Law School Discussion

Nine Years of 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 - Naked Promise

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 24
21
Transferring / Students Site Question
« on: July 08, 2009, 07:07:15 AM »
Did you?

22
General Board / Re: Jr. BigLaw Associate in NY Taking Questions
« on: July 06, 2009, 04:47:07 PM »
tag

23
Transferring / Re: LSAC reports -- "Image"
« on: July 02, 2009, 10:39:10 AM »
I'm not 100% sure, but I'm pretty sure that's how it works. I will say that even if schools request a paper copy, they can still access an electronic copy immediately (an admissions secretary told me that). I guess schools just want to save on printing costs or something...cheap bastards. =)

25
Law School Applications / UMiami defers incoming 1Ls. Yikes.
« on: July 01, 2009, 10:52:52 AM »
http://abovethelaw.com/2009/07/university_of_miami_law_school_1.php#more

It's about time someone from a law school was honest with applicants...becoming a lawyer isn't a golden ticket.

26
Transferring / Re: WUSTL
« on: June 30, 2009, 07:41:30 PM »
Also in at WUSTL RD. T30 school. Interestingly, the deposit deadline they gave me is 8/1.

27
2L job search / Re: OCI Employers by School
« on: June 30, 2009, 04:12:32 PM »
Why don't you start?

28
General Board / Re: Interviews--need resume tips for law firms
« on: June 29, 2009, 09:35:19 PM »
Also, go delete your other post. You double posted this (hopefully on accident).

29
General Board / Re: Interviews--need resume tips for law firms
« on: June 29, 2009, 09:34:43 PM »
I'm also wondering how your resume is 4 pages long. Is that the resume you submitted with law school applications? What school do you go to anyway?

I would also add that you should take off the 'objective' part. Just take it off completely. Employers at OCI know your objective-getting a law job.

30
Transferring / Re: Interesting article...must read!
« on: June 29, 2009, 09:30:50 PM »
Sands, I totally respect your judgment about how to handle this, but I have a suggestion.  In the future, when shills/obsessives/spammers post multiple threads with the same content or lack thereof, especially in the wrong areas of the board, I think it would make sense to delete or combine the offending multiple threads and issue a warning instead of banning the user (who may be a legitimate user who is just confused about how the board is organized) and leaving the offending threads around to muck up the board.  But this is just my 2 cents.

Maybe in some cases. This person posted the same link 16 times...excessive much?

I agree, but banning is really extreme.  I don't think it's too much to ask that we give people the chance to shape up before we ban them.  Also, we should consider deleting or combining the 16 threads instead of just taking action against the poster.

Yeah, but I could see from a mod's point of view that things like this just get annoying. You try to be reasonable, etc. and people abuse it. Easy way out: ban. Obviously being reasonable is a good thing too, but there are practical concerns as well. I do think you make a good point though.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 24