Show Posts

1

Acceptances / Re: NYU!! YESSSS!!!

« on: February 04, 2005, 04:26:21 AM »

They were the first school to reply, so I was very happy about it. I have no idea when they had it complete as they sent me nothing before the acceptance letter. In fact, I complained about their poor feedback earlier.

Salt Lake City

2

Reviews, Visits, and Rankings / Re: best squirrels

« on: February 04, 2005, 12:41:51 AM »

I'm not an expert on this, but my SO tells me DC squirrels are the friendliest she's seen (she's from NorCal for reference). I'm not sure which Washington school has the best though, but I would imagine GW'a squirrels are fine creatures.

3

Law School Applications / Re: Zero Correspondence from [blank]

« on: January 24, 2005, 09:32:34 PM »

Ditto on NYU. Their application should even be complete now, but I never got anything from them (sent application Dec 23). Another thread suggests they take a long time to confirm completed apps, but do they not send anything until it's completed?

4

Recommendations / Re: Which LOR's to use

« on: October 21, 2004, 02:26:59 AM »

I've heard as much as that work recommends aren't useful, and that unless you've been out of school for a very long time (over 5 years), they want to see at least two acedemic. And that's assuming the work recommend is equally as strong.

Because yours is weaker, it's a no-brainer. If they only allow 2, send in the two profs.

5

Law School Applications / Re: T14 School that just make you go blech

« on: September 19, 2004, 11:08:47 PM »

I don't like Texas either, but shouldn't we spare Austin?

I don't like NYC either. Agree on NYU and Columbia (don't care about Ivy).

6

Law School Applications / Re: LSN Gunners

« on: September 15, 2004, 10:28:48 PM »

Pfft. Damn straight.

7

Law School Applications / Re: Columbia has lost its mind

« on: September 15, 2004, 02:40:12 AM »

Quote from: shrub on September 15, 2004, 12:52:22 AM

Quote from: Giggity Giggity Giggity on September 15, 2004, 12:42:41 AM
Quote from: The Artist Formerly Known as Biscuit on September 15, 2004, 12:39:28 AM
Both of these posters are URM's.. and at least one of them has a very rare major combination. They may not just be sending out to reject people.

Columbia has no idea what the URM status is of individuals it sends waivers to. It is done based solely on LSAT scores. Therefore, though they may have a chance of being admitted, said chance was not Columbia's original intent in sending them the waiver.

Sure they know URM status. That's all part of the LSDAS information I entered when I first signed up w/ LSDAS. I also mentioned the states i'm most interested in attending. And lo and behold, those are the states that send me invitations to apply.

Also, what do all of your "invitation to apply" letters say? Mine always tout how "diverse" the student body is. I mean *REALLY* tout - a big long fat paragraph on the subject. I suspect each school has a "diversity" paragraph they automatically insert into the invitation letters when mailing out to URM's they discovered through LSDAS.

Also, i'm over 30 - which is part of LSDAS info since I had to enter my birthday. I'm sure all of that got passed along as well. Sure, Columbia says "we're highly interested in you and invite you to apply because of your LSAT score". Of course that's BS. Likely, Columbia got all the info from LSDAS and their form letter should actually say

"We see that you're a Mexican-American over 30 with a high GPA in two interesting majors and a 2nd bachelor's degree. Your LSAT is in the toilet. But you do have at least a snowball's chance in hell of being accepted. We know you wouldn't even bother applying otherwise, so here's an app fee waiver. Also, you're very likely to simply not meet our standards, so we will very likely reject you and that will benefit our selectivity rating. But your LSDAS info is mildly interesting (i.e. out of the normal) so we thought we'd give you a chance to strut your stuff."

I think the above probably reflects some of the truth involved in my getting a Columbia fee waiver.