Work Experience is proving to not matter this cycle. Forum

[jmaan]

I went to high school during the Reagan administration.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Look at how immature you are.... Life fail awaits you. Almost poetically, this thread concludes with what is perhaps the greatest reason [strike]to factor extensive work experience into admissions considerations.... maturity. Grow up.[/strike] I'm 30+ and arguing on TLS, I hate my life

[reasonabledoubt]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Look at how immature you are.... Life fail awaits you. Almost poetically, this thread concludes with what is perhaps the greatest reason [strike]to factor extensive work experience into admissions considerations.... maturity. Grow up.[/strike] I'm 30+ and arguing on TLS, I love my life[/quote][/quote]

You're really hung up on the fact that I'm 30 - interesting. Childish, but interesting. And you want to study law?

[td6624]

You're really hung up on the fact that I'm 30 - interesting. Childish, but interesting. And you want to study law?

I don't want to get into this thread really, but if your goal is to present yourself as more mature than some of the people here, I would advise you to stop responding.

[reasonabledoubt]

I went to high school during the Reagan administration.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Look at how immature you are.... Life fail awaits you. Almost poetically, this thread concludes with what is perhaps the greatest reason to factor extensive work experience into admissions considerations.... maturity. Grow up.

[vanwinkle]

... Life fail awaits you. Almost poetically, this thread concludes with what is perhaps the greatest reason to factor extensive work experience into admissions considerations.... maturity. Grow up.

Requoting yourself isn't exactly helping your cause any. Do you really think you can say "this thread concludes with..." and it'll conclude?

[clevinger33]

... Life fail awaits you. Almost poetically, this thread concludes with what is perhaps the greatest reason to factor extensive work experience into admissions considerations.... maturity. Grow up.

Requoting yourself isn't exactly helping your cause any. Do you really think you can say "this thread concludes with..." and it'll conclude?

He's kind of old, so I'm not sure he quite understands how the "internets" work. I mean, it was only so long ago that Al Gore invented it, and some of these geezers are a little slow to pick up on the technology.

[vanwinkle]

He's kind of old, so I'm not sure he quite understands how the "internets" work. I mean, it was only so long ago that Al Gore invented it, and some of these geezers are a little slow to pick up on the technology.

I'm 29, which appears to be some kind of sweet spot. I'm old enough to have the work experience necessary to overcome my low GPA, while not being old enough to be all bitter and "GET OFF MY LAWN" like this guy.

[Kobe_Teeth]

I'm sure if we revealed our identities to some adcomms they would be equally disappointed in all of us. Especially the 300 year old.











See what I did there? Added the extra "0"...supposed to look like a type-o. Its not. Just a bad joke.

[reasonabledoubt]

... Life fail awaits you. Almost poetically, this thread concludes with what is perhaps the greatest reason to factor extensive work experience into admissions considerations.... maturity. Grow up.

Requoting yourself isn't exactly helping your cause any. Do you really think you can say "this thread concludes with..." and it'll conclude?

Point taken, but I simply can't resist; this thread makes me feel young again!

I feel like that guy in Billy Madison who trips over the bench and several of you are the 10th graders staring at my old balls. I'm 30, you know.

Hey future lawyers, have you heard of a thing called "age discrimination?"

I'd hit you with my cane IRL!

[reasonabledoubt]

I'm sure if we revealed our identities to some adcomms they would be equally disappointed in all of us. Especially the 3000 year old.











See what I did there? Added the extra "00"...supposed to look like a type-o. Its not. Just a bad joke.

[Kobe_Teeth]

--ImageRemoved--

[TTTennis]

--ImageRemoved--

hahahahahaha!

[tomhobbes]

reasonabledoubt, if your only point is that schools should value 7 years of good WE above 1 LSAT point, then relax; in most cases they do. If your point is that they should value it above 3+ LSAT points, then you need to defend that.

[jmaan]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Look at how immature you are.... Life fail awaits you. Almost poetically, this thread concludes with what is perhaps the greatest reason [strike]to factor extensive work experience into admissions considerations.... maturity. Grow up.[/strike] I'm 30+ and arguing on TLS, I love my life

[/quote]

You're really hung up on the fact that I'm 30 - interesting. Childish, but interesting. And you want to study law?[/quote]

yes, which is y im an applicant to law school this year. and im just playing man, its not the fact that ur 30, its just that ur arguing with a bunch of kids who have nothing better to do than browse these forums all day, while u claim to have/had a 6 figure job that is so important that if u told us what u did we'd be able to figure out who u were

[chadwick218]

FWIW, searching for a 1L, WE is the only reason that I have gotten the interviews that I have thus far ...