Any recourse for disqualified Write-On competition Forum

[disqualifiedanon]

In the 40/50 hours put into the write on competition to get onto law reviews/journals, which the editors recommended we take time off work to do, someone forgot to add an honor code statement at the end of 1/2 parts that is the proof we did not cheat or use exterior help in doing our competition work.

Not only did this disqualify them for the Law Review consideration but also any secondary journal as the write on competition is unified.

This seems like an absolutely absurd punishment for a 1 second mistake which people are allowed no opportunity to fix. If Law review editors saw it as a mistake that showed to some degree that other applicants were better in the criteria of being able to catch detail then it would have been understandable but to fully disqualify this application seems ridiculous. This isn't even my application but seems like a terrible reason to pull someones name for the running.

For reference, the importance of the Write on competition was wildly apparent when the administration decided to withholdall 1L grades from being released ( with people needing their ranks to know where to place interview bidding, i.e. limited to 20 bids you don't apply for a job that requires 20% or above if you're 50% when you're limited, which was a concern expressed to them where the response was basically 'sucks to suck'). It makes absolutely no sense to me that if you forget a small part of this you are now disqualified from this seemingly very important part and activity of school without regard to penalty just an absolute fuck you.

Is there any recourse here to seeing that this person's paper be graded fairly here with just punishment for the honor code? The dean in charge just said 'it's unfortunate'. I suggested they bring it up to the deans/SBA. If that doesn't work I'm not sure there is a remedy

P.S. for reference almost everyone gets on a journal, even a secondary one if they just apply for it. The people who don't get on anything just put law review and no other preferences so when they are rejected they do none of them.

[Right2BearArms]

In the 40/50 hours put into the write on competition to get onto law reviews/journals, which the editors recommended we take time off work to do, someone forgot to add an honor code statement at the end of 1/2 parts that is the proof we did not cheat or use exterior help in doing our competition work.

Not only did this disqualify them for the Law Review consideration but also any secondary journal as the write on competition is unified.

This seems like an absolutely absurd punishment for a 1 second mistake which people are allowed no opportunity to fix. If Law review editors saw it as a mistake that showed to some degree that other applicants were better in the criteria of being able to catch detail then it would have been understandable but to fully disqualify this application seems ridiculous. This isn't even my application but seems like a terrible reason to pull someones name for the running.

For reference, the importance of the Write on competition was wildly apparent when the administration decided to withholdall 1L grades from being released ( with people needing their ranks to know where to place interview bidding, i.e. limited to 20 bids you don't apply for a job that requires 20% or above if you're 50% when you're limited, which was a concern expressed to them where the response was basically 'sucks to suck'). It makes absolutely no sense to me that if you forget a small part of this you are now disqualified from this seemingly very important part and activity of school without regard to penalty just an absolute fuck you.

Is there any recourse here to seeing that this person's paper be graded fairly here with just punishment for the honor code? The dean in charge just said 'it's unfortunate'. I suggested they bring it up to the deans/SBA. If that doesn't work I'm not sure there is a remedy

P.S. for reference almost everyone gets on a journal, even a secondary one if they just apply for it. The people who don't get on anything just put law review and no other preferences so when they are rejected they do none of them.

Is the honor code statement a required part of a completed submission?

Did the person in question (not you, of course...) not place the honor code statement in the required place?

Were all write-on participants made aware of the requirement that the honor code statement be included as outlined above?

If the answer to each of those above questions is "YES", then the submission was not complete and, in my mind, should not be considered for invitation to a journal. Your third paragraph is irrelevant. As far as deans/SBA, they likely signed off on the disqualification procedure before write-on ever began.

TL;DR - no, there probably isn't any recourse.

[Npret]

Honor code statement is important. You’re probably screwed.

[l3g@l33s3]

In the 40/50 hours put into the write on competition to get onto law reviews/journals, which the editors recommended we take time off work to do, someone forgot to add an honor code statement at the end of 1/2 parts that is the proof we did not cheat or use exterior help in doing our competition work.

Not only did this disqualify them for the Law Review consideration but also any secondary journal as the write on competition is unified.

This seems like an absolutely absurd punishment for a 1 second mistake which people are allowed no opportunity to fix. If Law review editors saw it as a mistake that showed to some degree that other applicants were better in the criteria of being able to catch detail then it would have been understandable but to fully disqualify this application seems ridiculous. This isn't even my application but seems like a terrible reason to pull someones name for the running.

For reference, the importance of the Write on competition was wildly apparent when the administration decided to withholdall 1L grades from being released ( with people needing their ranks to know where to place interview bidding, i.e. limited to 20 bids you don't apply for a job that requires 20% or above if you're 50% when you're limited, which was a concern expressed to them where the response was basically 'sucks to suck'). It makes absolutely no sense to me that if you forget a small part of this you are now disqualified from this seemingly very important part and activity of school without regard to penalty just an absolute fuck you.

Is there any recourse here to seeing that this person's paper be graded fairly here with just punishment for the honor code? The dean in charge just said 'it's unfortunate'. I suggested they bring it up to the deans/SBA. If that doesn't work I'm not sure there is a remedy

P.S. for reference almost everyone gets on a journal, even a secondary one if they just apply for it. The people who don't get on anything just put law review and no other preferences so when they are rejected they do none of them.

Is the honor code statement a required part of a completed submission?

Did the person in question (not you, of course...) not place the honor code statement in the required place?

Were all write-on participants made aware of the requirement that the honor code statement be included as outlined above?

If the answer to each of those above questions is "YES", then the submission was not complete and, in my mind, should not be considered for invitation to a journal. Your third paragraph is irrelevant. As far as deans/SBA, they likely signed off on the disqualification procedure before write-on ever began.

TL;DR - no, there probably isn't any recourse.

LOL UF?

[Right2BearArms]

In the 40/50 hours put into the write on competition to get onto law reviews/journals, which the editors recommended we take time off work to do, someone forgot to add an honor code statement at the end of 1/2 parts that is the proof we did not cheat or use exterior help in doing our competition work.

Not only did this disqualify them for the Law Review consideration but also any secondary journal as the write on competition is unified.

This seems like an absolutely absurd punishment for a 1 second mistake which people are allowed no opportunity to fix. If Law review editors saw it as a mistake that showed to some degree that other applicants were better in the criteria of being able to catch detail then it would have been understandable but to fully disqualify this application seems ridiculous. This isn't even my application but seems like a terrible reason to pull someones name for the running.

For reference, the importance of the Write on competition was wildly apparent when the administration decided to withholdall 1L grades from being released ( with people needing their ranks to know where to place interview bidding, i.e. limited to 20 bids you don't apply for a job that requires 20% or above if you're 50% when you're limited, which was a concern expressed to them where the response was basically 'sucks to suck'). It makes absolutely no sense to me that if you forget a small part of this you are now disqualified from this seemingly very important part and activity of school without regard to penalty just an absolute fuck you.

Is there any recourse here to seeing that this person's paper be graded fairly here with just punishment for the honor code? The dean in charge just said 'it's unfortunate'. I suggested they bring it up to the deans/SBA. If that doesn't work I'm not sure there is a remedy

P.S. for reference almost everyone gets on a journal, even a secondary one if they just apply for it. The people who don't get on anything just put law review and no other preferences so when they are rejected they do none of them.

Is the honor code statement a required part of a completed submission?

Did the person in question (not you, of course...) not place the honor code statement in the required place?

Were all write-on participants made aware of the requirement that the honor code statement be included as outlined above?

If the answer to each of those above questions is "YES", then the submission was not complete and, in my mind, should not be considered for invitation to a journal. Your third paragraph is irrelevant. As far as deans/SBA, they likely signed off on the disqualification procedure before write-on ever began.

TL;DR - no, there probably isn't any recourse.

LOL UF?

No. But please feel free to elaborate.

[l3g@l33s3]

In the 40/50 hours put into the write on competition to get onto law reviews/journals, which the editors recommended we take time off work to do, someone forgot to add an honor code statement at the end of 1/2 parts that is the proof we did not cheat or use exterior help in doing our competition work.

Not only did this disqualify them for the Law Review consideration but also any secondary journal as the write on competition is unified.

This seems like an absolutely absurd punishment for a 1 second mistake which people are allowed no opportunity to fix. If Law review editors saw it as a mistake that showed to some degree that other applicants were better in the criteria of being able to catch detail then it would have been understandable but to fully disqualify this application seems ridiculous. This isn't even my application but seems like a terrible reason to pull someones name for the running.

For reference, the importance of the Write on competition was wildly apparent when the administration decided to withholdall 1L grades from being released ( with people needing their ranks to know where to place interview bidding, i.e. limited to 20 bids you don't apply for a job that requires 20% or above if you're 50% when you're limited, which was a concern expressed to them where the response was basically 'sucks to suck'). It makes absolutely no sense to me that if you forget a small part of this you are now disqualified from this seemingly very important part and activity of school without regard to penalty just an absolute fuck you.

Is there any recourse here to seeing that this person's paper be graded fairly here with just punishment for the honor code? The dean in charge just said 'it's unfortunate'. I suggested they bring it up to the deans/SBA. If that doesn't work I'm not sure there is a remedy

P.S. for reference almost everyone gets on a journal, even a secondary one if they just apply for it. The people who don't get on anything just put law review and no other preferences so when they are rejected they do none of them.

Is the honor code statement a required part of a completed submission?

Did the person in question (not you, of course...) not place the honor code statement in the required place?

Were all write-on participants made aware of the requirement that the honor code statement be included as outlined above?

If the answer to each of those above questions is "YES", then the submission was not complete and, in my mind, should not be considered for invitation to a journal. Your third paragraph is irrelevant. As far as deans/SBA, they likely signed off on the disqualification procedure before write-on ever began.

TL;DR - no, there probably isn't any recourse.

LOL UF?

No. But please feel free to elaborate.

I meant is OP at UF because UF randomly decided to withhold 1L grades until after the write on competition.

[GoneSouth]

Honor code statement is important. You’re probably screwed.

This seems dumb. Honor code statement is important, but why not contact the person who forgot it and ask him to agree to the terms of the honor code statement? If he does, it seems like that would cure any harms from not including it initially

[nixy]

Honor code statement is important. You’re probably screwed.

This seems dumb. Honor code statement is important, but why not contact the person who forgot it and ask him to agree to the terms of the honor code statement? If he does, it seems like that would cure any harms from not including it initially

except that one of the whole goals of write on is to weed out people who can't follow directions.

[Npret]

Honor code statement is important. You’re probably screwed.

This seems dumb. Honor code statement is important, but why not contact the person who forgot it and ask him to agree to the terms of the honor code statement? If he does, it seems like that would cure any harms from not including it initially

except that one of the whole goals of write on is to weed out people who can't follow directions.

Yes. You need to be able to work carefully and follow directions with everything in law. Law review is no exception. Not putting on a required section means the reviewers don’t even have to read the submission. It’s an automatic reject.

Sorry this happened OP. Sounds like you worked hard.

[GoneSouth]

Honor code statement is important. You’re probably screwed.

This seems dumb. Honor code statement is important, but why not contact the person who forgot it and ask him to agree to the terms of the honor code statement? If he does, it seems like that would cure any harms from not including it initially

except that one of the whole goals of write on is to weed out people who can't follow directions.

I get this (though I always thought law reviews went way over the top on this), but as I understand the OP's post, it's not that each journal decided that forgetting the honor code statement was enough of a mistake that they didn't want the writer on their journal--which in my view would be silly, but that's their prerogative. It's that the school discarded the entry before it even got to the journals.

I doubt the school would discard every entry that contained typos, or used an improper citation style, or improper headings, or anything like that. So it seems unlikely that failure to follow directions is the reason that the entry got thrown out. Instead, it seems like they threw it out because a condition of submitting an entry was certifying that you didn't cheat--and if that is true, it seems like the omission could easily be cured after the fact. It's draconian to deprive journals of the ability to give an offer to a person they might want on their staff (and the writer from the experience of being on a journal) because of something like this that could be easily fixed.

[nixy]

There's a difference between being evaluated, and fulfilling the requirements to get to be evaluated.

I'm not saying any school has to run their write-on this way, but if a school does decide to, and you fuck it up, you've fucked it up.

[GoneSouth]

The entire point of my post was that the school appears to be running their write-on unreasonably. If the school expelled the student for forgetting the honor code affirmation, I doubt you would be saying "tough shit, you knew the rules."

[nixy]

The entire point of my post was that the school appears to be running their write-on unreasonably. If the school expelled the student for forgetting the honor code affirmation, I doubt you would be saying "tough shit, you knew the rules."

Sure, but those aren't comparable situations.

[OneShot2009]

The entire point of my post was that the school appears to be running their write-on unreasonably. If the school expelled the student for forgetting the honor code affirmation, I doubt you would be saying "tough shit, you knew the rules."

It would be unreasonable to kick someone out of school for failing to include a required portion of a writing assignment. That is not the same as refusing to consider a writing assignment that failed to meet the minimum submission requirements.

[GoneSouth]

They're not the same thing, but I think this is just as unreasonable. If this school is like most others, there are tons of secondary journals that would love to take anyone who's interested. And this applicant apparently wanted to be on a journal.

So why is the school going to puff up its chest and get in the middle of that based the failure to submit a silly honor code statement? It would literally be like a court saying that because you forgot the sign a brief, the brief is stricken and you don't get a chance to fix your error and file a replacement. It might be technically within their power, but it's an abuse of authority for what appears to be little to no benefit.

If the flagship law review, or any other journal, wants to toss the person's application for this, I get it. But I don't think the school should be doing something that has the potential to hurt the career opportunities of one of its students--and at the very least prevents one of its students from participating in an activity that he wanted to participate in--when the problem is minor, and could be easily remedied.

[GoneSouth]

At the school I went to (and I imagine many others) we had to sign a similar honor code statement on the front of our exam envelope for each exam. Would anyone think it would be reasonable for the school to discard an exam and award an F because the student forgot to sign the envelope without giving him a chance to fix the problem? That seems pretty comparable

[nixy]

They’re not comparable because exams are required and doing law review isn’t.

All that said, whether the school should run its competition that way doesn’t have anything to do with whether there’s any recourse, to which I’m pretty sure the answer is no (since the OP had already consulted a dean).