Mediocre Grades and Yet Got the Firm Job I Wanted, AMA Forum

[BigZuck]

I wanted to get mad cause you called me a liar, but then you used silly goose and I can't stay mad at you. I didn't look for an example, if I'm being honest. I would, but that's going to be a lot of work.

Why would it be a lot of work to find one example if it's such a prevalent sentiment?

[BigZuck]

How is he talking about you behind your back in your very own thread?

It's not Spidey's thread, it's Mr. Burns'

Although Peter Parker over here was an active participant in this thread and understand when I was addressing something he said so it's not like he didn't know that I was talking about him or doing anything behind his E-back. So I'm not sure what the complaint was about. Maybe it's a twitter thing? I dunno, I'm too old to keep up I think.

[rpupkin]

I wanted to get mad cause you called me a liar, but then you used silly goose and I can't stay mad at you. I didn't look for an example, if I'm being honest. I would, but that's going to be a lot of work.

Why would it be a lot of work to find one example if it's such a prevalent sentiment?

He probably just doesn't want to search through this "hellhole of elitism and hivemind insanity." It could be triggering.

[mrsnrub]

I wanted to get mad cause you called me a liar, but then you used silly goose and I can't stay mad at you. I didn't look for an example, if I'm being honest. I would, but that's going to be a lot of work.

Why would it be a lot of work to find one example if it's such a prevalent sentiment?

He probably just doesn't want to search through this "hellhole of elitism and hivemind insanity." It could be triggering.

Triggering is a bogus concept. It's SJW nonsense. I'm just lazy and this is inconsequential.

[rpupkin]

I wanted to get mad cause you called me a liar, but then you used silly goose and I can't stay mad at you. I didn't look for an example, if I'm being honest. I would, but that's going to be a lot of work.

Why would it be a lot of work to find one example if it's such a prevalent sentiment?

He probably just doesn't want to search through this "hellhole of elitism and hivemind insanity." It could be triggering.

Triggering is a bogus concept. It's SJW nonsense. I'm just lazy and this is inconsequential.

(Posts 20 times in own "inconsequential" thread)

[BigZuck]

Yeah I mean the whole point of the thread is to give hope for people who have suffered at the hands of the Hivemind and to show the Hive that it was/is wrong. And yet, you can't come up with a single example of the Hive acting in accordance with this elitism? Because it's "inconsequential"? Really?

Come on, Goose. You're either making things up or you've never understood what you've read. Which is it?

[A. Nony Mouse]

How is he talking about you behind your back in your very own thread?

It's not Spidey's thread, it's Mr. Burns'

Although Peter Parker over here was an active participant in this thread and understand when I was addressing something he said so it's not like he didn't know that I was talking about him or doing anything behind his E-back. So I'm not sure what the complaint was about. Maybe it's a twitter thing? I dunno, I'm too old to keep up I think.

Damn, you're right, I can't read tonight. Still think it's weird to say it's behind someone's back when they're actually participating in the thread, though.

[TetrisBlock]

Is the AMA still going on? My question: You can look at the lst for your school to see both the average scholarship and the employment numbers for your school so you know both the debt load and the typical employment result for a student at your school. Why do you keep mentioning that your result justifies your choice? If I put 2 bullets into a revolver, spun the chamber, and fired, should I consider it a good decision to have done so if I can look back and see that I didn't die? The 2 bullets would be assuming 33% unemployment rate and tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt the average student at your school has. Feel free to add a bullet to this analogy if it is closer to 50% unemployment. To make the analogy a little better for you, you can even bet that if you have it on a particular empty chamber you win a good job. Not only did you live, you were one of the 16% who got a good job out of it. It just seems gross to brag that you weren't destroyed and that others should follow your steps.

Things can work out no matter what poor choice you make, but it doesn't mean that it was the right choice to make. It means it was a lucky choice.

ETA:

How is he talking about you behind your back in your very own thread?

It's not Spidey's thread, it's Mr. Burns'

Although Peter Parker over here was an active participant in this thread and understand when I was addressing something he said so it's not like he didn't know that I was talking about him or doing anything behind his E-back. So I'm not sure what the complaint was about. Maybe it's a twitter thing? I dunno, I'm too old to keep up I think.

Damn, you're right, I can't read tonight. Still think it's weird to say it's behind someone's back when they're actually participating in the thread, though.

It's weird to call it subtweeting rather than saying it's behind someone's back.

[BottomOfTotem]

[quote="TetrisBlock"]Is the AMA still going on? My question: You can look at the lst for your school to see both the average scholarship and the employment numbers for your school so you know both the debt load and the typical employment result for a student at your school. Why do you keep mentioning that your result justifies your choice? If I put 2 bullets into a revolver, spun the chamber, and fired, should I consider it a good decision to have done so if I can look back and see that I didn't die? The 2 bullets would be assuming 33% unemployment rate and tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt the average student at your school has. Feel free to add a bullet to this analogy if it is closer to 50% unemployment. To make the analogy a little better for you, you can even bet that if you have it on a particular empty chamber you win a good job. Not only did you live, you were one of the 16% who got a good job out of it. It just seems gross to brag that you weren't destroyed and that others should follow your steps.

For what it's worth, I am not a negative person, nor do I particularly care about the OP. With that said, it is discouraging and somewhat revolting to see the responses on this page. This situation has prompted me to address a couple issues.

1) The above "quote" out of the post is a horrible analogy, as was the past reference to the OP's situation being like "winning the lottery". I'm not sure if it is from relative inexperience within the job market, or just an attempt to be funny, but it simply doesn't work. In your analogy, and the lottery example, the results are pure luck. In the OP's experience, he had a goal, created a plan, and he executed it to his benefit. Again, not at all similar to a purely luck-based hypothetical.

2) My questioning of the above poster's inexperience maybe relates back to the person who believed that reading a 509 report is all that it takes to be a "credible" source on legal (or any profession for that matter) employment. To say that those who have partaken in recruiting, interviews, job searches, and so on are not more "credible" in regards to the intricacies that may enhance one's opportunity to secure legal employment is naive to say the least. Statistics are important, nobody denies the fact. But anyone who has spent meaningful time within fields that work closely with such measures knows that to pull blanketing facts out of such narrow statistics is dangerous.

3) The OP is not, nor never was, saying that everyone should go to law school. Rather, according to his actual post, he is saying that a good outcome can come from attending a lower ranked school, if you play your cards right.

4) A few of you on here are pure douchebags, plain and simple. Good luck with life.

5) OP: What would you say, in regards to the work that led to you being promoted to "paid", was the key to getting the attention of those who were in charge? Was it simply well-executed work, or was it more nuanced? (After all, this is an "ask" forum).

Thanks for taking the time.

[A. Nony Mouse]

^so why did the people who went to the OP's school who didn't have good outcomes end up in that position? Did none of them have a goal, create a plan, and execute it?

(No one on TLS has ever said that people can't have a good outcome out of a lower-ranked school. The question is how someone choosing to attend such a school knows they're going to have one of those outcomes. And I say this as someone who went to a lower-ranked school.)

[BottomOfTotem]

^so why did the people who went to the OP's school who didn't have good outcomes end up in that position? Did none of them have a goal, create a plan, and execute it?

(No one on TLS has ever said that people can't have a good outcome out of a lower-ranked school. The question is how someone choosing to attend such a school knows they're going to have one of those outcomes. And I say this as someone who went to a lower-ranked school.)

That misses the point of this post, as well as my comment. I'm sure plenty of people have had poor outcomes, even with the best of planning. The offering by the OP is an example of how it CAN work. Perhaps for those new to the site, and or to the potential legal domain, this is invaluable advice.

Again, it is understood that people do not get jobs 100% of the time. Further, it is also universally accepted that the higher ranked the school is, the higher your chances are of both general employment and Big Law employment. Stop beating that to death. Let us instead offer encouragement and useful tactical advisement. If you have nothing to offer in that regard, perhaps this isn't the best place to post.

I don't want to sound like the forum police (although I know I am - which is an issue), but it would be great to not only ease off the pessimism, but also to add some new material that may help a potential student.

[rpupkin]

Again, it is understood that people do not get jobs 100% of the time. Further, it is also universally accepted that the higher ranked the school is, the higher your chances are of both general employment and Big Law employment. Stop beating that to death. Let us instead offer encouragement and useful tactical advisement. If you have nothing to offer in that regard, perhaps this isn't the best place to post.

Based on what I've seen, TLS does a pretty good job offering encouragement and "tactical advisement" to those struggling to find jobs. But you're confusing two different things: the advice given to someone who is choosing where and whether to attend a particular law school a particular price, versus the advice given to someone who is already in school, already has grades, and is looking to make the best of their employment prospects. When dealing with the former, informing applicants that the school they're considering may not be worth the price is tactical advisement, to use your phrase.

[stego]

^so why did the people who went to the OP's school who didn't have good outcomes end up in that position? Did none of them have a goal, create a plan, and execute it?

(No one on TLS has ever said that people can't have a good outcome out of a lower-ranked school. The question is how someone choosing to attend such a school knows they're going to have one of those outcomes. And I say this as someone who went to a lower-ranked school.)

That misses the point of this post, as well as my comment. I'm sure plenty of people have had poor outcomes, even with the best of planning. The offering by the OP is an example of how it CAN work. Perhaps for those new to the site, and or to the potential legal domain, this is invaluable advice.

Again, it is understood that people do not get jobs 100% of the time. Further, it is also universally accepted that the higher ranked the school is, the higher your chances are of both general employment and Big Law employment. Stop beating that to death. Let us instead offer encouragement and useful tactical advisement. If you have nothing to offer in that regard, perhaps this isn't the best place to post.

I don't want to sound like the forum police (although I know I am - which is an issue), but it would be great to not only ease off the pessimism, but also to add some new material that may help a potential student.

The funny thing about you sounding like the forum police is that you literally just told one of the mods that maybe this isn't the best place for her to post.

[WinSome]

.

[kcdc1]

According to my scientific sampling of TLS posts, 92% of students attending low-ranked law schools achieve excellent employment outcomes. The problem is that only 24% of students' friends attending the same schools secure any employment before graduating. The overwhelming conclusion is that attending a TTT law school is a wise financial investment, but that friendships kill careers.

[pancakes3]

Hey, OP - how much are you making?

[cavalier1138]

For what it's worth, I am not a negative person, nor do I particularly care about the OP. With that said, it is discouraging and somewhat revolting to see the responses on this page. This situation has prompted me to address a couple issues.

1) The above "quote" out of the post is a horrible analogy, as was the past reference to the OP's situation being like "winning the lottery". I'm not sure if it is from relative inexperience within the job market, or just an attempt to be funny, but it simply doesn't work. In your analogy, and the lottery example, the results are pure luck. In the OP's experience, he had a goal, created a plan, and he executed it to his benefit. Again, not at all similar to a purely luck-based hypothetical.

2) My questioning of the above poster's inexperience maybe relates back to the person who believed that reading a 509 report is all that it takes to be a "credible" source on legal (or any profession for that matter) employment. To say that those who have partaken in recruiting, interviews, job searches, and so on are not more "credible" in regards to the intricacies that may enhance one's opportunity to secure legal employment is naive to say the least. Statistics are important, nobody denies the fact. But anyone who has spent meaningful time within fields that work closely with such measures knows that to pull blanketing facts out of such narrow statistics is dangerous.

3) The OP is not, nor never was, saying that everyone should go to law school. Rather, according to his actual post, he is saying that a good outcome can come from attending a lower ranked school, if you play your cards right.

4) A few of you on here are pure douchebags, plain and simple. Good luck with life.

5) OP: What would you say, in regards to the work that led to you being promoted to "paid", was the key to getting the attention of those who were in charge? Was it simply well-executed work, or was it more nuanced? (After all, this is an "ask" forum).

Thanks for taking the time.

Well, in order:

1. You're right. It's more like someone who learns how to play blackjack passingly well and then claims that anyone who sits down at the table can walk away with a fortune because they made one good bet and got rich. Except in this case, they didn't really get rich. But that's the thing with analogies; they're not meant to be perfect.

2. Yes, all you need to do to be a reliable source on legal employment trends is be capable of reading summary reports. No, those reports don't tell you about the intangible factors like hustle, brains, and pure moxie. But when only 10% of your class is going to get a shot at a particular job type by sheer virtue of being at the top of the curve, moxie isn't going to cut it. No one has ever claimed that a decent outcome from a lower-ranked school is impossible. The only claim people have made (and this goes right back to the OP's original thread when they were choosing schools) is that it is unwise to get yourself in $150k of debt on a very uncertain outcome.

3. Yes, and that's a shitty thing to tell people. You cannot say, "I did it, so it can work for you," and then claim that you're not actually recommending your course of action. It was a gamble that happened to pay off in this circumstance. But much like the aforementioned blackjack player, the OP can throw their hands in the air and say, "Well, you must have done something wrong," when most other people in their situation don't get the same outcome.

4. Ok.

Look, you can bitch and moan about how no one gives fair weight to good, old-fashioned hustle anymore. But numbers don't lie. If you are going to a school where you have less than a 10% chance of making enough money to pay off your debts, then going to that school was never a good idea, even if you get your desired outcome.

[PeanutsNJam]

2) My questioning of the above poster's inexperience maybe relates back to the person who believed that reading a 509 report is all that it takes to be a "credible" source on legal (or any profession for that matter) employment. To say that those who have partaken in recruiting, interviews, job searches, and so on are not more "credible" in regards to the intricacies that may enhance one's opportunity to secure legal employment is naive to say the least. Statistics are important, nobody denies the fact. But anyone who has spent meaningful time within fields that work closely with such measures knows that to pull blanketing facts out of such narrow statistics is dangerous.

If only people who have been on a firm's recruiting committee are "credible," then why are you giving advice?

Where did I say recruiting people are not more credible? I said the mere fact of having full time legal employment doesn't make you any more credible. A biglaw 1st year associate on his first day on the job isn't going to be more credible than anybody else who has read a 509 report.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Again, it is understood that people do not get jobs 100% of the time. Further, it is also universally accepted that the higher ranked the school is, the higher your chances are of both general employment and Big Law employment. Stop beating that to death. Let us instead offer encouragement and useful tactical advisement. If you have nothing to offer in that regard, perhaps this isn't the best place to post.

Based on what I've seen, TLS does a pretty good job offering encouragement and "tactical advisement" to those struggling to find jobs. But you're confusing two different things: the advice given to someone who is choosing where and whether to attend a particular law school a particular price, versus the advice given to someone who is already in school, already has grades, and is looking to make the best of their employment prospects. When dealing with the former, informing applicants that the school they're considering may not be worth the price is tactical advisement, to use your phrase.

I agree with this.

I'm also not suggesting that the OP has nothing to offer about his experiences that would be useful to posters here. I just take issue with the idea that he is countering the hivemind, which is how he expressly framed his first post.

Re: winning the lottery - an imperfect analogy because it's not all luck, but luck plays a really big role. I had a good outcome out of a school that TLS would not recommend attending for most goals (including my current job). I did a lot to make my good outcome happen, but I can also identify points at which I benefited entirely from luck, or at least factors over which I had no control.

[BigZuck]

The whole point of the thread was for the OP to make a point about the Hive, not to help someone else secure employment or offer advice you silly geese.

[seagan823]

I think that these threads where people lash out at the TLS hive mind are a result of the tone that many people choose to us when giving advice. I don't believe TLS is all t-14 or bust and the advice I have received on this forum has been incredibly useful. However, a lot of the advice given has an air of superiority. Or people lose patience with posters who are hearing that for the first time that their decision to go to law school is probably a bad one and then start insulting them. I think that really pisses people off and makes them believe that TLS is just full of elitist assholes.

[First Offense]

And?

[A. Nony Mouse]

They have a point. I get why people here respond to newbies the way they do (usually because they've seen the same proposed scenario a thousand times), and most of the tone problems arise when a newbie gets defensive and lashes out, but they're not wrong. You may or may not think that's a problem, of course.

[First Offense]

They have a point. I get why people here respond to newbies the way they do (usually because they've seen the same proposed scenario a thousand times), and most of the tone problems arise when a newbie gets defensive and lashes out, but they're not wrong. You may or may not think that's a problem, of course.

No I get that. I've seen the same shit posted thousands of times in my ~5ish years posting here. I'm not going to respond as substantively to the "Can I get Biglaw if I'm top 2% at Barry?" than I would have then.

I just don't mind the snark. TLS serves to disabuse people of the notion that they're somehow special. It's a service that is sorely lacking in society.

[BottomOfTotem]

It's a non-biglaw firm. Congrats on getting a legal job paying somewhat decently (I'm guessing 60-90k) from bottom half of a T1, but that's not entirely uncommon. Non-biglaw firms are not nearly as grade sensitive and care a lot more about interviews, ties, work experience, etc.

The "25%" chance refers to biglaw because 25% of of a class at the school in question got a biglaw job.

Nobody is saying you HAVE to go to a T14 if you want a legal job, they're saying if you want a biglaw job (or prestigious PI or whatever else that's competitive), you best maximize your odds because 25% or 30% or whatever aren't great odds.

Have you landed you first full time job out of law school yet? Oh, you are still in law school? Please, continue to advise others on post-law school employment.

Jesus...

How is having full time employment somehow going to make me any more qualified to talk about law school employment in general? We're all working off the same ABA 509 data. You don't automatically get a memo when you get your first full time job detailing how legal hiring works.

Qualified? Or Credible? Credibility is very important, as you may learn when you take a trial advocacy class, join the trial team, or intern your 2L-3L years.

SAVAGE

How is having full time employment somehow going to make me any more qualified to talk credible about law school employment in general? We're all working off the same ABA 509 data. You don't automatically get a memo when you get your first full time job detailing how legal hiring works.

Well, firstly, I was referring to someone who has gone through the process, not just a recruiter - sorry if I was not clear. And you have just repeated what you said prior (about reading a 509 being sufficient), which what I countered by pointing out that someone with experience (i.e. being hired) has a unique perspective that someone who just reads a report does not have.

rpupkin: In my obviously subjective opinion, I don't think I was confusing two different things. The OP was offering both of the things you mentioned: advice for prospective students and those who are looking for a job. In the section of my post that you quoted I was referring to the latter, but the entirety of the post could be applied to both in certain circumstances. As far as the snidely referenced tactical advice, I would say there is an extremely overwhelming sentiment on this site (from what I have seen) that says do not go to a lower ranked school under most circumstances. And before you say it, I have actually not disagreed with this advice. Instead, I have questioned the method of delivery and have asked for less repetitiveness.

For the entire "hive" (joke): First off, everyone needs to relax on the defending of TLS - it's feelings are not hurt. To put down someone in defense of a website is not a good look. Secondly, I disagree with the sentiment that you cannot say, "I did it, so you can too". Coupled with the inescapable advice given by most of you regarding the likelihood, it provides closer to a complete view of the realities of legal employment. Please just think that through before responding. It may not be likely, or smart to depend on them solely, but to say they should not be uttered would be to suppress a part of the story. I will repeat for clarity: I understand that these stories are not the norm, and should not be construed as such - this though does not make them useless.

Lastly, I appreciate TLS, and all of the posters here. I still remember being new to the entire process, and found solace in the stories of all of you. Further, I find it invaluable that we can have these sort of debates. I hope I have not offended anyone with my criticism of their post(s).