That hurts LS22. Are we not your closest and most beloved internet friendslawschool22 wrote:Lol I would never do that, and my friends would have no idea it was TLS, they don't know what TLS is. I really have no law school/law-realated friends whatsoever lolkoalacity wrote:I have to say that the potential Penn State association wasn't the first thing that came to mind when considering the reasons one should probably avoid using TLS lingo IRL...lawschool22 wrote: I'm just thinking of using it in every day life.
Friend: Dude, I think that party is going to be crazy.
Me: Yeah, but I hope not in a Penn way...
Friend:
Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014) Forum
- kershka

- Posts: 630
- Joined: Sat Dec 21, 2013 2:45 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
- lawschool22

- Posts: 3875
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
You know what I meannnnkershka wrote:That hurts LS22. Are we not your closest and most beloved internet friendslawschool22 wrote:Lol I would never do that, and my friends would have no idea it was TLS, they don't know what TLS is. I really have no law school/law-realated friends whatsoever lolkoalacity wrote:I have to say that the potential Penn State association wasn't the first thing that came to mind when considering the reasons one should probably avoid using TLS lingo IRL...lawschool22 wrote: I'm just thinking of using it in every day life.
Friend: Dude, I think that party is going to be crazy.
Me: Yeah, but I hope not in a Penn way...
Friend:
- neprep

- Posts: 1066
- Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:16 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
JSW is hot on the heels of the crowd favorite — come on people, save JSjk!
Also, WTR, can you perhaps compile JS1 prep sources in the OP? I'm thinking the two or three posts in Regulus's thread + LS22's So You Want to Glam Up Your Skype Interview lighting guide.
Also, WTR, can you perhaps compile JS1 prep sources in the OP? I'm thinking the two or three posts in Regulus's thread + LS22's So You Want to Glam Up Your Skype Interview lighting guide.
-
Peadish

- Posts: 4
- Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2013 11:56 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
Mid December! My stats are 3.61/176.lowdmouse wrote:When did you go complete?Peadish wrote:JS1! Received at around 6 EST.
- lawschool22

- Posts: 3875
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
JSW, JSW, JSW.
Folks, you want an efficient abbreviation. That's the whole point of shorthand. Who wants to type that extra letter for JSJK? Think of all the cumulative time saved if we elect JSW.

Folks, you want an efficient abbreviation. That's the whole point of shorthand. Who wants to type that extra letter for JSJK? Think of all the cumulative time saved if we elect JSW.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- neprep

- Posts: 1066
- Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:16 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
No, stop flogging the canard that any of this has ever been about efficiency. We give cutesy, mawkish names to the various steps of the HLS application because of some relentless need to fetishize and decorate a painfully dry and cutthroat process. The reason it's "JS1" and "JS2" and not "H1" and "H2" is not that it matters who the current CAO is at HLS, but that using those terms gives us a sense of human connection; in short, these abbrevs are all about feelings. Our collective feelings. If JSjk makes people feel good, they should vote for it.lawschool22 wrote:JSW, JSW, JSW.
Folks, you want an efficient abbreviation. That's the whole point of shorthand. Who wants to type that extra letter for JSJK? Think of all the cumulative time saved if we elect JSW.
In any case, the "cumulative time saved" is going to be wasted hitting refresh one more time anyway.
P.S. 100 LSACPoints for anyone who can spot 2 points of disagreement and 2 points of agreement between me and LS22 (looking at you, December takers).
-
W$RKliveWELL

- Posts: 191
- Joined: Sun May 05, 2013 1:17 am
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
quick question... since theirs no held list this year can you be waitlisted without a JS1? AND when did the first wave of rejection letters come out in the past? Trying to remain optomistic 
- lawschool22

- Posts: 3875
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
Yes you can. Then at some point they may ask you to do a JS1.W$RKliveWELL wrote:quick question... since theirs no held list this year can you be waitlisted without a JS1? AND when did the first wave of rejection letters come out in the past? Trying to remain optomistic
- MrMileyCyrus

- Posts: 191
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 3:23 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
I actually think that "JSJK" is faster anyway. Your finger is already on the "J" key and then the "K" is right next to it. When you type it, it's a beautiful, fluid motion. But adding the "W" is bulky because you have to lift up your ring finger on your left hand, which for 95% of people is literally the worst finger in terms of mobility, usefulness, and overall coolness.lawschool22 wrote:JSW, JSW, JSW.
Folks, you want an efficient abbreviation. That's the whole point of shorthand. Who wants to type that extra letter for JSJK? Think of all the cumulative time saved if we elect JSW.
- lawschool22

- Posts: 3875
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
I just did a controlled scientific time trial and confirmed that JSW is in fact faster than JSJK. Although I was unable to test the coolness of my ring finger.MrMileyCyrus wrote:I actually think that "JSJK" is faster anyway. Your finger is already on the "J" key and then the "K" is right next to it. When you type it, it's a beautiful, fluid motion. But adding the "W" is bulky because you have to lift up your ring finger on your left hand, which for 95% of people is literally the worst finger in terms of mobility, usefulness, and overall coolness.lawschool22 wrote:JSW, JSW, JSW.
Folks, you want an efficient abbreviation. That's the whole point of shorthand. Who wants to type that extra letter for JSJK? Think of all the cumulative time saved if we elect JSW.
-
Pau.C.

- Posts: 90
- Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 5:46 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
.
Last edited by Pau.C. on Sun Jul 17, 2016 6:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- lawschool22

- Posts: 3875
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
Pau.C. wrote:lawschool22 wrote:I just did a controlled scientific time trial and confirmed that JSW is in fact faster than JSJK. Although I was unable to test the coolness of my ring finger.MrMileyCyrus wrote:I actually think that "JSJK" is faster anyway. Your finger is already on the "J" key and then the "K" is right next to it. When you type it, it's a beautiful, fluid motion. But adding the "W" is bulky because you have to lift up your ring finger on your left hand, which for 95% of people is literally the worst finger in terms of mobility, usefulness, and overall coolness.lawschool22 wrote:JSW, JSW, JSW.
Folks, you want an efficient abbreviation. That's the whole point of shorthand. Who wants to type that extra letter for JSJK? Think of all the cumulative time saved if we elect JSW.
I don't post often... But I've just got to say: I like you guys! You are all keeping me from going crazy!

- lawschool22

- Posts: 3875
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
Just saw this - love it lolneprep wrote:JSW is hot on the heels of the crowd favorite — come on people, save JSjk!
Also, WTR, can you perhaps compile JS1 prep sources in the OP? I'm thinking the two or three posts in Regulus's thread + LS22's So You Want to Glam Up Your Skype Interview lighting guide.
ETA: Here's the actual guide for anyone looking for it:
Professional lighting on the cheap for Skype interviews:
Change your computer background to a nice amber/orange color so your face looks warm and isn't washed out by the blue LED backlight. Get a lamp, take the lamp shade off, and position it to your left (about 10 o'clock position) and about three feet away - a 40-60 watt bulb is best for this. Turn on the overhead light in the room you're in (it will act as a "hair light" (technical term) and illuminate the top of your head with some shine to give depth). Then get a floor lamp (or put it on a shelf or something) with, preferably, a brighter bulb than the lamp on your desk (75 watts is good). Place it in the 4 or 5 o'clock position, about 5 feet away from where you are seated. For the best effect, place a white poster board or sheet behind the lamp pointed towards the back right of your head.
If you can do this setup in a room with window (covered w/ blinds or a light curtain) that is even better. Set it up so the window is to the right of you. This will give a pleasing contrast, as the lamp to your left will read on screen as a warm color, and the window will read as a cool color. This provides good definition to your face and is a pleasing set up. It is also important to only use one "type" of light in the room. By that I mean, mixing fluorescent with regular tungsten bulbs will cause color issues, as Skype cannot set the white balance properly. I would recommend using all tungsten (or "warm" CFL's) bulbs, plus the window, and you will get a nice contrast but proper color.
Keep your chin slightly up, with your face turned just ever so slightly to the right. But then relax and be natural. You should always have a slight smile, and you should appear engaged, happy, enthusiastic, etc.
Also - make sure your background is free of clutter. This is very important. A simple, clean room as a backdrop is best. And by setting up the lighting as described above, the room will appear slightly dimmer than you, making you the part that stands out, and causing the background to be less distracting.
Finally, feel free to experiment! All rooms are different. Go to the preferences of Skype and you can see how you will appear. Play around with the angle and distance of the lights until it looks good to you.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- vuthy

- Posts: 378
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 8:55 am
- koalacity

- Posts: 1162
- Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:56 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
BRACE YOURSELVES
- JD1776

- Posts: 59
- Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2013 3:08 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
JSNo. But ya'll shouldn't panick - it was a reach for me.
LSAT & GPA both below medians. Complete 11/25.
LSAT & GPA both below medians. Complete 11/25.
- andapieceoftoast

- Posts: 439
- Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2013 11:18 am
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
Just now? Via email?JD1776 wrote:JSNo. But ya'll shouldn't panick - it was a reach for me.
LSAT & GPA both below medians. Complete 11/25.
*hides under desk*
Edited for being hella rude: Very sorry to hear that -- the very best of luck to you in the rest of your cycle!
Last edited by andapieceoftoast on Fri Jan 17, 2014 12:25 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
- koalacity

- Posts: 1162
- Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:56 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
So sorry-even if it was a reach, that's still roughJD1776 wrote:JSNo. But ya'll shouldn't panick - it was a reach for me.
LSAT & GPA both below medians. Complete 11/25.
-
lsatnoob

- Posts: 84
- Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2013 10:42 am
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
Access denied! $85 lottery ticket
- lawschool22

- Posts: 3875
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm
- midwest17

- Posts: 1685
- Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2013 5:27 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
JD1776 wrote:JSNo. But ya'll shouldn't panick - it was a reach for me.
LSAT & GPA both below medians. Complete 11/25.
Sorry dudes.lsatnoob wrote:Access denied! $85 lottery ticket
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
- OliveBC

- Posts: 490
- Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 9:41 am
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
just got dinged as well, via email. K-JD at both 25th so definitely not a shock.
- JD1776

- Posts: 59
- Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2013 3:08 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
Thanks. It was via email, and no, I didn't have a JS1.koalacity wrote:So sorry-even if it was a reach, that's still rough. How'd you get the news? Email or status checker? Also, did you receive a JS1?
- lawschool22

- Posts: 3875
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:47 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
So sorrylsatnoob wrote:Access denied! $85 lottery ticket
-
edwardt1988

- Posts: 378
- Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 9:59 pm
Re: Harvard, C/O 2017, Applicants Thread (2013-2014)
Oh, they're coming?
Oh noesss
Oh noesss
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login