Quote from: ccmckay on April 27, 2005, 06:42:24 PMI still laugh at all the posts in the 'acceptances'category that are threads that have nothing to do with acceptances. Just despaerate people scrambling for anything to hold on to that keeps them from realizing that they will only get into TTTs, and will go on to mediocre carreers in law. There are people out there who consider anything outside the T14 a third tier toilet. They think anyone attending less than a T14 will (how did you put it?) go on to mediocre careers in law. So what makes you think that YOU are better than someone who is going to a t3 or t4? Just because your manager did nothing with his JD does not mean that all people who get their JDs from t3 or t4 schools are not driven enough to do something fantastic with their degrees. A lot of people have suggested to you to retake your LSAT, I agree. There is something terribly flawed with the logic that because *John Doe* went to *School X* and did not go on to a great legal career, ALL people who go to *School X* will not go on to great legal careers.
I still laugh at all the posts in the 'acceptances'category that are threads that have nothing to do with acceptances. Just despaerate people scrambling for anything to hold on to that keeps them from realizing that they will only get into TTTs, and will go on to mediocre carreers in law.
"Wow, is this the best you could do?" So reactionary!
Quote from: ImpairedWarpig on May 01, 2005, 05:57:22 PM"Wow, is this the best you could do?" So reactionary!"oh ho ho how naive we be"So anal and condescending!
Quote from: ImpairedWarpig on May 01, 2005, 05:57:22 PM"Wow, is this the best you could do?" So reactionary!Um...don't you mean reactive ?
Quote from: hammer101 on May 02, 2005, 02:14:34 PMQuote from: ImpairedWarpig on May 01, 2005, 05:57:22 PM"Wow, is this the best you could do?" So reactionary!Um...don't you mean reactive ?re·ac·tion·ar·y ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-ksh-nr)adj. Characterized by reaction, especially opposition to progress