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 - Andrew

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 74
General Board / MA Bar Results - when?
« on: November 02, 2004, 09:19:19 AM »
Does anyone know specifically when the MA Bar results for July come out?

Studying and Exam Taking / Re: simple tip I started using
« on: October 21, 2004, 03:02:34 PM »
There was a student in my class that used to cut the pages out of her book and keep the latest cases in a binder.  Another student had his girlfriend re-bind large books into two smaller volumes (I guess she was into book binding).  I've heard of people scanning books into their laptop to solve this problem too.  All are good ideas.

The problem with the Westlaw method is that many of the casebook cases are edited down to skip the tedious, unimportant parts.  You can end up reading a lot more and focusing on the wrong issues.  The professors usually use a case to show one or two issues, but real cases can sometimes have several (ie a Civ Pro issue in one part of the case and a Contract issue in another).

Studying and Exam Taking / Re: Citation manual
« on: October 21, 2004, 02:56:53 PM »
The ALWD is trying to make their system the new standard, so they're teaching it to law students.  Like most things in law, change is very slow.  I had to learn the ALWD my first year of law school but immediatly had to unlearn it and switch to the Bluebook for journal work.  I used the Bluebook for all my papers in law school (after first year).  Most of the lawyers I've talked to have never heard of the ALWD.

Even if your school uses the ALWD, it's probably not a bad idea to start getting to know the Bluebook as well.  There are some differences.

Pointless Arguments / test post
« on: October 20, 2004, 01:25:25 PM »

General Board / Re: Reputation Experiment
« on: October 12, 2004, 05:33:27 PM »
Haha - and why shouldn't we have all the power?  Okay - how about 50 - that's obtainable but probably not worth a troll's time.

I'm also thinking in the context of the pre-law board, where I'll implement this also if it goes well here.  There are tons of people over there with 100 posts, but we'll make it 50.

General Board / Re: Reputation Experiment
« on: October 12, 2004, 05:14:28 PM »
Okay - so if we increase the posts needed to being voting (say 100?) and increase the time between votes (say 3 hours?) we should have a pretty good system.

There will be lots of unjust defaming and commending, but these are matters of opinion.  Someone that really hates me might log in every 3 hours to defame me, but someone that likes me can do the same.  Over time a reputation will develop.  We're working with small numbers right now so it's easy to move things in one direction or another.

General Board / Re: Reputation Experiment
« on: October 11, 2004, 11:09:59 AM »
Okay, maybe it's just me, but I don't see the link.  Do you have to have a certain rep of your own to see it?  ;)

Oh, uh, oops.  You do have to have a minimun number of posts to change people's reputations - otherwise people could just set up fake accounts and give themselves points.

I lowered the minimum to 10 posts so you should be seeing the links now.

As for name changing - I agree that it gets confusing.  I'll have to figure out a way to close that off without people getting too mad.

General Board / Re: Reputation Experiment
« on: October 10, 2004, 11:58:36 PM »
You do it as your reading a thread.  For example, if you like this answer, you can click the "commend" link above my picture there on the left.  You can commend or defame again and again, but to prevent people from going crazy and boosting reputation too fast, there is a limit on how many points you can give to a person (ie - 1 time per hour per recipient - though that number can change depending on how this gets used - maybe once per day is more appropriate).

It's not scaled at all.  Someone could have a reputation of 5 or 10 or 10,000, or they could have a negative reputation.

Banning people will probably never become a common practice.  On the internet, you can't actually ban people, just cookies and IP addresses, and there are always ways around the ban.

What do you all think of the names?  Should it be called "reputation" or something else? "karma?"  I'd like to use a legal theme (hence: defame), but is it clear enough?

General Board / Re: Reputation Experiment
« on: October 08, 2004, 04:13:24 PM »
Well we have to see how well the reputation idea works before we completely change over.  I do like the post counts because they show you how active that member is.  I just don't like that people think they're so important.

General Board / Re: Reputation Experiment
« on: October 08, 2004, 01:53:04 PM »
Yes, but not more than once per hour per person.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 74