Columbia 2011! Forum

[4102011]

Forgot username field, post if you want me to add it for you

[ahduth]

So.... is no news bad news? I am wondering if my joint degree application is keeping me out of the fray, or if I am already in the "reserve" pile.

Wait lets do a count of how many remaining not held who are complete pre-xmas

+1

I'm going to make this a list. Next person quote it:

r6
dulcatis
justhoping
RJ127
absolutazn87
forward
Philip_J_Fry
Kent M
TrustMeI'mAnActress
glitched
ahduth

+1

edit: total quote fail.

[Knock]

Wait lets do a count of how many remaining not held who are complete pre-xmas

+1

+1

I'm going to make this a list. Next person quote it:

r6
dulcatis
justhoping

Probably already have VCE's in the mail. OR are heading for a rejection later on .

I refuse to think of a rejection because I was reserved last year. And I am miles better this year.

There is another option I mentioned

[starrydreamz3]

I feel a "The Forgotten - Columbia 2011" thread coming up.

[arism87]

pffft! What's "shocking" is that those applications would be so much more compelling than these tons of held people with super high numbers! I feel like if people have that great of an application they are probably aware of it and would share with TLS, right? (Not that we'd listen..)

My point is that knowing that somebody has 180/4.0 and that somebody else has 168/3.6 (or whatever— I'm making these numbers up) is not enough to know whose application is more compelling.

Look, you could plug numbers into Predictor that give you "DENY" at the top schools and still see that 10% or some such figure got into those schools with lower ones.

Maybe LSAT/GPA gives you 2/3 of the story. That's not enough, especially at the most selective schools. And I'm sure there are plenty of people who have great qualifications for that other 1/3 who don't share it here, because it's hard to do so succinctly, or because they don't care, or because they're trying to be anonymous and that other 1/3 is the most uniquely identifying.

Sorry but 99.5% of the time (making this number up) that is enough to know which is more compelling to an adcomm.

[r6_philly]

I feel a "The Forgotten - Columbia 2011" thread coming up.

I will start it when I get home and still sans email!

[4102011]

Yeah who am I kidding? For us confuzzled applicants:

Form:

--LinkRemoved--

Spreadsheet:

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key ... y=COCx7rcG

[lastMinuteGuy]

Just got my hold. 174/3.94, December complete.

It's not over?

Just double checked the timestamp and it was sent at 5:45 but didn't show up in my inbox until a little while ago, so just a Gmail hiccup and not another wave or anything.

[melamine]

pffft! What's "shocking" is that those applications would be so much more compelling than these tons of held people with super high numbers! I feel like if people have that great of an application they are probably aware of it and would share with TLS, right? (Not that we'd listen..)

My point is that knowing that somebody has 180/4.0 and that somebody else has 168/3.6 (or whatever— I'm making these numbers up) is not enough to know whose application is more compelling.

Look, you could plug numbers into Predictor that give you "DENY" at the top schools and still see that 10% or some such figure got into those schools with lower ones.

Maybe LSAT/GPA gives you 2/3 of the story. That's not enough, especially at the most selective schools. And I'm sure there are plenty of people who have great qualifications for that other 1/3 who don't share it here, because it's hard to do so succinctly, or because they don't care, or because they're trying to be anonymous and that other 1/3 is the most uniquely identifying.

So yes, i agree. although i don't think softs and PS count for 1/3... That said, this high level, i think they're looking for people who have other qualities that make them stand out. A 98% LSAT vs. a 99% LSAT isn't going to mean much in terms of the final product of being a lawyer. I would imagine having certain softs (or good writing ability - which can very GREATLY amongst applicants with high LSATS) makes a bigger difference to their actually being a good lawyer or not. In which case, the difference between a 170 and a 176 isn't going to mean much, is it? I can see why - from a practical standpoint (not thinking about USN rankings) softs are going to start counting more after a while.

[Knock]

pffft! What's "shocking" is that those applications would be so much more compelling than these tons of held people with super high numbers! I feel like if people have that great of an application they are probably aware of it and would share with TLS, right? (Not that we'd listen..)

My point is that knowing that somebody has 180/4.0 and that somebody else has 168/3.6 (or whatever— I'm making these numbers up) is not enough to know whose application is more compelling.

Look, you could plug numbers into Predictor that give you "DENY" at the top schools and still see that 10% or some such figure got into those schools with lower ones.

Maybe LSAT/GPA gives you 2/3 of the story. That's not enough, especially at the most selective schools. And I'm sure there are plenty of people who have great qualifications for that other 1/3 who don't share it here, because it's hard to do so succinctly, or because they don't care, or because they're trying to be anonymous and that other 1/3 is the most uniquely identifying.

So yes, i agree. although i don't think softs and PS count for 1/3... That said, this high level, i think they're looking for people who have other qualities that make them stand out. A 98% LSAT vs. a 99% LSAT isn't going to mean much in terms of the final product of being a lawyer. I would imagine having certain softs (or good writing ability - which can very GREATLY amongst applicants with high LSATS) makes a bigger difference to their actually being a good lawyer or not. In which case, the difference between a 170 and a 176 isn't going to mean much, is it? I can see why - from a practical standpoint (not thinking about USN rankings) softs are going to start counting more after a while.

I see you are new to TLS.

[Muenchen]

So.... is no news bad news? I am wondering if my joint degree application is keeping me out of the fray, or if I am already in the "reserve" pile.

Wait lets do a count of how many remaining not held who are complete pre-xmas

+1

I'm going to make this a list. Next person quote it:

r6
dulcatis
justhoping
RJ127
absolutazn87
forward
Philip_J_Fry
Kent M
TrustMeI'mAnActress
glitched
ahduth

+1

edit: total quote fail.

I can be added to this list.

[r6_philly]

pffft! What's "shocking" is that those applications would be so much more compelling than these tons of held people with super high numbers! I feel like if people have that great of an application they are probably aware of it and would share with TLS, right? (Not that we'd listen..)

My point is that knowing that somebody has 180/4.0 and that somebody else has 168/3.6 (or whatever— I'm making these numbers up) is not enough to know whose application is more compelling.

Look, you could plug numbers into Predictor that give you "DENY" at the top schools and still see that 10% or some such figure got into those schools with lower ones.

Maybe LSAT/GPA gives you 2/3 of the story. That's not enough, especially at the most selective schools. And I'm sure there are plenty of people who have great qualifications for that other 1/3 who don't share it here, because it's hard to do so succinctly, or because they don't care, or because they're trying to be anonymous and that other 1/3 is the most uniquely identifying.

So yes, i agree. although i don't think softs and PS count for 1/3... That said, this high level, i think they're looking for people who have other qualities that make them stand out. A 98% LSAT vs. a 99% LSAT isn't going to mean much in terms of the final product of being a lawyer. I would imagine having certain softs (or good writing ability - which can very GREATLY amongst applicants with high LSATS) makes a bigger difference to their actually being a good lawyer or not. In which case, the difference between a 170 and a 176 isn't going to mean much, is it? I can see why - from a practical standpoint (not thinking about USN rankings) softs are going to start counting more after a while.

You guys are presume people like you refer to are not still waiting for decisions.

[Muenchen]

I see you are new to TLS.

So much win.

[somewhere]

Sorry but 99.5% of the time (making this number up) that is enough to know which is more compelling to an adcomm.

And the reason you're sure of this is LSN & TLS, nothing else, right? Both of which have an obvious self-selection bias and contradict the stated claims of the adcomms themselves.

Obviously super high numbers usually get accepted and super low ones usually get rejected. Anybody would be a fool to deny either of those things. But there are enough exceptions to both to temper the LSN/TLS numbers obsession.

Or not. The other option is to just keep being shocked every other day.

[r6_philly]

I see you are new to TLS.

So much win.

Hey I said it first (in a Columbia-esque, gunner voice).

[forward]

Okay, this is NOT the place for a debate on what does or should matter to AdComms. It's pretty clear that with the avalanche of holds that something is up at CLS. We're trying to figure that out. CLS is historically quite numbers-based, but holds today went up and down the pool. Something deeper must be afoot. There are countless other threads to debate the merits of softs vs. numbers.

ETA: remove me from the 'not held' list - I'm there erroneously. Held just after 5 pm CST.

[c_dubya_s]

Just got my hold. 174/3.94, December complete.

It's not over?

Just double checked the timestamp and it was sent at 5:45 but didn't show up in my inbox until a little while ago, so just a Gmail hiccup and not another wave or anything.

5:55pm on mine...

[r6_philly]

There is another option I mentioned

Yes, I hope so.

[ahduth]

Dulcatis should probably just go work in i banking instead with her spreadsheet ninjitsu.

[dabbadon8]

Can anyone make anything of the no-hold spread sheet? My best guess is that we are part of the early feb mixed decision wave.

[hotthaichick]

Officially starting to feel dizzy from all the Columbia thread activity. I'm going to go stare at my hold letter for awhile...

[logistikon]

pffft! What's "shocking" is that those applications would be so much more compelling than these tons of held people with super high numbers! I feel like if people have that great of an application they are probably aware of it and would share with TLS, right? (Not that we'd listen..)

My point is that knowing that somebody has 180/4.0 and that somebody else has 168/3.6 (or whatever— I'm making these numbers up) is not enough to know whose application is more compelling.

Look, you could plug numbers into Predictor that give you "DENY" at the top schools and still see that 10% or some such figure got into those schools with lower ones.

Maybe LSAT/GPA gives you 2/3 of the story. That's not enough, especially at the most selective schools. And I'm sure there are plenty of people who have great qualifications for that other 1/3 who don't share it here, because it's hard to do so succinctly, or because they don't care, or because they're trying to be anonymous and that other 1/3 is the most uniquely identifying.

So yes, i agree. although i don't think softs and PS count for 1/3... That said, this high level, i think they're looking for people who have other qualities that make them stand out. A 98% LSAT vs. a 99% LSAT isn't going to mean much in terms of the final product of being a lawyer. I would imagine having certain softs (or good writing ability - which can very GREATLY amongst applicants with high LSATS) makes a bigger difference to their actually being a good lawyer or not. In which case, the difference between a 170 and a 176 isn't going to mean much, is it? I can see why - from a practical standpoint (not thinking about USN rankings) softs are going to start counting more after a while.

You guys are presume people like you refer to are not still waiting for decisions.

i didnt understand that sentence

[justhoping]

i'm the 2nd person on the spreadsheet...
in @ CLS would take a miracle, just look @ my track record...

[r6_philly]

Sorry but 99.5% of the time (making this number up) that is enough to know which is more compelling to an adcomm.

And the reason you're sure of this is LSN & TLS, nothing else, right? Both of which have an obvious self-selection bias and contradict the stated claims of the adcomms themselves.

Obviously super high numbers usually get accepted and super low ones usually get rejected. Anybody would be a fool to deny either of those things. But there are enough exceptions to both to temper the LSN/TLS numbers obsession.

Or not. The other option is to just keep being shocked every other day.

I have yet to be shocked.

[094320]

..