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 - contrarian

Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 [33] 34
321
Studying for the LSAT / Re: What caused the recent scale change?
« on: October 11, 2007, 05:51:09 PM »
julie blame republicans.

Ron Paul never voted for the LSAT's to be more difficult.
Ron Paul never voted for an increase n LSAT study materials.

322
Studying for the LSAT / Re: circular reasoning
« on: October 11, 2007, 05:25:54 PM »
An oldie but a goodie...

http://komplexify.com/math/images/CircularReasoning.gif


But as LH says, the explanation (though a bit cryptically worded in grand LSAT style) is correct.  The conclusion is true because the premise is true, but the premise is true because the conclusion is true, and since the conclusion is true, the premise is true and ...

323
Studying for the LSAT / Re: December retakers
« on: October 10, 2007, 01:29:41 PM »
Pardon my ignorance..

Does the LSAC report the highest, both or an average, and what do schools use? 

If I bombed the test and got a 140 but ended up getting a 160 the second time, an average of 150 is still pointless if this is the value the school uses in determining admission. 


324
Studying for the LSAT / Re: The no digital TIMER IS STUPID .
« on: October 10, 2007, 01:22:25 PM »

It is a stupid rule that needs to be changed back ASAP for the september. Ther is no hard in having a digital timer. All proctors have to do is pace and make sure no one is cheating.

 The thing about analog if you can not pace yourself.

If I had the resources and I were unethical (I am neither), I would rig a digital timer with a 2.4ghz camera and have someone go in and record images of the test.  I'd sign up for the Monday test.  This is probably why digital timers have been banned. 

This isn't a terribly difficult thing to do.  In fact, I'm surprised if people don't do this already by sticking pin-hole camera and transmitter on their persons.  It's not like I saw the proctors testing the 2.4 spectrum (and that's just using off-the-shelf equipment, think of what some engineering nerds at MIT might rig up). 

This might not give you access to all of the questions, but if you were able to get 1/3 or 1/2 of the answers complete questions that you then had from Sat noon to Monday to review... that's a HUGE advantage. 

You could accomplish this with 1 accomplice (to take the first test) and yourself or anyone technically competent enough to make such a rigging.  Total cost would be $123 for the test about about $200 in equipment.  Cheaper than the powerscore books were.

325
I received a letter that they insist on my handwriting the declaration. 

What kind of letter did you receive? When did you get it? Have you taken the test yet? That part just doesn't make any sense...

I got it yesterday.  It was for the test on the 29th.  The letter is dated 10/4 and basically restated what was stated on the test, and had blank lines where I was to write out the statement again in writing (not print) and send it back asap or failure to complete will delay reporting. 

I didn't write the certifying statement at all, not even remotely looking like cursive.  I started with difficulty so I just printed it with a note saying I hadn't written anything in over 20 years (which is pretty much on target).   It's not like my handwriting has ever been legible to begin with, being left handed and a clod.

Also it says I didn't sign it, but I do specifically remember signing and dating it.  My signature however is very VERY illegible (the handwriting of a lawyer), and I frequently get sh!t about it when people see it. So perhaps they think that the squiggly thing is just a squiggly line and not my signature.

326

How much would you have to pay a person who can get you a 180 AND be "artistic" enough to pull this off.

Are you sure LSAC didn't mention the cursive thing in the paperwork or their website?  I think they do. 

It's not like they make you write your essay in cursive.  That would be a wicked trick.  It's just for a statement that's not scored and not even read by anyone.  I'm not trying to cross the line into jerkhood by saying this, but how could you worry about this to the point of "distraction causing [you] to get a few questions incorrect, that could have a huge impact on [your] score and what school I get in, and [your] earning potential for the rest of [your] life.  If you really were worried though, I will suggest that no matter what you not write about this being a concern or problem for you in any of your law school applications (like the essay explaining a low LSAT score or something).   

Someone able to replicate my handwriting for the certifying statement doesn't also have to get a 180... they just need to be able to get a higher score than I'm currently willing or able to get.  Cost, for some, may be immaterial.  While your correct that generally speaking this would be reliable and finding a person able to stand in for you and pay them enough may be difficult, it's not outside the realm of possibility, especially for someone with money and connections. 

I didn't see anything stating I HAD to write the certifying statement until the day of the test.  Though, I can't say I read every single bit of documentation available (a web search brought up some older posts on the Internet for instance). 

Why would I worry about this as I took the test? Because it may have cause my entire test to become invalidated, a concern that was unduly put upon me due to not fully disclosing this relevant requirement.  Even a minor distraction like this may take me away from complete concentration on the test, and therefore I'm now at a disadvantage to anyone else who didn't have such a distraction.  You may find it an insignificant concern, I may find it very significant concern.  It is a subjective experience that would vary from person to person. 


327
...I'm a non-traditional coming from an IT background.  I'd like to argue for the utility of someone with my skill set in the legal community by pointing out recent cases that were lost due to poor technical knowledge of the attorney/team.  That to properly represent individuals in these cases requires both skill in the law and the technology behind it, and as we become increasingly a digital society this will become increasingly in demand.

Is this a wise approach?

Oh.. and that I hope to milk mega-national corporations as I sift through each and every e-mail sent in the past 5 years to ascertain their applicability to a case while in the discovery phase for untold number of hours at $300 per.

 

328
Law School Admissions / Re: What to take to Forums??
« on: October 10, 2007, 05:31:30 AM »
$50 to go hit one of the bars.

I was disappointed in the forums.  I sat through the admissions presentation and nothing was said that was any bit informative that common sense couldn't deduce.  There was very little that I learned from walking around that I couldn't have learned in a 10 minute phone call to the university or from their website. 

Plus, so so many people walking around in suits on a Saturday afternoon.  Am I to believe that someone showing up in a suit like the other 1/2 will leave some sort of lasting impression that'll make you stand out when they read your application?




329
Minority and Non-Traditional Law Students / Re: PS for Non-trads
« on: October 10, 2007, 05:16:56 AM »
I haven't written my PS yet, but yes I plan on addressing this. 

I'm not necessarily looking to escape my current career, which is in IT, altogether.  However I'd like to focus on areas of law that relate to IT topics, such as online speech/defamation, security/privacy, software licensing, etc.  From people I've spoken to and some recent cases, lawyers with a background and knowledge here are particularly useful right now. 

I've thought of referencing specific  cases that I've read about, and the incompetency of the legal team regarding technical issues that led to a defeat, and why someone with my background is needed in the legal community as a whole. 

I'm wondering if I should state my true personal goal... "I hope to milk large corporations as I read each and every internal e-mail for the past 10 years for applicability towards a pending case in the the discovery phase for an ungodly amount of hours at $300/per.  Cha-Ching baby!"


330
I would have to guess that it is for 'security', which would assume cursive is more reliable for ascertaining the authenticity of the author.  Personally I'd think printing would work just as well, there's got to be enough various idiosyncrasies that you could use to confirm authorship.  I also think a good artist would be able to train them self in someones handwriting and be able to forge the certifying statement, so this is hardly a reliable practice to begin with.  Hell even the thumb print can be forged (a web search will bring up an article of how to make a fake finger print you can make that you can put on your finger).

Anyhow, I managed to suffer through writing it out.  It took me a while since I did each word quite slowly and meticulously as I had to consciously think how to write out each word. 

I'm probably going to include a letter stating my objection to the practice.  As an older student who hasn't been forced to use cursive in over 20 years, this seems to be discriminatory and that they should have indicated a need for cursive writing prior to my taking the test so that I could have practiced it.  The results added an additional level of stress throughout the taking of the exam as I worried that I had printed the certifying statement, and all of my work would end up for naught.  Even if this caused me a slight distraction causing me to get a few questions incorrect, that could have a huge impact on my score and what school I get in, and my earning potential for the rest of my life.  In fact, I think I have a multi-million dollar lawsuit.

Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 [33] 34