/modhattome wrote:I agree 100% with everything Tome said.
[This new function rocks!]
This type of misuse of the anonymous feature will get you banned, d00der. I've outted you. It's sort of a similar name and shame tactic as Fordham pulled.
/modhat
/modhattome wrote:I agree 100% with everything Tome said.
[This new function rocks!]
haven't you heard -- even bad publicity is good publicity!neskerdoo wrote:OperaSoprano wrote:PK, I think the issue is how and when they did it. If they'd bothered to be polite and respectful, our dean would most likely have responded in kind. It happens that I agree with one of your earlier comments. I think firm and school will both back down, and this whole thing will be a distant memory by the time '12 does OCI.PKSebben wrote:I figured another fan of Penny-Arcade would have more sense than this. This is not fucking with Fordham. This is a firm making an economic decision.tome wrote:Banning one nothing firm from your OCI for a few years does not harm Fordham students. To say it does is patently ridiculous. The question is really what the broader effect is: will other firms hold it against Fordham, will they not give a shit, or will they think twice about fucking with Fordham. I'd say these options are presented in order from least to most likely. Either way, I really don't see it having a serious effect at all, other than to galvanize and encourage the students at Fordham. Good move Dean.
It still made me pretty happy to see Fordham plastered all over ATL this afternoon. I used to work in PR. Trust me, this is great publicity, and it's free.
I don't trust you.. why do you insist this is 'great' publicity??
I guess this is what I really don't see. There are hundreds of decent firms willing to take Fordham grads in the states, but only a handful of schools with students in Fordham's league who would be keen to go to a firm like RS.Dwaterman86 wrote:I just think in the long run Fordham needs Reed more than Reed needs Fordham.
In accordance with what I said, above, this will only be true if other firms care deeply about what Fordham has done here. Again, I really don't see this happening. As Neskeroo so kindly pointed out, I don't have anything to back this up, but I think it is a reasonable belief given the absence of any good evidence or reasoning for the opposite.Dwaterman86 wrote:Fordham is like a guy who gets laid off, but decides to take it super personally. So when the economy picks up, and the jobs come back everyone else who got laid off with him, will have job offers to come back to the company. Fordham, on the other hand, will not, because when Fordham got laid off instead of taking with class they decided to send the boss a big "fuck you" and egg his house.
Want to continue reading?
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
I'm just going to go on record and bet your wife is happy you're betting her ovaries, regardless of the odds.PKSebben wrote:They didn't say "fuck off" to Fordham. What they said is that they're canceling their interviews -- and I bet you my other ovary that they asked for a resume drop from these students, too. Reed Smith is certainly looking to recruit top talent at Fordham -- I bet they put out a statement tomorrow to that effect. This whole "boo hoo RS is going to other schools and not Fordham and so we're obviously lesser people than the C/N students" is getting a little old.tome wrote:Common dude. RS had no idea that this was a likelihood? No heads-up to the school, even though they are still interviewing at other schools (I doubt thathappened at Michigan). What they did was out and out shitty, and it was a huge FU to FU. The dean at Fordham had the ball and conviction to stand up to them, and it was the right thing to do. It was what they deserved, it was the best thing for the law school, and it was the best thing for the students.PKSebben wrote:Firms have pulled out of places all over the country
*BAM*
You are now hiring partner at a law firm. You can interview at TWO schools in NYC. POP QUIZ HOTSHOT: WHICH TWO ARE THEY?
Except that it isn't even bad publicity. Obviously you don't agree, but you've possibly noticed all the "good for Fordham!" comments. Bad publicity exists; you don't want to be a restaurant chain known for outbreaks of salmonella, say. This is far from a situation like that. We've been talking about Fordham all night. The silly email went viral. Epic publicity win.PKSebben wrote: haven't you heard -- even bad publicity is good publicity!
PKSebben wrote:/modhattome wrote:I agree 100% with everything Tome said.
[This new function rocks!]
This type of misuse of the anonymous feature will get you banned, d00der. I've outted you. It's sort of a similar name and shame tactic as Fordham pulled.
/modhat
The point is that it's not unprofessional. I don't think firms don't owe law students jack shit except to be as transparent as possible. If RS knew six months ago that it had no intention of interviewing Fordham students and decided to pull out at the last minute [sounds like my college love life -- eds.] then yeah, it's a shitty move. But there is no indication that this has happened.Miracle wrote:Some of these posts are ridiculous.
I don’t understand what exactly you mean by saying “this is a firm making an economic decision”. What are you trying to say? To act unprofessionally, is OK just because the economy is bad? Are you serious? That like saying its OK to steal just because an economy is bad. This has to do with principle. Fordham is a well recognizable world wide institution, and should stand up for its students! As a student I would not want to work with firm that lacks professionalism, and ethics therefore believe if the firm indeed exudes such behavior it should be banned.
I absolutely applaud dean William Michael Treanor!
The anonymous feature was implemented not for jokes, but to allow people to mask their identity while posting sensitive information. Making an exception for you -- and your HI-LARI-OUS comedy -- only creates an incentive for others to follow suit. Surely you understand that, right?tome wrote:PKSebben wrote:/modhattome wrote:I agree 100% with everything Tome said.
[This new function rocks!]
This type of misuse of the anonymous feature will get you banned, d00der. I've outted you. It's sort of a similar name and shame tactic as Fordham pulled.
/modhat
This site isn't nearly serious enough to warrant such lameness, d00der. It was a joke, and an obvious one. Take a drink and a deep breath.
Register now!
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
You will go far, friend.Da Stain wrote:Probably. A year of experience and the impending doom of this year's market has sort of clued me into the fact that I'm not owed shit, regardless of where I go.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
OperaSoprano wrote:PK, Reed Smith will almost certainly issue the statement you suggest. My guess is that school and firm will apologize to one another. They had a useful relationship in years past, and they probably will in the years to come. In the meantime, this was, as I've said, a publicity win for the school.
To bigben: I'm a 1L now. My first class started yesterday.
LOL. I'd probably be shitting my pants if I were a Fordham 2L [strike]grad[/strike] going through OCI. gobucks1101 had it right...bigben wrote:Is it just me, or are 100% of the law students in this thread critical of the dean's actions, while 100% of the people in support of the dean are 0Ls?
EDITS: where indicatedResponses should go like this...
Person not going to Fordham: Nice! Way to go Fordham!
Person going to Fordham: What the hell? Ego won't make me get off this ramen noodle diet and pay my rent!
But they should've known, right? It's not as if the recession started three weeks ago. I just find it hard to believe that they could have been in this position and not seen it coming.PKSebben wrote:The point is that it's not unprofessional. I don't think firms don't owe law students jack shit except to be as transparent as possible. If RS knew six months ago that it had no intention of interviewing Fordham students and decided to pull out at the last minute [sounds like my college love life -- eds.] then yeah, it's a shitty move. But there is no indication that this has happened.Miracle wrote:Some of these posts are ridiculous.
I don’t understand what exactly you mean by saying “this is a firm making an economic decision”. What are you trying to say? To act unprofessionally, is OK just because the economy is bad? Are you serious? That like saying its OK to steal just because an economy is bad. This has to do with principle. Fordham is a well recognizable world wide institution, and should stand up for its students! As a student I would not want to work with firm that lacks professionalism, and ethics therefore believe if the firm indeed exudes such behavior it should be banned.
I absolutely applaud dean William Michael Treanor!
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Already a member? Login
bigben wrote:Is it just me, or are 100% of the law students in this thread critical of the dean's actions, while 100% of the people in support of the dean are 0Ls?
They could very well be horribly incompetent.OperaSoprano wrote:But they should've known, right? It's not as if the recession started three weeks ago. I just find it hard to believe that they could have been in this position and not seen it coming.PKSebben wrote:The point is that it's not unprofessional. I don't think firms don't owe law students jack shit except to be as transparent as possible. If RS knew six months ago that it had no intention of interviewing Fordham students and decided to pull out at the last minute [sounds like my college love life -- eds.] then yeah, it's a shitty move. But there is no indication that this has happened.Miracle wrote:Some of these posts are ridiculous.
I don’t understand what exactly you mean by saying “this is a firm making an economic decision”. What are you trying to say? To act unprofessionally, is OK just because the economy is bad? Are you serious? That like saying its OK to steal just because an economy is bad. This has to do with principle. Fordham is a well recognizable world wide institution, and should stand up for its students! As a student I would not want to work with firm that lacks professionalism, and ethics therefore believe if the firm indeed exudes such behavior it should be banned.
I absolutely applaud dean William Michael Treanor!
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login