Anyone Heard of Academic Initiative Action (AIA)?

[LawDog3]

Just to be fair to LawDog (and if you asked me why I bother trying, I'd have to say I don't know), it actually might not be a bad idea for schools to adopt programs where they gave applicants an admissions bump if they accepted binding commitments to work in areas that the school deemed important yet underserved.  I just don't think this is what the schools like UCLA and NYU are doing at the moment (they're primarily trying to steal students who are likely to go to other, higher-ranked schools). 

I agree. I think that's what some of them are doing, hence my mention of those programs.

Look, a bad attempt is still an attempt, right? When u watch the NBA dunk contest, there are good dunks and not-so-good ones. But all of them are still dunks. What I am saying is that schools are trying to open doors that keep the playing field level, but applicants don't take advantage of them. I would also say that to URMs's that lack re$ource$ at the undergrad level. Where there's a will to train dilligently for the lSAT, there's a way to get a better score on the LSAT.

But non-URM's should not be complaining about specialized programs for URM's, b/c they also exist for non-URM's.

[LawDog3]

And the "AIA" acronym is my own, but the schools practicing it all have different names for it.

This was my favorite part of the thread so far. It basically renders the subject as "has anyone ever heard of this thing I made up and isn't based in reality?"

Kind of like how he creates his own definition of fraud, then asks if people who engage in the conduct that he labels fraud are committing fraud.

I haven't created my own definition of fraud. Did you follow the link I posted. Many so-called experts agreed with me. Any legal name has a doctrine behind it, and that doctrine can be expanded to include many acts. Fraud, for all intents and purposes, is the misleading of a party or parties with the intent of profiting financially. How can someone possible "make up their own definition" when the existing one is so broad/inclusive?

That's the difference between most of you and ME. I already know how to think about the law, you let the law tell you WHAT to think. I possess the type of mind that will set precedents and win many cases with individual thought. Others possess the type of legal minds that will be sick of the profession after five years.

But understand, I did not create my own definition, I expanded an existing concept to include the actions of law schools...and I stick by it.
Lawyers are born not made. 

[Matthies]

And the "AIA" acronym is my own, but the schools practicing it all have different names for it.

This was my favorite part of the thread so far. It basically renders the subject as "has anyone ever heard of this thing I made up and isn't based in reality?"

Kind of like how he creates his own definition of fraud, then asks if people who engage in the conduct that he labels fraud are committing fraud.

That's the difference between most of you and ME. I already know how to think about the law, you let the law tell you WHAT to think. I possess the type of mind that will set precedents and win many cases with individual thought. Others possess the type of legal minds that will be sick of the profession after five years.

quoted for hilarity

[bl825]

And the "AIA" acronym is my own, but the schools practicing it all have different names for it.

This was my favorite part of the thread so far. It basically renders the subject as "has anyone ever heard of this thing I made up and isn't based in reality?"

Kind of like how he creates his own definition of fraud, then asks if people who engage in the conduct that he labels fraud are committing fraud.

I haven't created my own definition of fraud. Did you follow the link I posted. Many so-called experts agreed with me. Any legal name has a doctrine behind it, and that doctrine can be expanded to include many acts. Fraud, for all intents and purposes, is the misleading of a party or parties with the intent of profiting financially. How can someone possible "make up their own definition" when the existing one is so broad/inclusive?

That's the difference between most of you and ME. I already know how to think about the law, you let the law tell you WHAT to think. I possess the type of mind that will set precedents and win many cases with individual thought. Others possess the type of legal minds that will be sick of the profession after five years.

But understand, I did not create my own definition, I expanded an existing concept to include the actions of law schools...and I stick by it.
Lawyers are born not made. 

Actually, the difference between most of us and you is the fact that most of us are much, much smarter than you are.  You just don't realize it.

But as for the creating your own definition of fraud thing, I'm joking (for the most part, anyway).

[Eugene Young]

And the "AIA" acronym is my own, but the schools practicing it all have different names for it.

This was my favorite part of the thread so far. It basically renders the subject as "has anyone ever heard of this thing I made up and isn't based in reality?"

Kind of like how he creates his own definition of fraud, then asks if people who engage in the conduct that he labels fraud are committing fraud.

I haven't created my own definition of fraud. Did you follow the link I posted. Many so-called experts agreed with me. Any legal name has a doctrine behind it, and that doctrine can be expanded to include many acts. Fraud, for all intents and purposes, is the misleading of a party or parties with the intent of profiting financially. How can someone possible "make up their own definition" when the existing one is so broad/inclusive?

That's the difference between most of you and ME. I already know how to think about the law, you let the law tell you WHAT to think. I possess the type of mind that will set precedents and win many cases with individual thought. Others possess the type of legal minds that will be sick of the profession after five years.

But understand, I did not create my own definition, I expanded an existing concept to include the actions of law schools...and I stick by it.
Lawyers are born not made. 

The bolded was hilarious. And it's even more hilarious that you really believe this.