WUSTL Recent Grad (and others) Taking Questions Forum

[RareExports]

A number of posters have referenced a low write-on participation rate this year. Is anyone willing to share the number of write-on submissions for this year (or give a rough estimate)?

[hoos89]

Just for the record: write on doesn't change every year. Probably don't post the correct issue publicly.

[MtheG]

A number of posters have referenced a low write-on participation rate this year. Is anyone willing to share the number of write-on submissions for this year (or give a rough estimate)?

Somewhere near 150 but that is just a guess. I also think that more than a few people just rage quit and submitted unacceptable products that did not meet the page minimum.

[Joscellin]

A number of posters have referenced a low write-on participation rate this year. Is anyone willing to share the number of write-on submissions for this year (or give a rough estimate)?

Somewhere near 150 but that is just a guess. I also think that more than a few people just rage quit and submitted unacceptable products that did not meet the page minimum.

150 would be 75%. Is that even unusually low? I'd figure that's around average.

[robert88]

Congrats on those of us that made LR and journals. I hope our "heated" discussion on TLS contributed to the news release.

[legit]

Is there any way to tell whether the write-on competition was completed well or only dunked because of grades?

[njdevils2626]

Yea, I had some friends who did that. Shermer is supposed to be awesome too, but I never had him and he teaches bankruptcy and I think co-teaches the seminar with Keating. If you like them and are interested in the subject, Bankruptcy+Comm Law first semester then the seminar second semester is really solid, esp as Ref said, you have to learn basic bankruptcy shit for comm law.

Write on and Journal are both pretty much just useless hazing rituals to which law students subject each other. For some it's a masturbatory exercise, so I guess it's slightly less useless for them.

Regardless, I wanted to get back to things that actually do matter and highly recommend taking Bankruptcy and Commercial in Fall and then Reorg in the Spring. Schermer and Keating are both great and their classes are very fair. If you do the work, you will do well. Plus they're awesome people. Anyways, can't recommend them both highly enough

[ek5dn]

Yea, I had some friends who did that. Shermer is supposed to be awesome too, but I never had him and he teaches bankruptcy and I think co-teaches the seminar with Keating. If you like them and are interested in the subject, Bankruptcy+Comm Law first semester then the seminar second semester is really solid, esp as Ref said, you have to learn basic bankruptcy shit for comm law.

Write on and Journal are both pretty much just useless hazing rituals to which law students subject each other. For some it's a masturbatory exercise, so I guess it's slightly less useless for them.

Regardless, I wanted to get back to things that actually do matter and highly recommend taking Bankruptcy and Commercial in Fall and then Reorg in the Spring. Schermer and Keating are both great and their classes are very fair. If you do the work, you will do well. Plus they're awesome people. Anyways, can't recommend them both highly enough

Luckily for me, there were lots of seats open for bankruptcy! I just enrolled. Thanks all for the advice

[NDOMUKONGGGG]

For those that heard from LR how did you hear?

[Ref]

Yea, I had some friends who did that. Shermer is supposed to be awesome too, but I never had him and he teaches bankruptcy and I think co-teaches the seminar with Keating. If you like them and are interested in the subject, Bankruptcy+Comm Law first semester then the seminar second semester is really solid, esp as Ref said, you have to learn basic bankruptcy shit for comm law.

Write on and Journal are both pretty much just useless hazing rituals to which law students subject each other. For some it's a masturbatory exercise, so I guess it's slightly less useless for them.

Regardless, I wanted to get back to things that actually do matter and highly recommend taking Bankruptcy and Commercial in Fall and then Reorg in the Spring. Schermer and Keating are both great and their classes are very fair. If you do the work, you will do well. Plus they're awesome people. Anyways, can't recommend them both highly enough

Luckily for me, there were lots of seats open for bankruptcy! I just enrolled. Thanks all for the advice

You're in for a treat! Best of luck!

[MoonSugar]

For those that heard from LR how did you hear?

Phone call, and they said emails will come later.

[PeanutsNJam]

Woah LR took 46 people. That's just shy of 25% of the class.

[NDOMUKONGGGG]

For those that heard from LR how did you hear?

Phone call, and they said emails will come later.

What? Who called you? What did the person say? So is the email just a follow up to the phone call or what?

[acr]

For those that heard from LR how did you hear?

Phone call, and they said emails will come later.

What? Who called you? What did the person say? So is the email just a follow up to the phone call or what?

Journal of Law and Policy called as well. I think every journal did. It was a random journal member that called to congratulate and extend invitation (maybe the managing editor iirc). Email is just a follow up to formally accept/deny the offer. My friend texted me and said he received a call and an invite, and then it was over an hour before I heard anything. It was torture.

[NDOMUKONGGGG]

Woah LR took 46 people. That's just shy of 25% of the class.

Not unusual. Chicago LR taks 40 for a class size of 180-190.

[xxLawSchoolIsHardxx]

Is there any way to tell whether the write-on competition was completed well or only dunked because of grades?

Are you asking whether people who graded on wrote well? B/c I guarantee you most of the people in the top 5% wrote shit b/c they knew they would just get on to LR. Congrats Wash U students, you've been railroaded once again.

[MtheG]

Assuming the top 5% all wanted LR and all put in good faith effort then that would only be about 10 people. In turn, that means that 32 spots were saved for people who did well in the competition. Having 77% of spots filled by people who actually had to compete seems pretty fair to me. Moreover, assuming that all the other journals take about 25 students each (they can take more), then any given 1L who participated had a 80% chance of getting an offer.

[Jay2716]

Is there any way to tell whether the write-on competition was completed well or only dunked because of grades?

Are you asking whether people who graded on wrote well? B/c I guarantee you most of the people in the top 5% wrote shit b/c they knew they would just get on to LR. Congrats Wash U students, you've been railroaded once again.

People don't know they're top 5% until after write on.

[xxLawSchoolIsHardxx]

Assuming the top 5% all wanted LR and all put in good faith effort then that would only be about 10 people. In turn, that means that 32 spots were saved for people who did well in the competition. Having 77% of spots filled by people who actually had to compete seems pretty fair to me. Moreover, assuming that all the other journals take about 25 students each (they can take more), then any given 1L who participated had a 80% chance of getting an offer.

For the foregoing reasons, you are both right and wrong. It is true that 76.2% of the spots were left to the non top 5%, but what about people who wrote a really good submission but got the boot because some top 5% gunner who bombed LP just got to walk on after wiping his ass with his write on submission. In sum, screwing really good writers out of LR because someone got a really good Torts grade makes little to no sense.

[xxLawSchoolIsHardxx]

Is there any way to tell whether the write-on competition was completed well or only dunked because of grades?

Are you asking whether people who graded on wrote well? B/c I guarantee you most of the people in the top 5% wrote shit b/c they knew they would just get on to LR. Congrats Wash U students, you've been railroaded once again.

People don't know they're top 5% until after write on.

Sounds like something someone not in the top 5% would say.

[hoos89]

Assuming the top 5% all wanted LR and all put in good faith effort then that would only be about 10 people. In turn, that means that 32 spots were saved for people who did well in the competition. Having 77% of spots filled by people who actually had to compete seems pretty fair to me. Moreover, assuming that all the other journals take about 25 students each (they can take more), then any given 1L who participated had a 80% chance of getting an offer.

For the foregoing reasons, you are both right and wrong. It is true that 76.2% of the spots were left to the non top 5%, but what about people who wrote a really good submission but got the boot because some top 5% gunner who bombed LP just got to walk on after wiping his ass with his write on submission. In sum, screwing really good writers out of LR because someone got a really good Torts grade makes little to no sense.

If someone really wrote that great of a comment they'd be on law review. Not that many people write truly good comments, and I assure you that given the number of people on law review who wrote-on, that all of those people got a spot. So no, I don't think that person who "wrote a really good submission" but didn't get on because grade-on exists, at least not this year. Also, your assumption that everyone who graded on just mailed it in is ill-founded. Sure there are people every year who assume they'll grade-on and don't put in their best effort, but a) some of those people end up screwing themselves when they actually miss the cut, and b) I doubt that's as common now that only the top 5% grade-on because it's very difficult to be secure in the top 5% after only 1 semester. One mediocre grade will knock you out. Also, there are more people taken by law review than they need because it's assumed that a number of those people who grade-on will transfer out anyway, which somewhat mitigates this issue as well (in reality, probably only about 5 spots get "taken" by grade-on). Your assumption that nobody who graded-on would have written on is wrong as well. People who are gunners don't just turn that off for write-on (and people who truly bombed LP would have a hard time getting in the top 5%, and it takes more than 1 really good grade to be top 5%).

This is a lot of butt hurt for something that really doesn't matter that much.

[xxLawSchoolIsHardxx]

Assuming the top 5% all wanted LR and all put in good faith effort then that would only be about 10 people. In turn, that means that 32 spots were saved for people who did well in the competition. Having 77% of spots filled by people who actually had to compete seems pretty fair to me. Moreover, assuming that all the other journals take about 25 students each (they can take more), then any given 1L who participated had a 80% chance of getting an offer.

For the foregoing reasons, you are both right and wrong. It is true that 76.2% of the spots were left to the non top 5%, but what about people who wrote a really good submission but got the boot because some top 5% gunner who bombed LP just got to walk on after wiping his ass with his write on submission. In sum, screwing really good writers out of LR because someone got a really good Torts grade makes little to no sense.

If someone really wrote that great of a comment they'd be on law review. Not that many people write truly good comments, and I assure that given the number of people on law review who wrote on, that all of those people got a spot. So no, I don't think that person who "wrote a really good submission" but didn't get on because of grade-on exists, at least not this year. Also, your assumption that everyone who graded on just mailed it in is ill-founded. Sure there are people every year who assume they'll grade on and don't put in their best effort, but a) some of those people end up screwing themselves when they actually miss the cut, and b) I doubt that's as common now that only the top 5% grade on because it's very difficult to be secure in the top 5% after only 1 semester. One mediocre grade will knock you out. Also, there are more people taken by law review than they need because it's assumed that a number of those people who grade on will transfer out anyway, which somewhat mitigates this issue as well (in reality, probably only about 5 spots get "taken" by grade on). Your assumption that nobody who graded on would have written on is wrong as well. People who are gunners don't just turn that off for write-on (and people who truly bombed LP would have a hard time getting in the top 5%, and it takes more than 1 really good grade to be top 5%).

This is a lot of butt hurt for something that really doesn't matter that much.

You may be right, but you also may be wrong. You're not God you know?

[PeanutsNJam]

Assuming the top 5% all wanted LR and all put in good faith effort then that would only be about 10 people. In turn, that means that 32 spots were saved for people who did well in the competition. Having 77% of spots filled by people who actually had to compete seems pretty fair to me. Moreover, assuming that all the other journals take about 25 students each (they can take more), then any given 1L who participated had a 80% chance of getting an offer.

For the foregoing reasons, you are both right and wrong. It is true that 76.2% of the spots were left to the non top 5%, but what about people who wrote a really good submission but got the boot because some top 5% gunner who bombed LP just got to walk on after wiping his ass with his write on submission. In sum, screwing really good writers out of LR because someone got a really good Torts grade makes little to no sense.

If someone really wrote that great of a comment they'd be on law review. Not that many people write truly good comments, and I assure that given the number of people on law review who wrote on, that all of those people got a spot. So no, I don't think that person who "wrote a really good submission" but didn't get on because of grade-on exists, at least not this year. Also, your assumption that everyone who graded on just mailed it in is ill-founded. Sure there are people every year who assume they'll grade on and don't put in their best effort, but a) some of those people end up screwing themselves when they actually miss the cut, and b) I doubt that's as common now that only the top 5% grade on because it's very difficult to be secure in the top 5% after only 1 semester. One mediocre grade will knock you out. Also, there are more people taken by law review than they need because it's assumed that a number of those people who grade on will transfer out anyway, which somewhat mitigates this issue as well (in reality, probably only about 5 spots get "taken" by grade on). Your assumption that nobody who graded on would have written on is wrong as well. People who are gunners don't just turn that off for write-on (and people who truly bombed LP would have a hard time getting in the top 5%, and it takes more than 1 really good grade to be top 5%).

This is a lot of butt hurt for something that really doesn't matter that much.

You may be right, but you also may be wrong. You're not God you know?

Based on your incredible display of intellectual firepower in this thread, I have no doubt you wrote a beautiful comment, but lost your spot to someone who graded on. Hell, if law professors didn't grade so arbitrarily and law exams weren't completely luck based, you clearly would have been in the top 5% yourself.

Btw, I know of at least one top 5%er who didn't write on and thus didn't steal anybody's much more deserved spot.

[xxLawSchoolIsHardxx]

Assuming the top 5% all wanted LR and all put in good faith effort then that would only be about 10 people. In turn, that means that 32 spots were saved for people who did well in the competition. Having 77% of spots filled by people who actually had to compete seems pretty fair to me. Moreover, assuming that all the other journals take about 25 students each (they can take more), then any given 1L who participated had a 80% chance of getting an offer.

For the foregoing reasons, you are both right and wrong. It is true that 76.2% of the spots were left to the non top 5%, but what about people who wrote a really good submission but got the boot because some top 5% gunner who bombed LP just got to walk on after wiping his ass with his write on submission. In sum, screwing really good writers out of LR because someone got a really good Torts grade makes little to no sense.

If someone really wrote that great of a comment they'd be on law review. Not that many people write truly good comments, and I assure that given the number of people on law review who wrote on, that all of those people got a spot. So no, I don't think that person who "wrote a really good submission" but didn't get on because of grade-on exists, at least not this year. Also, your assumption that everyone who graded on just mailed it in is ill-founded. Sure there are people every year who assume they'll grade on and don't put in their best effort, but a) some of those people end up screwing themselves when they actually miss the cut, and b) I doubt that's as common now that only the top 5% grade on because it's very difficult to be secure in the top 5% after only 1 semester. One mediocre grade will knock you out. Also, there are more people taken by law review than they need because it's assumed that a number of those people who grade on will transfer out anyway, which somewhat mitigates this issue as well (in reality, probably only about 5 spots get "taken" by grade on). Your assumption that nobody who graded on would have written on is wrong as well. People who are gunners don't just turn that off for write-on (and people who truly bombed LP would have a hard time getting in the top 5%, and it takes more than 1 really good grade to be top 5%).

This is a lot of butt hurt for something that really doesn't matter that much.

You may be right, but you also may be wrong. You're not God you know?

Based on your incredible display of intellectual firepower in this thread, I have no doubt you wrote a beautiful comment, but lost your spot to someone who graded on. Hell, if law professors didn't grade so arbitrarily and law exams weren't completely luck based, you clearly would have been in the top 5% yourself.

Btw, I know of at least one top 5%er who didn't write on and thus didn't steal anybody's much more deserved spot.

Uh oh here comes the notorious humble bragger PnJ. Surprised you're not on the transfer forums humble bragging about your stats. If you were not a complete moron, you'd realize that I am a rising 3L. No wonder you bombed LP, you clearly cannot read.
Btw, I know of at least one top 5%er who didn't write on and thus didn't steal anybody's much more deserved spot.

[Joscellin]

OMG I know a top 5%er that didn't write on too! Do I get to join a club now?