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 - hunterhogan

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15
111
I do not believe that the Internet is ambiguously public. It is public on its face, because access to the information is overtly and explicitly free of restrictions.

However, you are correct that the quality of the information on the internet is poor. That is why adcomms should investigate any information they find here. If they do not, then I would agree that it would be "indecent" of them.

This situation is not analogous to the state searching everyone’s homes. Homes are private, this is public.

If a law school is willing to perform due diligence when matching public information to applications, then there is not a problem. However, I seriously doubt most law schools are willing to go through the effort to verify all of the information that they find on LSN/LSD for all profiles. So, I don’t think that any school will every attempt to match 100% of all applicants to public information.

Matching the profiles is not a problem. Jumping to conclusions without investigating is a potential problem, though. However, we should not condemn the collection of the information itself. The problem is how they use it.

If Applicant Y claimed in their application that they got a 179 on the LSAT and the law schools did not corroborate this information, then we would all be outraged. It is the same issue here; if a law school found some information on the Internet and did not investigate, then we should all be upset.

Again, there is potential for abuse and misuse of information. But, the issue is not the collection of the information, it is the use of the information.

Imagine that you have published a book on social policy. You would want the adcomms to take the content of that public statement into account when reaching a decision. Your other public statements are also fair game. Like I said in your original post, just because you intend for some information to be private, does not mean that it is private.

112
I think you are overanalyzing it. Even if you could prove that the different adcomms liked you dramatically different, it wouldn't matter once school started. You will earn your grades, while the opinion of the adcomms will not affect your GPA.

Ignore how long it took for them to accept you.

114
I am divorcing this topic from the original thread to reinforce that my comments are not meant to judge specific people's actions. (I am also reposting this in a better area.)

Adcomms matching LSD/LSN profiles to applicants raises some big issues:
  • Privacy of the applicant
  • Honesty in the application
  • Schools using the rules that they set for themselves

Privacy
There is no privacy issue here. This is a public place; if you make comments here then anyone can read them. Having a conversation on this board or posting information on LSN is not fundamentally different from having a conversation or posting information in the halls of your favorite law school.

Even if you desired or intended for your conversation/information to be private, you willingly acted in a public place. Naked people in a mall cannot complain about voyeurs.

Honesty
If someone were to deceive the adcomms, and information on LSD/LSN helped to uncover that dishonesty, then I think it is a good thing. Two examples: one, imagine that Applicant X intentionally did not send a transcript to LSDAS from a summer school program. They got 2 bad grades in that program and it would bring down their GPA. Their main undergrad school never knew about it, so it is not on any other transcripts. During the application process Applicant X then reveals this on LSD. If the adcomms were to read it, then I would hope that they would follow-up on the issue. I don't think they should automatically reject the applicant, but I think they should investigate.

Example two: Applicant Y claims to be a resident of State E where College E is located. To be a resident you have to meet 3 criteria. Applicant Y reads the criteria and honestly believes that he is a resident. Applicant Y has discussions on LSD about residency and applications. College E reads the threads and realizes that Applicant Y has misunderstood the criteria. Again, the school should investigate, not eliminate.

In either case, this prevents people from cheating the system.

Playing by their own rules
There is a constraint on the actions of law schools though. If a school makes a big deal out of the fact that they do not make marks in people's files based on phone calls, visits, interviews, etc, then I think they should not read LSD/LSN during application season.

It is not ethical for them to break their own guidelines when they were too short sighted to realize that they might actually want to use information not contained in the application to make admission decisions.

Conclusion
Unless adcomms say they won't consider information outside of the application, it is a good idea for them to read LSD and LSN. Ultimately, everyone needs to practice discretion, because the Internet is not a private forum.

115
I have not heard anything back yet.

116
Choosing the Right Law School / Re: OSU or Kent?
« on: March 08, 2005, 01:41:23 PM »
Don't underestimate the advantage of being a native of the town where you go to school. I think that your GPA will likely be higher in Chicago just because you won't have to spend time learning the town.

117
Yes! Finally, an advantage in law school for being 30!

118
I have been assuming that no news is good news, but this thread made me reazlie that I don't have any proof. So, I did some analysis using numbers on LSN from last year.

I picked schools that I am applying to: Cardozo, Case Western, George Mason, Georgetown, GW, Harvard, Kent, IU-B, NIU, Quinnipiac, South Texas, Temple, USC, and Yale.

Many of the schools have significantly larger data sets, so they might skew the data. Out of the ~4000 records, less than 400 had clean enough data to use. So, the self-reporting aspect and non-standardized data could also skew the result. I did not try to do a correlation analysis, because I am not good at it. If someone knows how and wants the raw data, then email me.

The result is completely depressing to me. Basically, after about 6 weeks, your chance of getting admitted is below average. There are exceptions in this data, but that seems to be the trend.

I calculated the amount of time it took to get a decision after the complettion date (in weeks). The chart below has three lines. The pink line is the overall acceptance rate in the data (44%). The blue line is the % of people that got accepted during that week. The curved black line is the trend of the blue line (square regression).

The trend crosses the average after about 6 weeks.

http://www.hunterthinks.com/solo/lawschool/Acceptance_Chart.PNG

119
Mom's can be persuasive. She also might have been a lawyer, Duke alum, local celebrity, or have some other additional influence.

But, we shouldn't underestimate the power of motherhood.

My mom has offered to write to UT. Maybe I should let her.  :o

120
Law School Admissions / Re: Would anyone care to read my PS?
« on: March 04, 2005, 09:34:13 PM »
Me, too.

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15