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 - jason_perrlx

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 457
Meta Discussion / Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« on: July 09, 2009, 10:40:06 PM »
Page 21, asshat.

Meta Discussion / Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« on: July 09, 2009, 10:31:48 PM »
Haven't I explained that a couple of times already? 

Anyway, I'm out.  I actually have a job and, unlike you guys, I haven't made partner yet. You may breathe a collective sigh of relief.



Meta Discussion / Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« on: July 09, 2009, 10:26:39 PM »
Every one here has already seen the post... or could if they wanted to.  What's the point of re-posting if it's only a few pages back?

Anyway, I'm sure it's not going to affect your career.  I have no idea who you are, I do not want to know, and I have no say about whether or not you make partner.  Quit going on and on about it.  I'd rather discuss why you're an asshat.


(I'm kidding, I think that's a great phrase and I'm just trying to use it as much as possible.  Thanks Matthies.)

Meta Discussion / Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« on: July 09, 2009, 10:17:03 PM »
I'm jumping into the argument because it *is* interesting and it *is* entertaining in the same way Real Housewives of New Jersey is interesting and entertaining.  I thought I made that clear.  The "thank you, thank you, thank you!  This thread is a precious, hilarious jewel." was not meant to be subtle.  This thread is a hell of a lot more entertaining than "Do you think biglaw is over?" or "Which tier 2 school should I transfer to?"  Finally, LSD has gotten interesting again.

And your long-winded posting doesn't cut any mustard with me.  I read the posts and I actually went back and looked at the other thread.  Give it up.

Meta Discussion / Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« on: July 09, 2009, 10:02:23 PM »
Miss P,

Your plea for help was posted a couple of pages back.  It's out now.  Let's all get over it.

Sorry for not knowing there are a few dinks who think knowing their true identities would be helpful to people.  Now, I can kind of understand why people might want to know a board moderator's identity... but what about the rest of you people?  Who are you that you're so important, anyway?  I hope you're all, at least, Cravath partners.  If you're anything less than you've got really over-inflated egos.  What in God's name is knowing your true identities supposed to provide people, anyway?  Do you think there is a shortage of lawyers or law students in this country?  Everybody who posts here is either a law student or a lawyer.  If they wanted to get information from attorneys they actually know, don't you think they could find those people in real life?  The whole purpose of a discussion board is to get anonymous information so there are no consequences for asking goofy questions and so people can feel free to say what they really think.  What are you people thinking?  What are you providing?  Who are you and why are you here?

Also, if the three posters here are not using anonymity as an excuse to behave like an asshat... then what are their excuses?  Because these are the biggest asshats I've ever seen in my life.  It's like a reality TV show in discussion board format.

Meta Discussion / Re: The Senate Floor: Debate the Ban Process Here
« on: July 09, 2009, 08:58:16 PM »
Okay, first off... thank you, thank you, thank you!  This thread is a precious, hilarious jewel.  I stopped posting on LSD because I found the board getting inbred and boring, but now I see the drama alone is reason enough to come back.  The aspect of the thread that is the most fun is that you have all these posters who sincerely, honestly and pathologically care so much about their online "honor."  ISUCKATTHIS, you need to take a time out.  Irrx, my friend, you are simply adorable.  Miss P, you're kind of scary.
ISUCKATTHIS, I hope you realize how hilarious your position is.  I mean, you don't like these people and they don't like you.  You're basically complaining because people who don't like you have insulted you and want to ban you.  And then you insult them back.  What is the point of that?  I know you mean to call them out on their hypocrisy and, as I write below, I think you have done that.  Anything beyond that is just you getting all pissy because they don't like you.  What more can they say in response besides "yeah, we don't like you?"
That said, after having reviewed the evidence, I have to say the following:  It seems that ISUCKATTHIS, as abrasive as he is, has a point.  Miss P's posting a plea for help is pretty damning.  It seems she really did call in the troops to her aid.  That's really, really weak Miss P.  If you can't hold your own in an argument you have no business posting anything on the internet, let alone joining the legal profession.  It's pretty clear that you won't take even a modicum of responsibility for what you've done here and that you are not being the least bit reasonable.  It also seems like you have an unhealthy obsession with "saving face" on the internet.  Nobody knows who you are here.  More importantly, unreasonable obstinacy doesn't save any face.
Who knows about Irrx?  I mean, he deletes all his posts.  However, the facts that Irrx continues to insult and degrade and deliberately deletes his posts all the time don't bode well for him.  I find it wonderful that he keeps demanding "evidence" so that he may defend his honor, when he admits that he deletes all his posts hours after he posts them.
I don't know about the banning, but it does seem like it's routine for Miss P and others to complain about other posters.  That's just stupid.  How can any one say ANYTHING on an online forum that hurts you so badly you need to "report" them?  It's an ANONYMOUS forum, you freaks.  My god.

General Board / Re: Is the era of biglaw over forever?
« on: June 22, 2009, 07:52:42 PM »
The t14 will remain. What will happen is that the bottom half of the class in USN 7-14 will no longer get decent jobs.  People outside the t14 will be completely screwed.

General Board / Re: Is the era of biglaw over forever?
« on: June 21, 2009, 09:25:47 PM »
Big law isn't over, but it may well not resemble biglaw of 2004-8 for a long, long time. Big finance has its fingers up its collective a$$.  Since big finance bankrolled biglaw for much of the past decade, expect biglaw to shrink dramatically.  There will be no need for 3/4 of the lawyers on wall st doing transactional work.  those who are left will probably get less money for what they do than a middling associate used to in '07.  Welcome to the new normal.

General Board / Re: Top 10 Percent
« on: June 21, 2009, 03:21:32 PM »
"So, the fact that this guy said way above the median means 51% at best and even then I bet he is much lower than that."

Top 20 % at a T-14.  What do I win?

I hope, for your sake, that you're less of a jackass in person.

"As far as the case brief book keyed to your book, these are the law students guide to Cs. They are targeted at lazy students and they will hurt you in the end. To succeed on the exams you must not only know all of the rules of law but also how to apply them and the reasoning behind them."

That's nonsense.  If you're confident enough you can use the lecture and the case summaries to get all that is necessary from cases.  Most of the background details in cases is not the least bit useful and is not worth your time. 

Even if you aren't confident enough to do the above, I don't see what absorbing the extra material in cases gets you.  Somebody needs to explain that to me.  In your explanation, please be sure to include why I can be top 20 % after my first year and have, for the most part, ignored the extra bit.

"Law school is all about the details and reading the cases will not only give you a better understanding of the law but it will help you learn how to write good answers to the exams."

From my perspective, it's not really about "the details" at all.  It's about understanding the law, the motivation behind the law and any subtleties that mark differences between the two.  It's also about teasing out applicable paradigms, ideas and policy that apply to the salient features of a fact pattern and then making arguments based on those observations. If your argument relies too heavily on the minute details of a case or, even worse, details of precedential cases that aren't applicable even if the overall ruling might be, you're likely mucking up an important aspect of the law.

In my view, anybody who focuses on details and/or tertiary concerns is headed for mediocrity.  The only reason to sweat the details is if you've already nailed the most important points.  In my experience, if you've already nailed the most important points, sweating the details won't do much to improve your grade.

General Board / Re: Netbooks over Traditional Notebooks
« on: June 20, 2009, 07:41:43 PM »
netbook b1tch!cDxWx

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 457