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 - kill the headlights

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 16
Law School Admissions / Re: Multiple Seat Deposits?
« on: March 20, 2008, 11:34:49 AM »
Then the waitlist will be used only when people withdraw after having put down a deposit because they have been taken off the waitlist at another school. Instead of people putting down deposits on two or three schools they have already been admitted to and just taking a long time to decide, it will be only for people who have been taken off the waitlist at other schools. That will reduce the amount of people withdrawing after depositing and it will greatly reduce the size of the waitlist.

That's a win-win for everyone, except for the indecisive that can't make a choice.

Law School Admissions / Re: Multiple Seat Deposits?
« on: March 20, 2008, 11:30:14 AM »
I actually spoke with a dean of admissions and asked him about the waitlist. He said that some years they have taken zero people off the waitlist and other years they have taken off as many as 40. Then he told me about a new policy that LSAC has instituted in which they tell schools the names of applicants who have double deposited.

He said that in their acceptance package it says that people who put down multiple deposits will have their acceptance reneged. And it makes perfect sense why this is the case.

The whole purpose is to ensure that both students and schools can make decisions quicker. It forces the student who has been ADMITTED (waitlist doesn't matter, you don't need to put a deposit down yet), to decide quicker, which enables schools to make a more exact waitlist. It will also help schools notify waitlisted people sooner because they will have more exact numbers about who will be attending based on deposits. It has nothing to do with what is ethical or not, it has to do with what is more efficient.

The new program will make students and schools make decisions quicker. It will benefit all.

Law School Admissions / Re: University of Denver
« on: March 19, 2008, 08:45:05 PM »
Yeah, they don't let anyone do the housing now. So they have made a decision, but which one?

Law School Admissions / Re: University of Denver
« on: March 15, 2008, 09:32:18 PM »
Yeah, thanks for the advice, but I am not talking about downtown. I am talking about the Cheesecake Factory in Highlands Ranch or Maggiano's. Just those two places. I love both restaurants, and my wife has never been to Maggiano's before so I am leaning there right now.

Law School Admissions / Re: University of Denver
« on: March 15, 2008, 09:15:16 AM »
I am getting pretty excited for the open house. My wife and I are going to be leaving the kids with the in-laws so it will be a weekend getaway also. But I emailed the University of Colorado and they said the school is closed for that week. Bummer.

Anyway, any votes on where my wife and I should go out to eat: Maggiano's or The Cheesecake Factory?

Law School Admissions / Re: Acceptances Done?
« on: March 14, 2008, 11:31:33 PM »
I sure hope not!

Colorado :( And I really want it!

Law School Admissions / Re: Internet is blocked in Cornell classrooms?
« on: March 08, 2008, 08:25:20 PM »
I agree, that said, I would emphatically try to make it so you can browse the internet, because I am can multitask and not worry about what people are viewing on their screens next to me.

But I do see the other side, I think schools can do what they want. But I think if enough students want to see it changed they have that power also.

Law School Admissions / Re: Internet is blocked in Cornell classrooms?
« on: March 08, 2008, 07:50:40 PM »
Silly BS. If I want to pay 40k+ and sit in the classroom and read, then I should have the right. We're freaking adults. What's next, installing porn-filters on the  library computers?

On the other hand, law schools reasonably could argue that browsing the internet, chatting via an instant messenging client, or writing e-mails during class can be distracting to other students surrounding the one doing those activities.  Relying on that premise, it may make sense to ban internet use in the class. 

In essence, although one student may not wish to pay attention on a given day, it's not fair to other students if they are distracted by the first student, especially if these other students really do want to hear what's going on in class.  After all, these other students who are being distracted are also paying $40,000 to sit in the class.

This is not the correct response. If someone gets distracted that easily they have bigger fish to fry than laptop use in class. If different colors on a screen four feet away from you makes it so you can't pay attention that is sad. How are you going to manage in a work environment if you get distracted that easily. If you asked people in the cubicle to make it so you can't hear their music they will probably laugh their head off. Don't punish other people because of your inability to pay attention. That is like asking people to not drive flashy cars because other people can't pay attention on the road and it may cause an accident.

While I don't think someone paying 40,000 dollars is a good enough reason alone to let them use the internet I do think people can limit internet use if they wanted to. It is their school and their internet. I, however, would sign the petition to make internet use permitted in class again.

Law School Admissions / Re: Waiting on Tier 1
« on: March 06, 2008, 10:40:00 AM »
Anyway, I am waiting for my T1 response also, while I have been accepted w/$ at T2. Hopefully we hear soon.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 16