRemoved--

Look at the exchange which begins on November 12th, 2005 7:31 PM

Is this the exception, or is this kind of attitude the rule in real-life law firms? I know that online anonymity does wonders to one's personality, and so people post without concern or respect - but this is frightening.

Looking at the innocent nature of the first few posts and responses by Ken on TLS, I thought that this was more of a 2008-2010 thing, once TLS became a big website with thousands of users, but those AutoAdmit are from 2005. If Ken said half the things he said in the first year or so of his presence on this website, he'd be called all types of names on this forum by now. He used to give great advice on here, but I'm not surprised that he never ever shows up here - he'd be driven away although this is his website!

Anonymous User wrote:So I'm a pretty content, yet ambitious, laidback, yet energetic man, with a wonderful wife and an overall happy family. I like studying the law, enjoyed my summer work which was law-related, and I would love to be in a position in the distant future where I'm trying cases before juries, and arguing before appellate courts - this involves a long and successful career in big law, but I welcome that challenge. I'm at one of the top national schools, with a good academic record, and callbacks from several nationwide firms representing some of the biggest and best global companies.

I enjoy the company of like-minded driven people, and I'm a pretty positive, upbeat person who is very supportive of his friends and colleagues during good and bad times. If I had to pick an athlete for my kids to emulate, it'd probably be Steve Nash, because he's a true team player with seemingly no ego.

Then I saw this:
--LinkRemoved--

Is this the exception, or is this kind of attitude the rule in real-life law firms? I know that anonymity does wonders to one's personality, and so people post without concern or respect - but this is frightening.

Start a bakery, dood.

thanks. I'll ask a more direct question;
Has anyone actually worked at one of top big law firms, and if so, can you tell me if that kind of attitude was prevalent in REAL LIFE?

I don't care much for the name-calling, I'm referring more to the unbearable stench of status-obsession. Do people get over it when they hit the real world and get complex cases?

It is safe to assume that there is a very strong negative correlation between posting on autoadmit and possessing real life social skills. In other words, some people really do think that way, but they would never be able to communicate with you out loud. Unless you frequently visit autoadmit, it is very easy to forget that those people exist.

Are those autoadmit type things the INSIDE MENTALITY/MINDSET/PSYCHE of a sizeable proportion big law lawyers?

Sounds like those people work at Skadden, DPW, whatever - and are absolutely deranged.

I mean, frankly, I don't even think ANONYMITY can permit someone to talk like that, without some deep-seeded self-hatred, or hatred toward others, or some serious mental condition.

I don't see what the big deal is. In this day and age, a law firm that can't even maintain PPP above $1 million is pathetic. If I were a partner and were only making six figures, I don't know how I would live with myself. I expect to be a millionaire in ten years - any firm that can't offer me that lacks the prestige that I demand.

Anonymous User wrote:Are those autoadmit type things the INSIDE MENTALITY/MINDSET/PSYCHE of a sizeable proportion big law lawyers?

Sounds like those people work at Skadden, DPW, whatever - and are absolutely deranged.

I mean, frankly, I don't even think ANONYMITY can permit someone to talk like that, without some deep-seeded self-hatred, or hatred toward others, or some serious mental condition.

Go to wsj.com, click on an article about Obama, then skip to the comments. Similarly, go anywhere else, click on an article about Palin, then skip to the comments. This problem is not unique to biglaw hopefuls.

PiersonVee wrote: Go to wsj.com, click on an article about Obama, then skip to the comments. Similarly, go anywhere else, click on an article about Palin, then skip to the comments. This problem is not unique to biglaw hopefuls.

So your point is that WSJ anonymity allowing for expression of deep-seeded race-prejudice is analogous to Autoadmit/ATL anonymity for deep-seeded eliteness-prejudice?

You're making my point, not refuting it. If racism, which is a reptilian type unjustified feeling of superiority, is analogous to law-elitism, then that says a LOT about the legal profession.

My point is - the law seems unique in creating such psychos, other than - of course - racism, which is a multi-century mental disorder.

PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong, but do doctors, engineers, history majors do this kind of school-bashing/company bashing? Do engineers go around calling GE a TTT company, or Toyota a TTT company? I don't know - you tell me.

Anonymous User wrote:So I'm a pretty content, yet ambitious, laidback, yet energetic man, with a wonderful wife and an overall happy family. I like studying the law, enjoyed my summer work which was law-related, and I would love to be in a position in the distant future where I'm trying cases before juries, and arguing before appellate courts - this involves a long and successful career in big law, but I welcome that challenge. I'm at one of the top national schools, with a good academic record, and callbacks from several nationwide firms representing some of the biggest and best global companies.

I enjoy the company of like-minded driven people, and I'm a pretty positive, upbeat person who is very supportive of his friends and colleagues during good and bad times. If I had to pick an athlete for my kids to emulate, it'd probably be Steve Nash, because he's a true team player with seemingly no ego.

Then I saw this:
--LinkRemoved--

Is this the exception, or is this kind of attitude the rule in real-life law firms? I know that online anonymity does wonders to one's personality, and so people post without concern or respect - but this is frightening.

What is wrong with money dood? Why don't you start a commune or something? Maybe you could go hide in the forest and live off the land? Now granted, calling Irell a TTT is just fucking stupid, but still...

When did we, as a country, start thinking that profit was bad?

sorry guys, not referring to Irell being called TTT - I'm referring more to the V3/V5 debate that goes in a few pages below.

Anonymous User wrote:sorry guys, not referring to Irell being called TTT - I'm referring more to the V3/V5 debate that goes in a few pages below.

Judging by your example then, I think we can comfortably say that we all ought to be more worried about biglaw lacking a sense of humor than about it being overly prestige obcessed. "Go hide behind a filing cabinet" indeed!

Veyron wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:sorry guys, not referring to Irell being called TTT - I'm referring more to the V3/V5 debate that goes in a few pages below.

Judging by your example then, I think we can comfortably say that we all ought to be more worried about biglaw lacking a sense of humor than about it being overly prestige obcessed. "Go hide behind a filing cabinet indeed!"

maybe I am just boring, but you're missing my point by a mile, I couldn't care less about Southpark style humor, its the deep-seeded insecurity that is almost inescapable when you read that website, and even this one at times.

Anonymous User wrote:

PiersonVee wrote: Go to wsj.com, click on an article about Obama, then skip to the comments. Similarly, go anywhere else, click on an article about Palin, then skip to the comments. This problem is not unique to biglaw hopefuls.

So your point is that WSJ anonymity allowing for expression of deep-seeded race-prejudice is analogous to Autoadmit/ATL anonymity for deep-seeded eliteness-prejudice?

You're making my point, not refuting it. If racism, which is a reptilian type unjustified feeling of superiority, is analogous to law-elitism, then that says a LOT about the legal profession.

My point is - the law seems unique in creating such psychos, other than - of course - racism, which is a multi-century mental disorder.

PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong, but do doctors, engineers, history majors do this kind of school-bashing/company bashing? Do engineers go around calling GE a TTT company, or Toyota a TTT company? I don't know - you tell me.

I see your point, but I think that you are oversimplifying the problem. If it is an emotionally-charged issue, then people become idiots when posting on the internet.

As for your question, the legal profession is probably more elitist than most other professions, except perhaps academia. I don't know why, and I don't really care. While these people are the loudest on autoadmit, they are not outspoken about it in real life.

Anonymous User wrote:

Veyron wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:sorry guys, not referring to Irell being called TTT - I'm referring more to the V3/V5 debate that goes in a few pages below.

Judging by your example then, I think we can comfortably say that we all ought to be more worried about biglaw lacking a sense of humor than about it being overly prestige obcessed. "Go hide behind a filing cabinet indeed!"

maybe I am just boring, but you're missing my point by a mile, I couldn't care less about Southpark style humor, its the deep-seeded insecurity that is almost inescapable when you read that website, and even this one at times.

I'm going to guess that you're from the east coast.

In any event, of course lawyers are insecure. We are in a profession with huge salary disparities, no job security, and advancement by attrition. Its an intentional characteristic of the system.

OP, I agree, even anonymity doesn't justify or explain that sort of behavior. Both strike me as utterly ridiculous, pathetic, etc. I hope they are not a common type in the legal field, and I have met many lawyers who do not remotely resemble them, so I am cautiously optimistic.

Academia is far, far worse than the legal profession.
Legal academia is INFINITELY worse than any other kind of academia there is.

I mean, the LAW is so full of itself, that you have PROFESSORS publishing RANKINGS for schools by faculty (See Leiter).

The day a Bryan Leiter pops up for Physics is the day we're all doomed.

pocket herc wrote:OP, I agree, even anonymity doesn't justify or explain that sort of behavior. Both strike me as utterly ridiculous, pathetic, etc. I hope they are not a common type in the legal field, and I have met many lawyers who do not remotely resemble them, so I am cautiously optimistic.

And I have met many that do. Welcome to the real world, may I help you?

Veyron, I hope you're not one of these people, although you seem to be almost perversely happy that the legal profession is this way.

I think the legal profession is this way because they are brainwashed by hierarchy from day #1 of law school.

Anonymous User wrote:Veyron, I hope you're not one of these people, although you seem to be almost perversely happy that the legal profession is this way.

I think the legal profession is this way because they are brainwashed by hierarchy from day #1 of law school.

You may perhaps consider me one of these people (sans racism). I'm a competitive person by nature and I enjoy highly competitve environments, so yes, I am happy that the profession is this way in some sick sense. Also, when I heard the managing partner at cravath talking about fighting for large corporations against government regulations, my heart skipped a beat.

Veyron, being competitive is fine, even welcome. Being immature is another thing altogether, which those two very much were.

pocket herc wrote:Veyron, being competitive is fine, even welcome. Being immature is another thing altogether, which those two very much were.

You consider my sense of humor immature, I consider yours overly stuffy. May we both find firms that suit us (and my mine be higher ranked)

I was talking about them, not you.

For reasons pointed out in this thread (self selection, the nature of the profession, the nature of law schools, the state of the legal market, etc) lawyers are going to be way more elitist then your average profession. But I think this elitism, in part, stems from the fact that lawyers are elite. If you look at bankers, academics, CEOs, politicians, etc (members of the elite) you will find that they are all just as prestige obsessed as lawyers are. It comes with being the top 5%.

That being said, through OCI and callbacks, I've now had 20-30 minute conversations with well over 60 biglaw attorneys, from the newly minted first year associate through the life time partner on the verge of retirement. They pretty much all seem like normal, cool people. Talk of biglaw as a horrible sweatshop machine where everyone is treated like shit and partners don't care about you at all and where everyone is miserable is totally overblown. PEOPLE work in law firms, and people are generally pretty nice. They work hard, and it is a demanding profession, but its not inhabited exclusively by monsters. Without fail, when I asked "what do you like most about this firm?" or "why did you pick this firm over xyz?" the answer was always the same: the people. Most biglaw lawyers like what they do and who they work with.

Veyron wrote:

pocket herc wrote:Veyron, being competitive is fine, even welcome. Being immature is another thing altogether, which those two very much were.

You consider my sense of humor immature, I consider yours overly stuffy. May we both find firms that suit us (and my mine be higher ranked)

Higher ranked? Haha. You go to Penn. Ahahaha!

OP here, definitely NOT the all-star who wrote that snarky comment re Penn; which is a fantastic school that opens doors to all of the "prestigious" NYC firms.

Veyron, there's a distinction between healthy ambition and unhealthy self-esteem issues that manifest themselves rampantly on autoadmit, I'm pretty sure you know what I'm talking about.

Glamorizing the latter is kind of irresponsible, and results in other people losing track of the healthy level of ambition, but whatever, its just the "internets" right.