Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: UChicago  (Read 5779 times)

check01

  • Guest
Re: UChicago
« Reply #20 on: March 24, 2006, 07:03:41 PM »
Splitter ding, 2.72/175

This is a relief, because I didn't want to move to Chicago, and if I had gotten in I couldn't say no. (Unlike Northwestern, where I applied because of a fee waiver and a hope to use it as leverage for money.)

Alamo

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 2557
    • View Profile
Re: UChicago
« Reply #21 on: March 27, 2006, 11:33:19 AM »
Ding dated March 21 - 3.25/169 with a couple connections that turned out to be worthless.  Can't say I'm shocked.
I must admit that I may have been infected with society's prejudices and predilections and attributed them to God . . . and that in years hence I may be seen as someone who was on the wrong side of history.  I don't believe such doubts make me a bad Christian.  I believe they make me human . . .

ImNobody

  • Guest
Re: UChicago
« Reply #22 on: March 27, 2006, 11:35:26 AM »
Got my ding too. Maybe I'm getting a little sensitive, but it seemed like a pretty politely worded "go fvck yourself" to me. At least Stanford gives you all that garbage about "its not you, its us."

Hm.

postal007

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 242
  • Bite Me Fergie
    • View Profile
Re: UChicago
« Reply #23 on: March 27, 2006, 12:41:08 PM »
Got my ding too. Maybe I'm getting a little sensitive, but it seemed like a pretty politely worded "go fvck yourself" to me. At least Stanford gives you all that garbage about "its not you, its us."

Hm.

I can't believe an admissions office could write such a poorly worded rejection letter.  It's sad, really.

check01

  • Guest
Re: UChicago
« Reply #24 on: March 27, 2006, 01:52:40 PM »
You mean you read the letter?  I had it torn up within two seconds.

ImNobody

  • Guest
Re: UChicago
« Reply #25 on: March 28, 2006, 12:40:26 AM »
I'm a glutton for punishment.
Also, I'm becoming a bit of a rejection letter connoisseur, so it seemed only fair.