Law School Discussion

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - LoverOfWomen

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17
Current Law Students / Re: Pepperdine went down 10 spots...
« on: March 30, 2006, 02:35:45 PM »
Honestly most firms don't care about the specific number, just the tier with the exception of top 14.  Thus firms see T14, tier 1, 2, 3, 4.  Granted there are exceptions but most firms will not care if your ranked 77 or 87, its when you drop out of the top 100 when it can hurt you.  I do however find it ironic that most law schools sign a paper saying they do not like the rankings, yet many send out explanations to alumni when they drop.  Also someone said their dean sent out a letter saying they had moved up to 80 I believe from T3.  Ironic the Depaul dean signed a letter against rankings, yet sends out a letter bragging about the jump. Be proud of the jump, but dont say you disagree with them, thats sending out conflicting messages.

click on the link: this letter has been endorsed by the following deans.

It's perfectly possible not to like the artificial pressures and constructions the ranking system places, while at the same time maintaining a realistic appraisal of their importance in the admissions process.  I don't see it as at all contradictory.

Current Law Students / Re: Government Law Jobs
« on: March 30, 2006, 05:05:40 AM »
What kind of background checks are involved with the DOJ?  Do you have to have been squeaky clean, never arrested at all, only seen drugs in the movies, etc.?  Does the whole department screen similary to the FBI?

Because umm... a friend of mine wanted to know.

You don't have to be clean, just honest.  I had a handful (gross understatement) of "youthful indescretions) and I had absolutely no problems during my clearance process.  However, honesty is key. 

Yes, I suppose it could depend on whether the drug use was definitely in the past and if you have a clean record afterwards.  I'm assuming, though, that such use has to be outside of the seven year interval they give for background checks?  That's what I've been able to find on the DOJ website, at least.

In any case, Erapitt is right.  However matters stand, hiding it will only make things worse. 

Current Law Students / Re: Procrastinators Unite!
« on: March 30, 2006, 02:57:37 AM »
Why don't you look up "sarcasm" in the dictionary?  Of course I know what insatiable means.   It's probably a 10th grade vocabulary word, oh learned one.  You are so out of touch with what's going on it's freakish.  You actually think that you are teaching me vocabulary?  "Insatiable"? ?

You are your biggest fan.  You claim to have regular sex.  Congratulations, no one cares.  You dumb down these boards with porn star pics on EVERY thread.  Grow up.  You claim to have an interest and appreciation for the "female form" as an artist, which consists exclusively of fake porn unmentionables.  You and every other 16-year old. You are a self-proclaimed "connoisseur" of women because you collect porn and know every porn star by name.  Bordering on creepy.  And finally, you try SO hard to use big words that you think no one else could possibly have your 10th-grade vocabulary, and you forcefully and deliberately inject words in sentences to create awkwardly flowing phrases like "the gift of subtextual idiocy." and flowery ones like "pray tell", not to mention following the words "hooking up" with "insatiable sexpots."

Then, you think no one has EVER heard of words like "insatiable" and "hedonism" (oh please educate us with your vast knowledge of Greece.  Are you for real or what?  This is a law school message board!).

Everything about you is transparently fake.  Your user name is LoverOfWomen for Christ's sake.  Even your "plan" of working with Hollywood actresses or porn stars as an entertainment lawyer is the law school equivalent of "I want to be a spaceman when I grow up because I want to go to outer space!!"

Fake.  Pathetic.  In fact I am having a hard time believing you are even in law school at all.  I am starting to have the sinking and embarrassing feeling that I have actually been  bickering with a high school student.

Given how grossly you misinterpreted my post (in fact, you gave "insatiable" the opposite meaning), it was very possible that you didn't have the vocabulary of a 10th grader.  Your rant about beautiful women and the supposed crime of my purple prose--on the hedonism point, I didn't care to educate you about Greece; you completely missed the allusion to Walter Pater--strikes me as frustration more than anything else.  I've already explained my position, but I suspect that no amount of discussion will appease you.  In that case, I'll simply ignore your little tantrum.  Perhaps at some later point, when you are less easily annoyed, you will see how silly you're acting.

If you don't like my career plans, that's your deal.  I chose to incorporate legal studies with an existing interest of mine.  I really don't see why this bothers you so much, and at this point, I really don't care.

To move this conversation back to more topical ground, I'm playing Monopoly.

Current Law Students / Re: Procrastinators Unite!
« on: March 30, 2006, 12:42:40 AM »
You're right.  I don't know what f**cking "insatiable" means. 

Ah, well you ought to have availed yourself of a dictionary.  Keep that memo for the future.

Consider if I served up the following, out of the blue, in the middle of a discussion about exam stresses:

"Personally, I've been blowing off a little steam between the sheets.  Lucky for me, the last few days my girl just can't get enough of it!"

Would I sound like:
A) A pathetic loser
B) A self-deprecating funnyman(?)
C) A liar
D) An awkward dork

Considering that you wrote the quote, I'd pick (E) "All of the above."  However, given the original context of my statement, if I were you, I would shrug and laugh.  Probably throw a friendly jab about not being able to satisfy a woman.  But that's because I don't take myself so seriously. 

You, on the other hand, should get some.  It'd make you much less of a crab, ya know.

Current Law Students / Re: Procrastinators Unite!
« on: March 30, 2006, 12:14:43 AM »
Get the point.  Pay attention.

You seem to think that I am bothered by a discussion of sexuality. I have not once suggested this. I could care less if you said sex was a pastime (on topic).  What you did was imply that you keep women satisfied.  Ummm okaaaaayy, thanks for the update, freak.  A little off topic.

I think you sound pathetic because you are actually trying to offer details about some girl's sexual appetite out of the blue.  The earlier posters were at least on topic and it was funny.  Yours was just weird.  You went the extra step of trying to add a little commentary on your prowess.  It looks contrived because you just slipped it in there like it it ain't no thang.  You my friend, are special. 

Haha, if you read an implication about my "prowess" into that, you have the gift of subtextual idiocy.  All I said was that a particular girl was "insatiable."  Now, if you actually understood what that word meant, you would realize that "incapable of being pleased or satisfied" (a rough definition of insatiable) suggests nothing about my prowess.  In fact, you might logically conclude the opposite (i.e., that I was incapable of satisfying her sexually).  If anything, it was a self-deprecating comment.

This is a lovely illustration of why English should be taught more often.

Current Law Students / Post-LS career plans?
« on: March 30, 2006, 12:04:35 AM »
I'm planning to go into entertainment law, probably with an emphasis in film or publishing.  The only downside would be that I'd have to relocate to the West Coast, although New York has some good options.  In any case, it seems like a fairly lucrative field, plus I would have the chance to work on a subject I really care about (art). 

What are everyone's career plans for after law school and why?

The reason law students are more depressed then med students is because even the bottom student that makes it through medical school becomes a doctor with the first job paying 6 figures.  the law student knows the chance of waiting tables is very real and even if you get a job, very good chance you'll end up working for a tyrant.  hmm, bleak future for most law students versus very bright future for med students.  i wonder why law students are depressed

The solution is for the ABA to stop approving so many schools.  Seriously, T3 and T4 schools are essentially worthless to the profession.  I would say even most schools outside of the T6 probably are. 

In the meantime, depressed law students will just have to get by on this:

EDIT: I removed the image because it turned into an advertisement, not a picture as I had originally intended.  I apologize.

Current Law Students / Re: Lexis or WestLaw?
« on: March 29, 2006, 11:46:33 PM »
I use WestLaw exclusively but for no good reason, really.  It was the first one I used at the beginning of my first semester and so I have always been somewhat comforted by the familiarity of it I guess.  I hope I am not missing something(!)

I use both, but I don't think you're hurting terribly if you miss LexisNexis.  If you're more comfortable with WestLaw, no harm in sticking to it.

Current Law Students / Re: how does westlaw work?
« on: March 29, 2006, 11:44:38 PM »
There are three different ways that Westlaw and LexisNexis bill practitioners. The first is an hourly rate. The second is called transactional. It charges you by the type of transaction you do. If you just enter in the citation, it is "relatively" cheap. If you perform a search, a search on a broader/more national database will be more expensive than just your state database. And like someone else already mentioned, they will also charge extra when you Shepardize or KeyCite a case. Just remember to download and print.

The third way is a yearly flat fee. While you can perform unlimited research for the same charge, Westlaw and Lexis re-negotiate this flat fee every year depending on rising costs and usuage of the firm. For instance, if a firm doubles in size from 60 to 120 attorneys in one year (and some have done this), they are going to be performing a lot more searches and Westlaw and Lexis want a cut. Thus, the firm won't be able to pay the same rate that it paid in the previous year b/c Westlaw and Lexis will demand more. Similarly, if usuage drops, the firm has a better argument to reduce the flat fee. Bottomline: your usuage counts regardless of which billing system the firm uses. Sure if it's a flat fee, your three additional searches won't make a difference but 3 per day * 7 days per week * 50 weeks per year, makes a huge difference.

Where can I get more info on this?

Current Law Students / Re: Procrastinators Unite!
« on: March 29, 2006, 11:42:10 PM »
Your knack for missing the point is incredible.  I don't care who you have sex with.  That's the point.  No one does.

How deliciously hypocritical.  Not a word yet on those who were discussing their autoerotic stimulation at the beginning of this post.

Most people would not post something like that on a message board.  But like I said, you are special.  You see it raises questions about why you would want people to have this wonderful little nugget of information.  When you blast through commonly shared subtleties of good taste in such a  way, it screams "deliberate effort" whether you realize/care or not.

If it entertains you to think that I spent my time deliberately trying to poke through your "commonly shared subtleties of good taste" (pray tell, does "jacking off" fall into such a category), by all means, do what pleases you.

You do not get to choose the impression your words make.  You can only choose your words.  When you try to "casually" slip info about your sexual odysseys into unrelated conversations it will ALWAYS sound like you are desperately insecure and trying very hard. ALWAYS. Since you obviously must know that no one here cares who you sleep with, what is it you are trying to justify by decribing the sexual appetite of some chick you bagged?  Do you not understand how stupid you sound?  Do you want validation? Are you aware that it sounds like you are making it up, even if you aren't?  ... ah forget it.  I can't believe I'm still responding to this.  You get under my skin somehow.

I don't know if you don't know these things or if you are oblivious to conversational tact.  Nothing that you said was in the least bit offensive.  It was pathetic.  See if you can figure it out.

Similarly, when a random poster overreacts at the slightest suggestion of sexuality, certain questions come to mind.  It seems pathetic, for instance, that you care so much that I mention sexual relations as a pastime.  I really don't see why you are so embarrassed, unless this raises an uncomfortable inadequacy for you.  In that case, I sincerely apologize that you are still so woefully repressed.  It's dreadfully unattractive.

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17