Overheard at the LSAT Forum

[JazzyMac]

Damn, 2 observations with this thread:

1) Some of this stuff is incredibly funny

2) DAMN, there are some extremely pompous attitudes posting in this thread! Some of us need to chill out, stop being so judgmental of other people aiming for scores that may not be what YOU are looking for, and take that stick out of your @$$. Just remember, there are students at these "toilet schools" that WILL be making more money than you someday, and living a more enjoyable life - I guarantee it. You are a rookie, at best, chill out and cut down your ego just a bit. None of us are God's gift to the world - just a bit of reality. If someone has a goal of 150, that's awesome, good for them. I personally would dread a 150, but that's only because my goal is not to get a 150. You remind me of those young, weak newbies at the gym staring in the mirror and making fun of others, judging them.

That is all, carry on.

+1

[CicBob17]

Damn, 2 observations with this thread:

1) Some of this stuff is incredibly funny

2) DAMN, there are some extremely pompous attitudes posting in this thread! Some of us need to chill out, stop being so judgmental of other people aiming for scores that may not be what YOU are looking for, and take that stick out of your @$$. Just remember, there are students at these "toilet schools" that WILL be making more money than you someday, and living a more enjoyable life - I guarantee it. You are a rookie, at best, chill out and cut down your ego just a bit. None of us are God's gift to the world - just a bit of reality. If someone has a goal of 150, that's awesome, good for them. I personally would dread a 150, but that's only because my goal is not to get a 150. You remind me of those young, weak newbies at the gym staring in the mirror and making fun of others, judging them.

That is all, carry on.

New, insightful stuff in this post

+1

[lizzielemon]

Damn, 2 observations with this thread:

1) Some of this stuff is incredibly funny

2) DAMN, there are some extremely pompous attitudes posting in this thread! Some of us need to chill out, stop being so judgmental of other people aiming for scores that may not be what YOU are looking for, and take that stick out of your @$$. Just remember, there are students at these "toilet schools" that WILL be making more money than you someday, and living a more enjoyable life - I guarantee it. You are a rookie, at best, chill out and cut down your ego just a bit. None of us are God's gift to the world - just a bit of reality. If someone has a goal of 150, that's awesome, good for them. I personally would dread a 150, but that's only because my goal is not to get a 150. You remind me of those young, weak newbies at the gym staring in the mirror and making fun of others, judging them.

That is all, carry on.

+1

+2

[SplitMyPants]

You remind me of those young, weak newbies at the gym staring in the mirror and making fun of others, judging them.

Totally—if low beginner gainz could bring on $250k of unserviceable debt.

I personally would dread a 150, but that's only because my goal is not to get a 150.

Also, the fact that you felt urged to include this means you need to get off your high horse.

[GreatBraffsby]

Damn, 2 observations with this thread:

1) Some of this stuff is incredibly funny

2) DAMN, there are some extremely pompous attitudes posting in this thread! Some of us need to chill out, stop being so judgmental of other people aiming for scores that may not be what YOU are looking for, and take that stick out of your @$$. Just remember, there are students at these "toilet schools" that WILL be making more money than you someday, and living a more enjoyable life - I guarantee it. You are a rookie, at best, chill out and cut down your ego just a bit. None of us are God's gift to the world - just a bit of reality. If someone has a goal of 150, that's awesome, good for them. I personally would dread a 150, but that's only because my goal is not to get a 150. You remind me of those young, weak newbies at the gym staring in the mirror and making fun of others, judging them.

That is all, carry on.

I disagree. If someone has a goal of 150, the odds are very high that they don't understand what doors that will open for them. Without career/family ties or significant work experience, a score lower than 160 means they likely won't get into a state flagship or the t-14. Furthermore, their odds of getting a scholarship are minimal.

This isn't being judgmental, pompous, or neurotic. It's dealing with facts. LSAT score and GPA are very strong determinants of your school and scholarship, which in turn influence your odds of success. Of course some people beat the odds, but that doesn't make playing the lottery a sound investment. Saying you need a 160+ isn't like telling someone that their hobbies are just as good as someone else's, but more like helping them avoid financial and professional suicide.

Telling someone with a 150 that it is ok to spend hundred of thousands of dollars, as well as 3 years, on the schools available to them is flat out wrong. I think allowing someone to take the test with an unscrutinized goal of a 150 is a disservice under the guise of being accepting. Law school is an expensive, long term commitment, and a score of 150 can equate to spending a significant portion of your life in debt for minimal reward.

I really don't understand what you mean by posters being "rookies" or having egos. What I just wrote is backed up with well-documented acceptance employment statistics, in addition to expert testimony. The advice of getting the highest possible LSAT score in order to either attend one of the few schools that actually provides acceptable return on investment or to get a hefty discount on a regional school is unimpeachable in the case of most, if not all, applicants. So is the fact that if a 150 is your best possible score, you should strongly reconsider your choice to attend law school.

[bmathers]

Preparing and doing well on the LSAT is obviously fairly important - however, I was just very turned off by the elitism in this thread. Not scoring at an elite level and attending an elite school is not the end-all be-all of having a successful law career. I personally know a few millionaires and county judges who attended lowly ranked, or unranked schools.

Who you know is more important than what you know. Network, network, network and secure good summer internships. Are the doors as widely opened at a ~100-rank school vs a T14? Of coarse not, but your career is not doomed if you do not attend a top school.

[Hennessy]

"I didn't study, because it is about logic and at this point you either are good at logic or not and can't really improve that"

Funny, but kinda true if you think about it...

Yeah agreed - half the people take the test get under a 150 and some of them studied, it's not like the other half all studied their asses off. How many 179 stories do you read about from people who took maybe two or three practice tests? I think people are either apt at LSAT-type problem solving or they aren't.

[Smc1994]

.

[landshoes]

about a gazillion people on this site upped their scores substantially after studying

my score went up 6 points which took me from about the 25%ile for my school to about the 75%ile

"I didn't study, because it is about logic and at this point you either are good at logic or not and can't really improve that"

Funny, but kinda true if you think about it...

Yeah agreed - half the people take the test get under a 150 and some of them studied, it's not like the other half all studied their asses off. How many 179 stories do you read about from people who took maybe two or three practice tests? I think people are either apt at LSAT-type problem solving or they aren't.

Seconded. I know it's not a 179, but I managed a 176 with less than a month of studying. I think that certain upbringings -- parents or close relatives who are lawyers -- can help prepare someone for the type of thinking that the LSAT requires.

if upbringings can prepare you, why wouldn't studying prepare you...

[Hennessy]

about a gazillion people on this site upped their scores substantially after studying

my score went up 6 points which took me from about the 25%ile for my school to about the 75%ile

"I didn't study, because it is about logic and at this point you either are good at logic or not and can't really improve that"

Funny, but kinda true if you think about it...

Yeah agreed - half the people take the test get under a 150 and some of them studied, it's not like the other half all studied their asses off. How many 179 stories do you read about from people who took maybe two or three practice tests? I think people are either apt at LSAT-type problem solving or they aren't.

Seconded. I know it's not a 179, but I managed a 176 with less than a month of studying. I think that certain upbringings -- parents or close relatives who are lawyers -- can help prepare someone for the type of thinking that the LSAT requires.

if upbringings can prepare you, why wouldn't studying prepare you...

+20 yrs. of being trained to think critically and recognize patterns vs. 3 months of cramming how to figure out one question-type from another. If you don't have the first one, the second one can only help to an extent. No one scores a 180 without natural talent; you can't game a 180.

[landshoes]

natural talent doesn't come from upbringing though so why call it "natural talent"

I agree that natural talent is a factor but then when you're like "has a family of lawyers and therefore is exposed to the method of thinking" I find it a lot more sketchy as an argument

especially since we have substantial evidence that the LSAT is very learnable over a relatively short period of time (within limits, obviously)

[FairchildFLT]

I like how the point of this thread was to talk about funny things overheard at the LSAT and it has devolved into a dick measuring contest. Lawyers, amirite?

[Hennessy]

I like how the point of this thread was to talk about funny things overheard at the LSAT and it has devolved into a dick measuring contest. Lawyers, amirite?

we ain't lawyers yet, just argumentative and anxiety-ridden

anyway the other day I was talking to another June-taker who told me his tutor assured him the unscored section would have a cover-page stamped "UNSCORED"

guy needs his money back

[CicBob17]

I like how the point of this thread was to talk about funny things overheard at the LSAT and it has devolved into a dick measuring contest. Lawyers, amirite?

we ain't lawyers yet, just argumentative and anxiety-ridden

anyway the other day I was talking to another June-taker who told me his tutor assured him the unscored section would have a cover-page stamped "UNSCORED"

guy needs his money back

maybe its so he wont chill on any section thinking its unscored because he'll be waiting for that big cover page to slack off

[CPAlawHopefu]

Damn, 2 observations with this thread:

1) Some of this stuff is incredibly funny

2) DAMN, there are some extremely pompous attitudes posting in this thread! Some of us need to chill out, stop being so judgmental of other people aiming for scores that may not be what YOU are looking for, and take that stick out of your @$$. Just remember, there are students at these "toilet schools" that WILL be making more money than you someday, and living a more enjoyable life - I guarantee it. You are a rookie, at best, chill out and cut down your ego just a bit. None of us are God's gift to the world - just a bit of reality. If someone has a goal of 150, that's awesome, good for them. I personally would dread a 150, but that's only because my goal is not to get a 150. You remind me of those young, weak newbies at the gym staring in the mirror and making fun of others, judging them.

That is all, carry on.

I disagree. If someone has a goal of 150, the odds are very high that they don't understand what doors that will open for them. Without career/family ties or significant work experience, a score lower than 160 means they likely won't get into a state flagship or the t-14. Furthermore, their odds of getting a scholarship are minimal.

This isn't being judgmental, pompous, or neurotic. It's dealing with facts. LSAT score and GPA are very strong determinants of your school and scholarship, which in turn influence your odds of success. Of course some people beat the odds, but that doesn't make playing the lottery a sound investment. Saying you need a 160+ isn't like telling someone that their hobbies are just as good as someone else's, but more like helping them avoid financial and professional suicide.

Telling someone with a 150 that it is ok to spend hundred of thousands of dollars, as well as 3 years, on the schools available to them is flat out wrong. I think allowing someone to take the test with an unscrutinized goal of a 150 is a disservice under the guise of being accepting. Law school is an expensive, long term commitment, and a score of 150 can equate to spending a significant portion of your life in debt for minimal reward.

[quote[I really don't understand what you mean by posters being "rookies" or having egos. What I just wrote is backed up with well-documented acceptance employment statistics, in addition to expert testimony. The advice of getting the highest possible LSAT score in order to either attend one of the few schools that actually provides acceptable return on investment or to get a hefty discount on a regional school is unimpeachable in the case of most, if not all, applicants. So is the fact that if a 150 is your best possible score, you should strongly reconsider your choice to attend law school.

lol yes it is. The fact that your facts are straight does not prevent you from coming off as "judgmental, pompous, and neurotic." You can have the most accurate data to support your case and still come off as a pompous asshat based on the way you express your views.

And he is correct in saying that you are just a rookie. No first-hand experience in a formal legal hiring process (part-time jobs off craigslist do not count) and the fact that you must resort to third-party statistics and testimonies to back up your case does make you a rookie. Spending few months on an online forum and reviewing LST data does not suddenly boost your status from a rookie to a seasoned consultant in legal career when you haven't even started first year in law school.

[Hennessy]

lol yes it is. The fact that your facts are straight does not prevent you from coming off as "judgmental, pompous, and neurotic." You can have the most accurate data to support your case and still come off as a pompous asshat based on the way you express your views.

And he is correct in saying that you are just a rookie. No first-hand experience in a formal legal hiring process (part-time jobs off craigslist do not count) and the fact that you must resort to third-party statistics and testimonies to back up your case does make you a rookie. Spending few months on an online forum and reviewing LST data does not suddenly boost your status from a rookie to a seasoned consultant in legal career when you haven't even started first year in law school.

u okay bruh? u need a hug?

[Winter is Coming]

Love the skepticism on using "third-party statistics." As in using objective, concrete data is somehow worse than anecdotes that the "rookies" don't have.

[GreatBraffsby]

Love the skepticism on using "third-party statistics." As in using objective, concrete data is somehow worse than anecdotes that the "rookies" don't have.

+1. Tell me again how medians and employment reports published by the schools themselves are "third party". Law schools themselves issue data screaming "this is a risky investment" and make it clear what gpa/scores will likely get you wait listed (25th%), accepted (median) and money (75th% and up).

LSN, LST and this site are helpful tools, but the official stats and costs are all you need to understand why a high LSAT score is imperative.

[tsujimoto74]

Love the skepticism on using "third-party statistics." As in using objective, concrete data is somehow worse than anecdotes that the "rookies" don't have.

Always remember: the plural of anecdote is data!
I'm here to help.
/sarcasm

[Hennessy]

Love the skepticism on using "third-party statistics." As in using objective, concrete data is somehow worse than anecdotes that the "rookies" don't have.

+1. Tell me again how medians and employment reports published by the schools themselves are "third party". Law schools themselves issue data screaming "this is a risky investment" and make it clear what gpa/scores will likely get you wait listed (25th%), accepted (median) and money (75th% and up).

LSN, LST and this site are helpful tools, but the official stats and costs are all you need to understand why a high LSAT score is imperative.

+2. Using the goal of a 150 LSAT score for any school is pretty obviously stupid, whether you think law school stats are "third party" or not. This isn't t14, this is t200. If you are applying to any law school, whether it's YLS or Pennsylvania Dutch Barn University, your 150 is worth no scholarship money.

"pompous" "neurotic" LOL get a grip, don't encourage people to willingly go deeply into debt that they could easily avoid

[GreatBraffsby]

+2. Using the goal of a 150 LSAT score for any school is pretty obviously stupid, whether you think law school stats are "third party" or not. This isn't t14, this is t200. If you are applying to any law school, whether it's YLS or Pennsylvania Dutch Barn University, your 150 is worth no scholarship money.

"pompous" "neurotic" LOL get a grip, don't encourage people to willingly go deeply into debt that they could easily avoid

+180 for Pennsylvania Dutch Barn University.

[CPAlawHopefu]

ITT: People do not understand what "attitude" means.

Hint: Attitude has nothing to do with how much factual data you have. You may have an encyclopedic knowledge of every topic known to mankind under your belt, that still doesn't give you any immunity over what massive ego you have.


Also: You are still just a rookie. Just because you know what median is needed to get into xyz school and are able to pull employment data by clicking on its career profile link does not certify you as a law school expert give me a fking break

[GreatBraffsby]

ITT: People do not understand what "attitude" means.

Hint: Attitude has nothing to do with how much factual data you have. You may have an encyclopedic knowledge of every topic known to mankind under your belt, that still doesn't give you any immunity over what massive ego you have.


Also: You are still just a rookie. Just because you know what median is needed to get into xyz school and are able to pull employment data by clicking on its career profile link does not certify you as a law school expert give me a fking break

I think the disagreement is if telling someone that it doesn't make sense to go to law school with a low LSAT score is judgmental in itself. I don't think it's necessarily rude to tell someone their goals are unrealistic or they're about to make a bad investment. In my opinion, this forum is pretty charitable in that it strongly tries to dissuade people from making bad decisions. Of course tone can make someone pompous, but I don't think the act of telling a painful truth is anything less than a kindness.

Like I said before, I still don't know what "rookie" is supposed to mean. Obviously not many of us are hiring professionals or law school employees, which I guess technically makes us amateurs. But I think that's a high standard for someone being able to give valuable input.

I hope your post was intentional trolling, because it expressed a terrible "attitude" towards other posters.

[Hikikomorist]

WTF happened to this thread?

[nicknar]

WTF happened to this thread?

A chain of different groups of people have been carrying on the same argument about whether it's pompous to make fun of people who haven't prepared for the LSAT for like six years. It's actually kind of amazing when you think about it. A torch whose eternal flame of neuroses is passed from one generation to the next.