. Forum

[20141023]

.

[suralin]

Damn, thank you for doing this. It's obvious that you spent quite a bit of your time putting this together, and it seems like it'll be a valuable resource.

[justonemoregame]

Wait, so if I create an LSN account, my chances for admission increase?

[hume85]

Damn, thank you for doing this. It's obvious that you spent quite a bit of your time putting this together, and it seems like it'll be a valuable resource.

+1, well done Regulus.

[20141023]

.

[Chaucer1343]

It is not creating an account that increases your chances; it is some third cause: going to the website for instance. There was a survey recently that showed 90% of people who visit the website believe this. The survey was not created by someone applying. So, it is definitely correct. After all, if someone who is not an applicant creates a survey related to applying to law school, the survey is likely to be true. Thus, this survey is definitely true, because it was created by an individual who is not matriculating.

[calidancer2]

Semi- related, but I noticed a lot of people don't end up completing their LSN profiles (e.g. A lot of the late-accepted Harvard TLSers off the waitlist late last summer). Do you think this makes the predicted acceptance data more difficult (as in, someone with lower numbers would use the predictor and assume they'd be shut out of T14 entirely, when there's actually a fairly decent number making it in)? Obviously it's self-reported/taken with a grain of salt, but I just wonder if this lack of data (and of course, the lack of users entirely...perhaps who have lower #s) makes TLS predictions more negative. There obviously isn't a class at H filled entirely with people above their medians as LSN seems to report...where the heck are the below median LSN profiles?!

I guess what I'm trying to say is TLS is full of special above-median pessimistic snowflakes.

[calidancer2]

It is not creating an account that increases your chances; it is some third cause: going to the website for instance. There was a survey recently that showed 90% of people who visit the website believe this. The survey was not created by someone applying. So, it is definitely correct. After all, if someone who is not an applicant creates a survey related to applying to law school, the survey is likely to be true. Thus, this survey is definitely true, because it was created by an individual who is not matriculating.

I hope that if you don't write for the LSAT already, you head down that career path soon.

[20141023]

.

[husker2012]

Semi- related, but I noticed a lot of people don't end up completing their LSN profiles (e.g. A lot of the late-accepted Harvard TLSers off the waitlist late last summer). Do you think this makes the predicted acceptance data more difficult (as in, someone with lower numbers would use the predictor and assume they'd be shut out of T14 entirely, when there's actually a fairly decent number making it in)? Obviously it's self-reported/taken with a grain of salt, but I just wonder if this lack of data (and of course, the lack of users entirely...perhaps who have lower #s) makes TLS predictions more negative. There obviously isn't a class at H filled entirely with people above their medians as LSN seems to report...where the heck are the below median LSN profiles?!

I guess what I'm trying to say is TLS is full of special above-median pessimistic snowflakes.

+1

these are my exact thoughts

[twinkletoes16]

I hope that if you don't write for the LSAT already, you head down that career path soon.

+1

Anyway, based off of the data linked above, I think that if the information on LSN is somehow "incomplete," it would basically be because a bunch of yellow WLs and red dings are missing from the bottom left region of the graphs for each school. Obviously, including these applicants would bring the acceptance rate of [LSN admits / LSN total pool] closer to that of the [total admits / total pool], but I don't think anyone minds that we don't have more 139 LSAT / 2.3 GPA applicants reporting their data on LSN.

True. But I want to see the below-median people that are getting ACCEPTED. Don't care about the people throwing Hail Marys to the T14.

[Rahviveh]

Semi- related, but I noticed a lot of people don't end up completing their LSN profiles (e.g. A lot of the late-accepted Harvard TLSers off the waitlist late last summer). Do you think this makes the predicted acceptance data more difficult (as in, someone with lower numbers would use the predictor and assume they'd be shut out of T14 entirely, when there's actually a fairly decent number making it in)? Obviously it's self-reported/taken with a grain of salt, but I just wonder if this lack of data (and of course, the lack of users entirely...perhaps who have lower #s) makes TLS predictions more negative. There obviously isn't a class at H filled entirely with people above their medians as LSN seems to report...where the heck are the below median LSN profiles?!

I guess what I'm trying to say is TLS is full of special above-median pessimistic snowflakes.

Also, pretty sure most LSN's are abandoned by the time scholly info comes out for a lot of schools.

[20141023]

.

[venus]

That's awesome, thank you so much!!! For a second I didn't see the tab with the different schools on top and thought Yale's stats applied to all T14 (like an average or something), and I wanted to shoot myself

[clouded.memory]

Is the Stanford tab correct? It lists 152 LSN applicants and 8 admits for the 2012-2013 cycle so far, however, I haven't been able to find any admits on LSN. I might be reading these data wrong, so if you could clarify, that would be great.

Thanks for making this, by the way!

[20141023]

.

[one_by_one]

Sort of relevant: I came across this - http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 0#p6177263

LSAC says "applicants are down 22.4% and applications are down 24.6%" thus far!

[20141023]

.

[vzapana]

Anyone updating this? This was helpful.