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 - UNAS
Pages: 1 2  4 5 6 7 8 ... 15
« on: March 12, 2008, 09:33:11 AM »
how does CLEO notify you of acceptance??
phonecall or mail
« on: February 20, 2008, 10:44:26 AM »
just got invited to an interview. so to all the non-traditional students out there, there is hope
YES WE CAN
« on: February 14, 2008, 12:50:05 PM »
When dealing with the redistribution of wealth/welfare issue discussed previously, I abide by the ancient Chinese proverb--"Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, he'll eat for a lifetime."
Of course, there's always the other, IMO more accurate version of this saying: "Teach a man to fish, and he'll get drunk and sit in a boat all day."
Something someone else alluded to above, but that I think people are willfully ignoring: a 39.5% top tax bracket does not mean that the people in the top tax bracket are forking over 39.5% of their income. It means that they're taxed 39.5% of the portion of their income that falls in the top tax bracket. And because of deductions and clever accountants, most people in the top tax bracket pay a smaller percentage than people in the lowest bracket (lowest bracket that's required to pay anything, not those who are tax-exempt, obviously).
Y'all are some greedy sons of bitches, if you ask me.
I was one of the people who mentioned the casual misuse of marginal as average (effective) tax rates earlier and I'd just like to point out that the bold statement is absolutely wrong. Effective tax rates increase monotonically with income quintile. They are just all a lot lower than the marginal rates.
Could it not be argued that those of us on the board fretting over a repeal in taxes that won't have any material effect on us until 3 years out of law school or a sudden insane salary hike are just not smart enough to take advantage of the many loopholes existent in the system. Using the widely accepted logic from my friends on the right, maybe you all deserve to be taxed higher since you weren't shrewd enough to avoid the taxes to begin with
« on: February 06, 2008, 03:33:56 PM »
to minority issues all you have to do is look in Alan Keyes' direction. The cherry on top would be an Alan Keyes/ JC Watts Presidential ticket. I guess I can only dream.
Sorry for the flame yall. I couldn't resist.
« on: January 29, 2008, 12:18:16 AM »
I've interviewed already. Its not bad if you establish a easy going relationship from the onset. You gotta remember that these people are looking for a reason to help you. In my case it was 10 minutes before we got to our first interview question. And thy were all basic. It might have helped that she was beautiful, but it was a very enjoyable experience.
So I've never posted on this before, but I thought I would share my thoughts about my recent experience interviewing with SEO. First of all, I thought that the interviewer (there was only 1) was extremely unprofessional. Nice and congenial, yes. But the entire interview she was checking her blackberry and cell phone every time it blinked. As someone who flew quite a ways and took time off of school and work to participate in the interview (which is only 30 minutes, by the way), I felt that I deserved her undivided attention. I felt like the questions asked were very generic, and more behavioral than the kinds of questions that would be useful to really narrow down the candidate field. And what's more, she spent the first 10 minutes small-talking about stuff that had no bearing on my selection, other than seeing that I could carry a conversation. Sure it's important to build rapport with your interviewer, but it was excessive given the time constraint. I realize this is not in itself enough to sway my opinions on the program, but still, it was just disappointing.
As far as the program itself, I'm not sure it's worth the stress, at least for me. The fact that they won't even COMMENT on the status of your application until you've sent them proof of where your attending law school is a bit shady. I thought it had to do with wanting to maintain the prestige of the program (i.e. you'll only get accepted if you go to a T14 school, or whatever), but when I asked the interviewer about it, they said the reason they do it is because they have some people who interview who don't even end up going to law school. They just want to know you're going SOMEWHERE. Once you're in, they might use it for placement with firms, but it's not as crucial to your admission into the program in general. It may just be me, but I am not going to wait 4 months as I get school responses back to "maybe" get an internship offer at the end, and "maybe" with a firm that I'd like to go back to, especially since I have other offers oustanding. I figure I'll have time in law school to make actual summer associate money (SEO doesn't pay all that much) at a firm I would probably like to go back to full time. The risk is too great for something that you can do just as well next year. Sure you might get a head start on networking, but my advice is, if you're not going to work elsewhere, take the summer off and have fun. It'll be the last time you'll be able to do that for a while...you have the whole rest of your life to be a lawyer. I'm sure the program is great for all that participate, but the process of getting there is, in my opinion, not worth the rewards. You can do the same thing next year, and spend time exploring the culture of the firms on your own beforehand instead of getting randomly assigned to one that pays about half if not less of of what you'll be making next summer.
Just my thoughts...don't want to start a riot. : )
Law firm interviews seem to be informal anyway, though. I'm not too surprised about the small talk or anything else you posted (maybe the Blackberry, but not that surprised). I guess only you all can decide whether the program is worth your time though.
Titcr. I had one 20-min interview where the partner spent the entire time asking me about my family and cricket. I don't think we even spent a minute talking about anything remotely law related.
This is true, I'm aware that many interviews for professional-type jobs can be extremely informal. However, it has been my experience that those firms PAY for your travel expenses to interview, so it doesn't really matter too much that they spend your interview time talking about the NBA. But for a program that really makes its applicants beg to be accepted, and then doesn't give the applicants the time of day, it's just a bit disappointing. Especially when decisions are made so late, and often times when it's then too late to find a decent replacement internship. I just got the impression that the program was very full of themselves. Sure they're great firms, but they're internships that you can just as easily get next year (and get paid way more). Again, just my thoughts.
1. Not necessarily. I paid to travel to the interview I mentioned above. Not all firms pay for 1Ls to interview.
2. it's not a job that you can easily get next year. It's obviously not impossible to get a 1L firm job, but it can be very difficult. And the market will definitely be tighter next year if we're heading into a recession.
3. Don't think that a firm isn't evaluating you because they aren't discussing your impressive credentials. They can get all that from the resume. Often they're more interested in seeing if you're a likable person who can carry a decent conversation on something other than law. They're interested in hiring people, not statistics.
4. The cellphone/blackberry thing might have also been intentional. Some people practice stress interviews, where they'll do/say things that seem outside the norm to judge how you'd react in a tense/weird situation. If you're action was anything like the reaction you showed here, you probably didn't pass.
I concur with everything above. As the elderstatesmen here (at least in terms of professional experience) I would advise against blowing off an offer to intern at a vault firm under any circumstances. For starters, screw your summer. When you intern that will probably give you some much needed insight into not only that particular firm, but the practice of law in general. Secondly, it will help put into perspective your work load when you start your 1L year. I hate to talk at out of my ass, but I find nontraditional students often agree that law school by and large is easier than working 9 to 12 hours everyday at a regular job. Thirdly, you would have an enormous advantage over your competition. Fourthly, where do people get notion you can't work and relax simultaneously? Again, not to sound harsh, but the idea of taking a summer off when you have been blessed with such an opportunity continues to baffle me. Barring family issues or health, there is no reason to do otherwise unless you want to work in public interest.
« on: January 25, 2008, 04:10:04 PM »
Why so much emphasis on the prestige of the firm. Is there something that I am not getting? Given most firms pay the same with the exception of 2 or 3, wouldn't it make more sense to pursue depth/quality of work and quality of life. Is it profit per partner? What is it that I am missing?
« on: January 23, 2008, 11:34:14 AM »
How many hours are you guys billing per month/year?
According to the trusty little computer program here, I billed 175.2 last month, and 169.4 the month before that, which to me felt like nothing major. I came in most days at 9:30 or 10, and left most days around 7. And both months were mon-fri with no weekends worked.
has it been your experience that most firms take this flex time approach with when you come on? Did you let your folks know off top i will get to work between 930 and 10? Did you start coming to work at 759 and some how it morphed into 930
« on: January 22, 2008, 09:30:50 AM »
put what ever makes you feel comfortable
« on: January 21, 2008, 10:06:25 PM »
people, please note that i will note post any comments that could possibly be construed as acrimonious. instead i will just let my silence be a testimony of my consternation.
I think my 2 favorite words of 2008 will be "Wake Up"
« on: January 18, 2008, 02:33:53 PM »
I don't see anything wrong with taking the LSAT again, however, if you do decide to take it again I think your approach has to be much different than the first two times. You really need to consider a private tutor or someone who can diagnose area where you need the most help in improving your score. This might be an expensive route but this is your only choice if you truly have your heart set on attending law schoool.
You're also going to have to consider when you do improve your score how are you going to explain away the lower scores. I think that you can come up with an acceptable explanation but you need to start working on that now.
I would go to grad school now just to get the GPA boost.
Basically, if you're heart is set on law school take the test again with proper outside instruction and see what happens. If you don't improve maybe you have to consider it just isnt' right for you right now.
I don't think an explanation is needed for a higher score. I mean its not like you can cheat. At least not that I know of anyway. Bottomline, get the higher score and worry about the rest later.
Pages: 1 2  4 5 6 7 8 ... 15