Elon 2013 Forum

[PirateCap'n]

Hilarious. This web sites has the biggest collection of douche bags I've ever seen in my life. I don't really care what anyone thinks of Elon, but I come to this thread to be a part of a community of peers; people I may be in class with in the Fall. Instead of discussing any pertinent issues or emotions involving Elon for a prospective student, all of the relevant community members are run away by douche bags who have no interest in the school other than to denigrate it. Get a life people. You suck.

Actually, a lot of people are making points that are very relevant for prospective Elon students. Regardless of which side you choose to take, people discussing your prospective school is a positive thing (regardless of whether their opinions are positive or negative). Mr. McAllister is writing about all of the things he perceives to be positive about the school. I noted both positive and negative aspects, and the other other person wrote about many of the negatives of the school. If you don't like people arguing about things, then you've picked the wrong profession. If arguing makes people "douche bags," so be it. Either way, I have no intentions of "denigrating" the school. In fact, I love the school. Almost went there for undergrad. However, people should not be so quick to assume that it is wrong to question a poster's claims about a school. Elon is still a provisionally-accredited law school. It does have a very good chance to be a decent law school, and, I believe that it will one day compete with Campbell and Central. However, it is NOT equal to either Campbell or Central at the moment. The entrance GPAs and LSAT scores may be similar, but that does not make them equal. Elon still has to develop a reputation among in the legal field in NC. Campbell, and to some extent Central, already have that. Employers know they can get good lawyers from those schools. Elon has not had the opportunity to demonstrate that. Over time, I'm sure the school will probably compete with those two as it puts out more and more employees. Until then, it isn't on par with them. Even when it develops a reputation among employers, it still will not be comparable to UNC and WFU. These schools have been established for over one hundred years. They will always have that hundred years of reputation over Elon. Elon can and should develop a good reputation in the state, but it is very unlikely that it will ever have much reach outside the borders of NC (much like Campbell). UNC and WFU have that reach. It isn't the reach of Duke, but it's significantly more than Campbell. In any case, you should understand that arguing/discussing a matter does not a "douche bag" make. Getting on here to complain about such posters without making any meaningful contribution to either side of the argument other than to say that one side is full of "douche bags," however, can certainly make you seem like one.

[PirateCap'n]

Cheer up buttercup.

I'm happy as can be, but instead of quoting that entire post (which is unnecessarily long), I'll say this. Long at my response to "climbintolaw." It should answer some of your questions. To answer the others: I do not necessarily argue that everyone's statement that are against Elon are reasonable, but many of them are. Much of the criticism is valid. And, no, there actually isn't a chance of Elon being comparable to UNC or Wake (small or not -- the chance is nonexistent). But, that's a matter of opinion, and I don't expect to change yours. We can agree to disagree, and that's fine. I think the undergrad's reputation can help (to a very slight extent) with the law school. I do not think it makes the law school comparable to UNC or WFU simply because it has a somewhat prestigious undergrad. I would say that the poster who argues against this notion has a reasonable "opinion." It isn't a fact, but much of what he says is.

Next paragraph, if you take "sigh" to be demeaning, you better grow some thicker skin. I'm sure the poster didn't mean it in a nice way, but if it causes you start dissecting people's "foreseeable future" posts, you need to toughen up. You note that posters make "unnecessary broad, negative, vagueness" comments. Just because the comments are not "broad, negative, and vague" does not make them any less valid. Sure, the poster should back up his claims. If it is true, then so be it. If it isn't, then call him out on it. I don't care either way.

Next, the 130 LSATs. I don't claim to know if Elon lets people with 130s in or not. If they do, they should be ashamed of themselves. The purpose of the LSAT is to allow schools to weed out students based on a demonstrated ability to comprehend information and make logical moves. If an individual makes in the 130s on the test, he/she has demonstrated absolutely nothing other than the the individual might know how to write his/her name. A 130s score equates to basically doing nothing more than picking random answers. Letting in students with scores of this nature defeats the entire purpose of the LSAT. If it isn't obvious, I don't agree with the idea that everyone deserves a shot to be a lawyer. If you can't cut it on the entrance exams, you should find another profession. (And yes, I realize that some people may get into law school with these scores and then pass the Bar. Do they deserve that shot? Not really -- at least not based on LSAT scores, and I'm fine with that. They contribute to an over-saturation of the legal market and then complain about it not being fair when they can't find a decent-paying job).

Preceptor Program:

The only way the program helps establish an alumni network is if it allows students to get legal jobs that they would not otherwise get. In that case, sure, it helps establish a network. Does the program actually help students get jobs that the wouldn't otherwise get? I don't know. It may. Can you say for certain that it does? If so, then sure, it helps establish an alumni network.

Writing comment:

I made the writing comment in reference to you making a sarcastic remark about someone's "foreseeable future" comment. You randomly (i.e. in a manner that was completely irrelevant to any topic I know of that was being discussed) made that comment critiquing the poster's writing. Therefore, I mentioned the likelihood of my writing being critiqued as well.

If I've left anything out, feel free to PM me. Otherwise, I'll probably be done with this thread since Elon folks seem to take their school being critiqued to heart a little too much. It's great to defend your school. Like I said, if someone makes a false statement about it, call them out. Optimism is also good. However, don't be blind optimists who think that their school is the next UC-Irvine because, well, it isn't. Accept valid criticism. Use it to make the school better if you can. There's nothing wrong with arguing. Just don't get so bent out of shape about someone critiquing your school. That's all.

[MrMcAllister]

Again, I will suggest that you reread the discussion. The part about being "comparable" to WF regarded rankings. This is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of fact that there is a possibility that Elon can achieve a ranking that is comparable to WF. I never said that it would, just that it is conceivable. I even said that I wouldn't be surprised if the ranking simply isn't there in 15 years. About the strength of the undergrad institution, I was simply saying that I doubted that Elon, with its already-established undergrad reputation, would allow its large investment in a law school to fail. I wasn't saying that it would make the school comparable to WF - just that it could. There is a reason to assume that Elon's success will be transferred to the law school - the steps it is taking, that have been repeatedly outline in this thread, seem to be pushing it in the right direction. Again, the success or failure is not foreseeable, but what evidence is there to show that Elon is taking steps backward to ensure that it will never - with NO chance - be comparable to WF (rankings wise)? No one has shown that it is impossible, yet those few refused to accept the possibility.

I didn't take "sigh" to be demeaning. That's why I put it in quotations. The "sigh" came from NicholasNickyNic, and I reciprocated the sarcasm. You seemed to be thoroughly disgusted with every part of my comments, so I figured I would point out where the "demeaning" aspects entered the discussion. I didn't personally find it demeaning, I just noted that the "sigh" is where the discussion seemed to take a turn towards less civility. Though I think NNN and I feel just fine about what has transpired.

Vagueness does make a post less cogent. The poster tried to show that Elon is a "bad" school because they heard something about it. Without even showing that they made the effort to fact-check what they had heard, they classified the school as "bad," as well as for other reasons that have, thus far, remained unnamed. Leaving out information certainly produces an effect on the cogency of the statement.

I don't know if Elon has let in a few people with 130s lsats or not. I agree with most of your sentiments on this paragraph about the LSAT.

The preceptor program is intended to provide first-year students with a mentor who guides them into being better students, allows them to shadow an attorney/judge (mentor) in dealing with clients and courtroom proceedings, and engages the student in social events with their preceptors. These programs are designed to provide the students with internships, which certainly spruces up resumes, and leads to higher qualifications for jobs. Even if it doesn't help them get jobs they wouldn't otherwise get, it still serves as a method for establishing the skills necessary to be an legitimate attorney. Those skills still lead to the establishment of an alumni network as they are necessary for the alumni to practice as alumni. That's the case I was making.

So you really only took opposition to one single "foreseeable future" statement I made and decided that I was a "stupid, idiotic, ass" because of that one comment? It seems obvious to me that, even if it the comment was sarcastic or idiotic, that it was still relevant to the content of that poster's comment. It's also not irrelevant to the scope of this discussion as the discussion was largely involved with predicting the future comparability of Elon. The reality is that it's simply not foreseeable, and it cannot be certainly stated that Elon has NO chance at being a comparable (rankings-wise) school. It also cannot be stated with certainty that Elon WILL have a comparable ranking. I was simply arguing that it perhaps could (while it also could not), which is the only reasonable (non-future predicting) opinion that has been expressed on this matter.

I'm not bent out of shape about people critiquing the school, nor am I taking it to heart too much. I'm simply asking for legitimate critiques. Again, reread the discussion, and you will see the acknowledgment of the valid criticisms of the school. I've simply been arguing that Elon is taking the necessary steps to become a better law school - not ignoring its downfalls. But saying that it has NO chance to be comparable in rankings in 10-15 years is simply out of the scope of human possibility to actually state as a legitimate fact - unless some of these folks actually possess those skills to see into the future. Forming an opinion about something someone heard (that may or may not be true, and if true would only apply to a very small minority of students) is hardly a legitimate critique. Saying that the preceptor program is very similar to other programs, without supplying sufficient supporting information when pressed on the issue, is hardly a legitimate critique. Those are the major critiques of the school that have been the focus of attention. No one is ignoring valid criticisms of Elon (which mainly consists of its newness and lack of alumni network). Most of that was two pages back, though. If you read the entire discussion, you will see the acknowledgment of such criticisms (as well as the context of "comparable" regarding ranking (not historical establishment) and the introduction of less civility in the discussion).

I have no need to PM you about this. That would simply leave out the clarity of my views. I like how my "unnecessarily long" post was replied to with a comparable (length wise) post. Clarity can often take up a bit of space.

[PirateCap'n]

Just for the record, I was referring to quoting mine and your posts as being "unnecessarily long" -- not just your post. However, I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with you. If you want to go to Elon, then, by all means, do it. It will probably be a good choice for some people. It will probably be a bad choice for many more. If you get a job coming out of there, good for you. I'm sure many people come out with a job, but how many of those are making more than $45,000 a year? Not many. Like I said, you're going to defend your school regardless of the reasonable criticism that others put out, so do as you please. I'm done with it. Some people simply can't take criticism. So be it.

[Nicholasnickynic]

Again, I will suggest that you reread the discussion. The part about being "comparable" to WF regarded rankings. This is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of fact that there is a possibility that Elon can achieve a ranking that is comparable to WF. I never said that it would, just that it is conceivable. I even said that I wouldn't be surprised if the ranking simply isn't there in 15 years. About the strength of the undergrad institution, I was simply saying that I doubted that Elon, with its already-established undergrad reputation, would allow its large investment in a law school to fail. I wasn't saying that it would make the school comparable to WF - just that it could. There is a reason to assume that Elon's success will be transferred to the law school - the steps it is taking, that have been repeatedly outline in this thread, seem to be pushing it in the right direction. Again, the success or failure is not foreseeable, but what evidence is there to show that Elon is taking steps backward to ensure that it will never - with NO chance - be comparable to WF (rankings wise)? No one has shown that it is impossible, yet those few refused to accept the possibility.

I didn't take "sigh" to be demeaning. That's why I put it in quotations. The "sigh" came from NicholasNickyNic, and I reciprocated the sarcasm. You seemed to be thoroughly disgusted with every part of my comments, so I figured I would point out where the "demeaning" aspects entered the discussion. I didn't personally find it demeaning, I just noted that the "sigh" is where the discussion seemed to take a turn towards less civility. Though I think NNN and I feel just fine about what has transpired.

Vagueness does make a post less cogent. The poster tried to show that Elon is a "bad" school because they heard something about it. Without even showing that they made the effort to fact-check what they had heard, they classified the school as "bad," as well as for other reasons that have, thus far, remained unnamed. Leaving out information certainly produces an effect on the cogency of the statement.

I don't know if Elon has let in a few people with 130s lsats or not. I agree with most of your sentiments on this paragraph about the LSAT.

The preceptor program is intended to provide first-year students with a mentor who guides them into being better students, allows them to shadow an attorney/judge (mentor) in dealing with clients and courtroom proceedings, and engages the student in social events with their preceptors. These programs are designed to provide the students with internships, which certainly spruces up resumes, and leads to higher qualifications for jobs. Even if it doesn't help them get jobs they wouldn't otherwise get, it still serves as a method for establishing the skills necessary to be an legitimate attorney. Those skills still lead to the establishment of an alumni network as they are necessary for the alumni to practice as alumni. That's the case I was making.

So you really only took opposition to one single "foreseeable future" statement I made and decided that I was a "stupid, idiotic, ass" because of that one comment? It seems obvious to me that, even if it the comment was sarcastic or idiotic, that it was still relevant to the content of that poster's comment. It's also not irrelevant to the scope of this discussion as the discussion was largely involved with predicting the future comparability of Elon. The reality is that it's simply not foreseeable, and it cannot be certainly stated that Elon has NO chance at being a comparable (rankings-wise) school. It also cannot be stated with certainty that Elon WILL have a comparable ranking. I was simply arguing that it perhaps could (while it also could not), which is the only reasonable (non-future predicting) opinion that has been expressed on this matter.

I'm not bent out of shape about people critiquing the school, nor am I taking it to heart too much. I'm simply asking for legitimate critiques. Again, reread the discussion, and you will see the acknowledgment of the valid criticisms of the school. I've simply been arguing that Elon is taking the necessary steps to become a better law school - not ignoring its downfalls. But saying that it has NO chance to be comparable in rankings in 10-15 years is simply out of the scope of human possibility to actually state as a legitimate fact - unless some of these folks actually possess those skills to see into the future. Forming an opinion about something someone heard (that may or may not be true, and if true would only apply to a very small minority of students) is hardly a legitimate critique. Saying that the preceptor program is very similar to other programs, without supplying sufficient supporting information when pressed on the issue, is hardly a legitimate critique. Those are the major critiques of the school that have been the focus of attention. No one is ignoring valid criticisms of Elon (which mainly consists of its newness and lack of alumni network). Most of that was two pages back, though. If you read the entire discussion, you will see the acknowledgment of such criticisms (as well as the context of "comparable" regarding ranking (not historical establishment) and the introduction of less civility in the discussion).

I have no need to PM you about this. That would simply leave out the clarity of my views. I like how my "unnecessarily long" post was replied to with a comparable (length wise) post. Clarity can often take up a bit of space.

--ImageRemoved--


For the record, lighten up. I regularily criticize the two schools I am deciding between (wake forest and uga- check out either official thread). There's nothing wrong with a little debate. In fact, its probably good to consider the pros and cons of a school.

[Nicholasnickynic]

Again, I will suggest that you reread the discussion. The part about being "comparable" to WF regarded rankings. This is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of fact that there is a possibility that Elon can achieve a ranking that is comparable to WF. I never said that it would, just that it is conceivable. I even said that I wouldn't be surprised if the ranking simply isn't there in 15 years.

Poll!
Poll!
Poll!

[marshalltucker]

The chances of Elon Law EVER being better than Wake Forest Law is close to zero, the chances of Elon law being better than Campbell in the foreseeable future are also pretty damn low. I've heard of people getting in there with high 130s, thats not the only reason they are bad but it is one of them.

Forseeable future?

I bet you had one hell of a personal statement with those kinds of skills.

Wasn't going to comment but what does this mean? The person spelled the word correctly? Are you bashing word choice now?

I was being sarcastic by implying that the personal statement of that poster must have been awesome with skills that can see into the future. Not really an attack on word choice - more of an attack on the entire post. This poster "heard" something? And that's part of why the school is bad? But not the only reason? It just seemed like a vague waste of a criticism of the school, so I treated it as such.

I wasn't trying to get involved in these multi-paragraph battles you all are having I just wanted to try and clear you of your delusion that Elon was going to be the next Wake Forest. I have nothing against Elon, I actually like it and think there is alot of potential there, but neither its undergrad or its law program can compete with Wake Forest. And before you ask, no, I do not attend Wake Forest or have any connection to the university in any meaningful way. It was simply a ridiculous statement and I wanted to let you know that it was extremely incorrect. Thank you.

[MrMcAllister]

I wasn't trying to get involved in these multi-paragraph battles you all are having I just wanted to try and clear you of your delusion that Elon was going to be the next Wake Forest. I have nothing against Elon, I actually like it and think there is alot of potential there, but neither its undergrad or its law program can compete with Wake Forest. And before you ask, no, I do not attend Wake Forest or have any connection to the university in any meaningful way. It was simply a ridiculous statement and I wanted to let you know that it was extremely incorrect. Thank you.[/quote]

Feel free to revisit my comments from the beginning. That might clear up your delusion of my "delusion."

Also feel free to point out the "ridiculous statement" that I made in reference to Elon being the next Wake Forest.

[Nicholasnickynic]

Also feel free to point out the "ridiculous statement" that I made in reference to Elon being the next Wake Forest.

Ahem Ahem *points*

In about 10 years, I see Elon as a first tier law school approaching the ranks of Wake Forest, if not surpassing them.

Elon University and Wake Forest University are ranked about the same in "Best Value Private Schools in America" rankings. Both in the top 30 I believe. I think it's pretty reasonable to think their Law programs will be compatible in the future. Especially considering how Elon's law program is taking off.

I think you're right about this. US News and World Report also ranked Elon at #2 for southern master's-level universities...Like you said, the school just needs time to establish its alumni network and reputation of successful practice, which will enable it to be more selective. No chance of that in 10-15 years? Maybe for someone who knows nothing about the institution...

? Is that what you were looking for ?
*waits for backpedaling and interesting spin/interpretation*

[MrMcAllister]

Also feel free to point out the "ridiculous statement" that I made in reference to Elon being the next Wake Forest.

Ahem Ahem *points*

In about 10 years, I see Elon as a first tier law school approaching the ranks of Wake Forest, if not surpassing them.

Elon University and Wake Forest University are ranked about the same in "Best Value Private Schools in America" rankings. Both in the top 30 I believe. I think it's pretty reasonable to think their Law programs will be compatible in the future. Especially considering how Elon's law program is taking off.

I think you're right about this. US News and World Report also ranked Elon at #2 for southern master's-level universities...Like you said, the school just needs time to establish its alumni network and reputation of successful practice, which will enable it to be more selective. No chance of that in 10-15 years? Maybe for someone who knows nothing about the institution...

? Is that what you were looking for ?
*waits for backpedaling and interesting spin/interpretation*

What I'm looking for is a statement of mine that says, "Elon law WILL be comparable to Wake Forest..."

Yeah, I do think it is reasonable to think that this could happen. There are plenty of ways that Elon could become comparable (rankings-wise) to WF in the next decade. The possibilities of increasing their ranking are quite abundant.

It's easy to take the "I think you're right about this " reference out of context. It seemed rather obvious to me that I was agreeing with his/her undergrad ranking information that could help establish comparability between Elon and WF (though I hadn't seen that information, I had other graduate rankings to help in confirmation). Even if you wanted to apply the "I think you're right..." statement to Elon being comparable to WF as a certainty, that would still be a pliable statement, which is much more reasonable than saying, "there is NO chance whatsoever" that Elon could ever be comparable. Did I say, "I am sure you are right...?" I do think he is right that the undergrad ranking that establishes Elon and WF as comparable schools offers confirmation to the notion that Elon may be comparable to WF. If you had read LittleJerk's post to which I was responding when I said, "I think you're right..." you would see that he/she was simply saying that it is "reasonable to think" that the two schools could be comparable. Do I think he is right about that?

Yes, I think it is reasonable to think that Elon can conceivably have a comparable ranking to WF in 10-15 years. It is also reasonable to think that this will not happen (as I have said a few times before on this thread). But it is simply unreasonable, at this stage, to think that it will NEVER happen ("no chance"). I hope I'm not the only participant of this thread who understands the efficacy of absolutes.

[scruffs mcguff]

In before this appears on the next LSAT LR section.

[Nicholasnickynic]

Also feel free to point out the "ridiculous statement" that I made in reference to Elon being the next Wake Forest.

What I'm looking for is a statement of mine that says, "Elon law WILL be comparable to Wake Forest..."

Yeah, I do think it is reasonable to think that this could happen. There are plenty of ways that Elon could become comparable (rankings-wise) to WF in the next decade. The possibilities of increasing their ranking are quite abundant.

I like when you try to claim that you didn't say "elon could equal wake," and in the process of making that claim, you contradict yourself.

You are my favorite person ever!

[Nicholasnickynic]

In before this appears on the next LSAT LR section.

lol +1.

I see it more as a RC

Passages would need to be cut down though !

[Nicholasnickynic]

Even if you wanted to apply the "I think you're right..." statement to Elon being comparable to WF as a certainty, that would still be a pliable statement, which is much more reasonable than saying, "there is NO chance whatsoever" that Elon could ever be comparable

Disagree. I think it is more reasonable to use an absolute and say Elon will never equal Wake Forest, than it is to say there is a chance it could happen.

Absolutes are more reasonable than 1 in a 1,000,000 shots.

Wouldn't you say the statement that, "osama bin laden will NEVER be the u.s. president" (an absolute) is more reasonable than "there is a chance osama bin laden could be president?"

This has absolutley nothing to do with absolutes (which are very often reasonable statements).

You made a statement which clearly contradicted what you said earlier, and now you are just back pedaling like crazy, making up all kinds of absurd arguments.

And "efficacy of absolutes" ? Really? I mean, really? Who says that?

[MrMcAllister]

Even if you wanted to apply the "I think you're right..." statement to Elon being comparable to WF as a certainty, that would still be a pliable statement, which is much more reasonable than saying, "there is NO chance whatsoever" that Elon could ever be comparable

Disagree. I think it is more reasonable to use an absolute and say Elon will never equal Wake Forest, than it is to say there is a chance it could happen.

Absolutes are more reasonable than 1 in a 1,000,000 shots.

Wouldn't you say the statement that, "osama bin laden will NEVER be the u.s. president" (an absolute) is more reasonable than "there is a chance osama bin laden could be president?"

This has absolutley nothing to do with absolutes (which are very often reasonable statements).

You made a statement which clearly contradicted what you said earlier, and now you are just back pedaling like crazy, making up all kinds of absurd arguments.

And "efficacy of absolutes" ? Really? I mean, really? Who says that?

Way to respond to a generalization about absolutes with a generalization about absolutes. Sure, they are often reasonable statements; that doesn't mean they are when examined in this context. To support your view, you imply that Elon being comparable rankings-wise to WF is a 1 in 1,000,000 chance. Another baseless assertion.

Even if there is a 1 in 1,000,000 chance, then that simply contradicts the absolute that states that there is NO chance whastoever. I have no predictive power regarding Al Qaeda's ability to infiltrate this nation and institute Osama bin Laden as President. However improbable that may be, to say that it is impossible - when it isn't - is downright dangerous. And as long as there remains a possibility, then the absolute that states there is no possibility is simply false.

I didn't make a statement that contracted my earlier statements. I made it quite clear that I thought LittleJerk had a point about the undergrad/grad rankings.

[MrMcAllister]

Also feel free to point out the "ridiculous statement" that I made in reference to Elon being the next Wake Forest.

What I'm looking for is a statement of mine that says, "Elon law WILL be comparable to Wake Forest..."

Yeah, I do think it is reasonable to think that this could happen. There are plenty of ways that Elon could become comparable (rankings-wise) to WF in the next decade. The possibilities of increasing their ranking are quite abundant.

I like when you try to claim that you didn't say "elon could equal wake," and in the process of making that claim, you contradict yourself.

You are my favorite person ever!

Way to take my comments out of context - again. MarshallTucker said, "...I just wanted to try and clear you of your delusion that Elon was going to be the next Wake Forest." I never said that it was (or is) going to be the next WF. That's an absolute. I simply said that it could be comparable.

Keep trying...

[Nicholasnickynic]

sure thing, I'll work on something and get back to you

[MrMcAllister]

Did anyone attend the admitted students' day?

How did those leadership fellows interviews go?

[BCgoUSC]

Everyone please SHUT UP.

Anyone have any good recommendations of places to live? I'd really like to stay close to the law school. I've looked at Cityview which is really close and Lincoln Green about 15 mins away. Does anyone know of any places downtown that are close to the law school?

[actorlaw]

Again, I will suggest that you reread the discussion. The part about being "comparable" to WF regarded rankings. This is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of fact that there is a possibility that Elon can achieve a ranking that is comparable to WF. I never said that it would, just that it is conceivable. I even said that I wouldn't be surprised if the ranking simply isn't there in 15 years. About the strength of the undergrad institution, I was simply saying that I doubted that Elon, with its already-established undergrad reputation, would allow its large investment in a law school to fail. I wasn't saying that it would make the school comparable to WF - just that it could. There is a reason to assume that Elon's success will be transferred to the law school - the steps it is taking, that have been repeatedly outline in this thread, seem to be pushing it in the right direction. Again, the success or failure is not foreseeable, but what evidence is there to show that Elon is taking steps backward to ensure that it will never - with NO chance - be comparable to WF (rankings wise)? No one has shown that it is impossible, yet those few refused to accept the possibility.

I didn't take "sigh" to be demeaning. That's why I put it in quotations. The "sigh" came from NicholasNickyNic, and I reciprocated the sarcasm. You seemed to be thoroughly disgusted with every part of my comments, so I figured I would point out where the "demeaning" aspects entered the discussion. I didn't personally find it demeaning, I just noted that the "sigh" is where the discussion seemed to take a turn towards less civility. Though I think NNN and I feel just fine about what has transpired.

Vagueness does make a post less cogent. The poster tried to show that Elon is a "bad" school because they heard something about it. Without even showing that they made the effort to fact-check what they had heard, they classified the school as "bad," as well as for other reasons that have, thus far, remained unnamed. Leaving out information certainly produces an effect on the cogency of the statement.

I don't know if Elon has let in a few people with 130s lsats or not. I agree with most of your sentiments on this paragraph about the LSAT.

The preceptor program is intended to provide first-year students with a mentor who guides them into being better students, allows them to shadow an attorney/judge (mentor) in dealing with clients and courtroom proceedings, and engages the student in social events with their preceptors. These programs are designed to provide the students with internships, which certainly spruces up resumes, and leads to higher qualifications for jobs. Even if it doesn't help them get jobs they wouldn't otherwise get, it still serves as a method for establishing the skills necessary to be an legitimate attorney. Those skills still lead to the establishment of an alumni network as they are necessary for the alumni to practice as alumni. That's the case I was making.

So you really only took opposition to one single "foreseeable future" statement I made and decided that I was a "stupid, idiotic, ass" because of that one comment? It seems obvious to me that, even if it the comment was sarcastic or idiotic, that it was still relevant to the content of that poster's comment. It's also not irrelevant to the scope of this discussion as the discussion was largely involved with predicting the future comparability of Elon. The reality is that it's simply not foreseeable, and it cannot be certainly stated that Elon has NO chance at being a comparable (rankings-wise) school. It also cannot be stated with certainty that Elon WILL have a comparable ranking. I was simply arguing that it perhaps could (while it also could not), which is the only reasonable (non-future predicting) opinion that has been expressed on this matter.

I'm not bent out of shape about people critiquing the school, nor am I taking it to heart too much. I'm simply asking for legitimate critiques. Again, reread the discussion, and you will see the acknowledgment of the valid criticisms of the school. I've simply been arguing that Elon is taking the necessary steps to become a better law school - not ignoring its downfalls. But saying that it has NO chance to be comparable in rankings in 10-15 years is simply out of the scope of human possibility to actually state as a legitimate fact - unless some of these folks actually possess those skills to see into the future. Forming an opinion about something someone heard (that may or may not be true, and if true would only apply to a very small minority of students) is hardly a legitimate critique. Saying that the preceptor program is very similar to other programs, without supplying sufficient supporting information when pressed on the issue, is hardly a legitimate critique. Those are the major critiques of the school that have been the focus of attention. No one is ignoring valid criticisms of Elon (which mainly consists of its newness and lack of alumni network). Most of that was two pages back, though. If you read the entire discussion, you will see the acknowledgment of such criticisms (as well as the context of "comparable" regarding ranking (not historical establishment) and the introduction of less civility in the discussion).

I have no need to PM you about this. That would simply leave out the clarity of my views. I like how my "unnecessarily long" post was replied to with a comparable (length wise) post. Clarity can often take up a bit of space.

You have just used the words possibility, could, and assume in a paragraph while trying to argue that Elon being comparable to Wake Forest is a fact and not an opinion...

If you want facts look at placement, LSAT, GPA, and other irrefutable material that clearly proves that Elon has their work cut out for them before they become a respectable law school like Wake Forest.

I think it is probably an exciting time to be at a school like Elon while it is building their program. However, I would be reluctant to atend Elon having to compete with JD's from Duke, UNC, Wake Forest, Campbell, and NC Central...

At best, Elon is the 6th best law school in the state... And the NC legal market isn't that big.

[rockstar4488]

I think it is pretty common knowledge that the undergraduate program at Elon is not competitive. I would be concerned that the undergrad reputation could taint the potential marketability of a JD earned. Obviously the dichotomy of a competitive law school / non competitive undergrad does exist in places, but it seems much more frequent for the two to be on similar levels.

[hacksaw jim duganz]

what are u talking about elon university is highly respected as an undergrad university
btw the admission rep i spoke with this week said that they ar eprojecting this incomming class to have an average lsat of 157 thats not bad for a new law school

[deadpanic]

what are u talking about elon university is highly respected as an undergrad university
btw the admission rep i spoke with this week said that they ar eprojecting this incomming class to have an average lsat of 157 thats not bad for a new law school

An average tells you nothing. That just means they gave a lot of full rides to people with LSAT scores in the 160s. The median is what is reported to US News and gives you a better picture of what the incoming class profile is like. I'd bet that median will be lower than 157.

[Nicholasnickynic]

woot! gogo actor law!
I can't wait to hear mrmccalister's (multi-paragraph) response to actorlaws assertion.



IMO best thread ever. MrMccalister, you are my hero.

[hacksaw jim duganz]

yeah my bad i meant the median