Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: Boalt...  (Read 5399 times)

Regal_Muse

  • Guest
Re: Boalt...
« Reply #10 on: February 07, 2005, 05:42:06 PM »
It's a UC, what should I expect? My chances of getting into a private school are much better anyway.

Are we there yet?

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 183
  • We should all do our part...
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Boalt...
« Reply #11 on: February 07, 2005, 05:48:02 PM »
Oh shut the hell up Jrs. I said oh my god b/c I expected to get into Berkeley. I'm obviously upset so if you have a problem with  my comments, go f*ck yourself.

FYI: The same goes for anyone else who wants to criticize my comments.


After reading this post, I can't say I disagree with them.
  

InVinoVeritas

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 5550
  • Fine! I shall also fix zee hobo suit!
    • AOL Instant Messenger - NVinoVeritasChi
    • View Profile
Re: Boalt...
« Reply #12 on: February 07, 2005, 05:51:24 PM »
by numbers alone, you're a shoe-in a tons of places.  but only you know how the rest of you application looks, and maybe it's there that Boalt found reason to deny admission.  On the other hand, perhaps they saw the writing the wall: you were obviously going to be admitted at a good number of highly regarded schools and the likelyhood of your matriculating at Boalt was slim.  Did you indicate a strong preference for Boalt when you applied there?

Jennaye

  • Guest
Re: Boalt...
« Reply #13 on: February 07, 2005, 05:56:19 PM »
They're waiting for radical-uberliberal activists with crappy LSAT scores such as myself


 ;D

 

Bahamut

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 363
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Boalt...
« Reply #14 on: February 07, 2005, 06:05:49 PM »
I'm sorry, a 160 isn't "crappy". People need to stop downplaying decent scores as if only a 170+ will get you into a "decent" law school.
SMU Fall '05

mmyles

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 222
    • View Profile
Re: Boalt...
« Reply #15 on: February 07, 2005, 06:19:14 PM »
It HAS to be because they knew there was very little chance of you going there since you'd be accepted into at least some of the big three.  Stanford is WAY better, anyway  ;D  (I will continue to praise them even if I'm rejected...but I can still hope!) 

Regal_Muse

  • Guest
Re: Boalt...
« Reply #16 on: February 07, 2005, 06:21:52 PM »
LOL. I just got off the phone with Boalt admissions and they basically gave me the typical BS response "We have so many qualified applicants and not enough seats..." Oh well. Life goes on.

Jennaye

  • Guest
Re: Boalt...
« Reply #17 on: February 07, 2005, 06:38:45 PM »
I'm sorry, a 160 isn't "crappy". People need to stop downplaying decent scores as if only a 170+ will get you into a "decent" law school.


ty ty ty for that

ok maybe not "crappy" but certainly not up to T-20 standards, and not even a shoo-in for most 1st tier schools

Regal_Muse

  • Guest
Re: Boalt...
« Reply #18 on: February 07, 2005, 06:45:15 PM »
160 is not a low LSAT score. The vase majority of lsat takers score between 145-155. Anything above those numbers is considered good in my book.

filialuna

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 173
    • View Profile
Re: Boalt...
« Reply #19 on: February 07, 2005, 06:53:59 PM »
160 is not a low LSAT score. The vase majority of lsat takers score between 145-155. Anything above those numbers is considered good in my book.

Hon, you're in at Harvard and Columbia!!  Boalt just doesn't know what they are missing :)  I am way envious, I would give anything for a Columbia acceptance/Berkeley denial right now =)