So much less important it hardly even merits mention. The Bears, on the other hand, have been owned by USC as of late, no?BioEBear2010 wrote:The Trojans' record against unwanted pregnancies is pretty solid, though.crackberry wrote:Need I remind you what the Trojans' record is against the Cardinal the last three years?JohnnyTrojan08 wrote:Writing post to appear to "assume acceptance" FTW.![]()
But what I meant was that if I get rejected, then I can compare Harvard with nothing. And then it looks pretty darn good.![]()
And if I get accepted, then I can start actually comparing. As we Trojans can say frequently: a good problem to have.
Stanford 2010!!! Forum
- crackberry
- Posts: 3252
- Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
- CardinalRules
- Posts: 2332
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
It's an impressive achievement, since the girls there are amazing.BioEBear2010 wrote:The Trojans' record against unwanted pregnancies is pretty solid, though.crackberry wrote:Need I remind you what the Trojans' record is against the Cardinal the last three years?JohnnyTrojan08 wrote:Writing post to appear to "assume acceptance" FTW.![]()
But what I meant was that if I get rejected, then I can compare Harvard with nothing. And then it looks pretty darn good.![]()
And if I get accepted, then I can start actually comparing. As we Trojans can say frequently: a good problem to have.

Their record against hollowed-out horses could use some improvement.
- JohnnyTrojan08
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 5:46 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
I love how every time I try and post a serious topic/question, it turns into a brief discussion/bash of USC.
Crack = troll. Love ya anyway.
Crack = troll. Love ya anyway.
- crackberry
- Posts: 3252
- Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Haha, well to be fair, I do not try to hide the fact that I am a huge Stanford fan. I don't really think "troll" is the right word for what I am.JohnnyTrojan08 wrote:I love how every time I try and post a serious topic/question, it turns into a brief discussion/bash of USC.
Crack = troll. Love ya anyway.
Anyway, I think you should definitely update SLS about your accomplishments.
- CardinalRules
- Posts: 2332
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
I like USC (and Trojans) too, to be honest, so no worries.JohnnyTrojan08 wrote:I love how every time I try and post a serious topic/question, it turns into a brief discussion/bash of USC.
Crack = troll. Love ya anyway.

And do update them, of course.
Last edited by CardinalRules on Tue Mar 23, 2010 8:33 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- BioEBear2010
- Posts: 745
- Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:05 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
You just happened to run into the Bay Area wall of hate.JohnnyTrojan08 wrote:I love how every time I try and post a serious topic/question, it turns into a brief discussion/bash of USC.
Crack = troll. Love ya anyway.
But I agree with Crack -- update them

- JohnnyTrojan08
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 5:46 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
I guess I'm so far removed from undergrad that I've forgotten the bitter partisanship of the Pac 10.
Then again, during my time at USC, we were repeat champs and never, EVER lost to Stanford. So it wasn't even a topic of conversation. It'd be a bigger deal if I'd had to deal with the losses (or from Crack's perspective, wins).
Is there any reason I should NOT include a LOCI, or are you merely suggesting it would be unneeded?
Then again, during my time at USC, we were repeat champs and never, EVER lost to Stanford. So it wasn't even a topic of conversation. It'd be a bigger deal if I'd had to deal with the losses (or from Crack's perspective, wins).
Is there any reason I should NOT include a LOCI, or are you merely suggesting it would be unneeded?
- crackberry
- Posts: 3252
- Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
If you have meaningful updates to your file (which you do), it would be foolish not to update SLS with them.JohnnyTrojan08 wrote:I guess I'm so far removed from undergrad that I've forgotten the bitter partisanship of the Pac 10.
Then again, during my time at USC, we were repeat champs and never, EVER lost to Stanford. So it wasn't even a topic of conversation. It'd be a bigger deal if I'd had to deal with the losses (or from Crack's perspective, wins).
Is there any reason I should NOT include a LOCI, or are you merely suggesting it would be unneeded?
- JohnnyTrojan08
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 5:46 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
I think you misunderstand. My original question was whether I should send a LOCI WITH the resume update, and then CardinalRules suggested that I didn't need a LETTER because I've only been under review for less than a month. So I was wondering if a LOCI would be seen as a negative, since I'd be sending in an updated resume anyway.crackberry wrote: If you have meaningful updates to your file (which you do), it would be foolish not to update SLS with them.
- BioEBear2010
- Posts: 745
- Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:05 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
I would send the LOCI anyway, especially if SLS is your top choice. It shows more interest in the school than a simple resume drop.JohnnyTrojan08 wrote:I think you misunderstand. My original question was whether I should send a LOCI WITH the resume update, and then CardinalRules suggested that I didn't need a LETTER because I've only been under review for less than a month. So I was wondering if a LOCI would be seen as a negative, since I'd be sending in an updated resume anyway.crackberry wrote: If you have meaningful updates to your file (which you do), it would be foolish not to update SLS with them.
- crackberry
- Posts: 3252
- Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Ohh I see. I would use the resume drop as an excuse to reiterate your interest in the school with a LOCI.JohnnyTrojan08 wrote:I think you misunderstand. My original question was whether I should send a LOCI WITH the resume update, and then CardinalRules suggested that I didn't need a LETTER because I've only been under review for less than a month. So I was wondering if a LOCI would be seen as a negative, since I'd be sending in an updated resume anyway.crackberry wrote: If you have meaningful updates to your file (which you do), it would be foolish not to update SLS with them.
- CardinalRules
- Posts: 2332
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:20 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
I was just saying that it wasn't really necessary, but if you want to and have the time to devote the effort, there's nothing wrong with it. It's just that you shouldn't really be worried about your chances simply because you haven't heard from them by now.JohnnyTrojan08 wrote:I guess I'm so far removed from undergrad that I've forgotten the bitter partisanship of the Pac 10.
Then again, during my time at USC, we were repeat champs and never, EVER lost to Stanford. So it wasn't even a topic of conversation. It'd be a bigger deal if I'd had to deal with the losses (or from Crack's perspective, wins).
Is there any reason I should NOT include a LOCI, or are you merely suggesting it would be unneeded?
- WhiskeyGuy
- Posts: 361
- Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:34 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Agreed. It sounds like you have not communicated to SLS that SLS is your top choice (or at least that you really want to attend). I'd do it right by sending a LOCI.BioEBear2010 wrote:I would send the LOCI anyway, especially if SLS is your top choice. It shows more interest in the school than a simple resume drop.JohnnyTrojan08 wrote:I think you misunderstand. My original question was whether I should send a LOCI WITH the resume update, and then CardinalRules suggested that I didn't need a LETTER because I've only been under review for less than a month. So I was wondering if a LOCI would be seen as a negative, since I'd be sending in an updated resume anyway.crackberry wrote: If you have meaningful updates to your file (which you do), it would be foolish not to update SLS with them.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- parker09
- Posts: 430
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 5:15 am
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
"Dear Dean Deal" looks funny.
-
- Posts: 1341
- Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 12:58 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
I know. Awkward. She needs to change her nameparker09 wrote:"Dear Dean Deal" looks funny.

- parker09
- Posts: 430
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 5:15 am
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Haven't heard anything since I went complete in like October, so sent a LOCI via email (in body and as pdf attachment) that would have been sitting in their inbox this morning; just got an email acknowledgment that they will add it to my file.
Now just... 1+ more months of waiting for the inevitable rejection, to bring the grand total up to 5+ months. Whee!
Now just... 1+ more months of waiting for the inevitable rejection, to bring the grand total up to 5+ months. Whee!
- Sakura3210
- Posts: 189
- Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:29 am
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Ugh, I just got some feedback that my LOCI to Stanford was apparently not great.
That can't negatively affect me, right? It just won't help too much? please let this be the case...

Last edited by Sakura3210 on Wed Mar 24, 2010 1:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- Herb Watchfell
- Posts: 228
- Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 7:48 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Well, it depends.Sakura3210 wrote:Ugh, I just got some feedback that my LOCI to Stanford was apparently not great.That can't negatively affect me, right? It just won't help too much? please let this be the case...
Who gave you this "feedback"? A friend? A professor? Faye Deal?
- invisiblesun
- Posts: 329
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:01 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
If the feedback was from the SLS admissions office I'd say it probably negatively affects you...Herb Watchfell wrote:Well, it depends.Sakura3210 wrote:Ugh, I just got some feedback that my LOCI to Stanford was apparently not great.That can't negatively affect me, right? It just won't help too much? please let this be the case...
Who gave you this "feedback"? A friend? A professor? Faye Deal?
I wonder if there has ever been a dean whose last name was Dean...BenJ wrote:I know. Awkward. She needs to change her nameparker09 wrote:"Dear Dean Deal" looks funny.
- Sakura3210
- Posts: 189
- Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:29 am
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Pre-law advisor at my undergrad uni.Herb Watchfell wrote:Well, it depends.Sakura3210 wrote:Ugh, I just got some feedback that my LOCI to Stanford was apparently not great.That can't negatively affect me, right? It just won't help too much? please let this be the case...
Who gave you this "feedback"? A friend? A professor? Faye Deal?
Actually, I knew one - it was pretty weird.I wonder if there has ever been a dean whose last name was Dean...
- invisiblesun
- Posts: 329
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:01 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Hard to say- some prelaw advisors give terrible advice. For example, one told me that once you got beyond a certain point on LSAT and GPA, it was all about softs, and told me not to retake my 171 since it was a 98th percentile score. (My GPA is a mid 3.8 so it's not like I was at a GPA point where a retake wouldn't have helped prospects much.)Sakura3210 wrote:Pre-law advisor at my undergrad uni.Herb Watchfell wrote:Well, it depends.Sakura3210 wrote:Ugh, I just got some feedback that my LOCI to Stanford was apparently not great.That can't negatively affect me, right? It just won't help too much? please let this be the case...
Who gave you this "feedback"? A friend? A professor? Faye Deal?
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.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- BioEBear2010
- Posts: 745
- Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:05 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
I wouldn't worry too much. I sent my PS off to a pre-law advisor, and she thought it was terrible. I thought it was alright, so I sent it off anyway, with pretty positive results.Sakura3210 wrote: Pre-law advisor at my undergrad uni.
-
- Posts: 32987
- Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Understatement of the cycle.BioEBear2010 wrote:I wouldn't worry too much. I sent my PS off to a pre-law advisor, and she thought it was terrible. I thought it was alright, so I sent it off anyway, with pretty positive results.Sakura3210 wrote: Pre-law advisor at my undergrad uni.
- Sakura3210
- Posts: 189
- Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:29 am
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
No kidding.Kronk wrote:Understatement of the cycle.BioEBear2010 wrote:I wouldn't worry too much. I sent my PS off to a pre-law advisor, and she thought it was terrible. I thought it was alright, so I sent it off anyway, with pretty positive results.Sakura3210 wrote: Pre-law advisor at my undergrad uni.


- BioEBear2010
- Posts: 745
- Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 7:05 pm
Re: Stanford 2010!!!
Haha, thanks guys. Seriously, though, I wouldn't worry about it. Also, now that it's out of your hands, there's really no point fretting over it!Sakura3210 wrote:No kidding.Kronk wrote:Understatement of the cycle.BioEBear2010 wrote:I wouldn't worry too much. I sent my PS off to a pre-law advisor, and she thought it was terrible. I thought it was alright, so I sent it off anyway, with pretty positive results.Sakura3210 wrote: Pre-law advisor at my undergrad uni.Thanks Bio, knowing how things panned out well for you makes me feel a lot better.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login