Jump to content

pzabbythesecond

Members
  • Content count

    1930
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

pzabbythesecond last won the day on April 14

pzabbythesecond had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1109 Good People

1 Follower

About pzabbythesecond

Recent Profile Visitors

2381 profile views
  1. High LSAT (173), abysmal gpa (2.0)

    The typical u of t self flagellation. Puke. At least try to be humble.
  2. High LSAT (173), abysmal gpa (2.0)

    de minimus non curat lex
  3. High LSAT (173), abysmal gpa (2.0)

    I mean. I'm not the one making the original claim. Universities are universities. It's a safer assumption to assume they're similar than not, especially in Canada (as opposed to the US for example). So not that I really care, but the onus is on you not me. But to go further, I went to Ryerson for my undergrad. I'm now at McGill. The law faculty allows us to take a non law faculty course as an elective. I did that. I found it easier than what I experienced at undergrad. That's not to say this is determinative. It's anecdotal. It's also limited in scope. But take it for what it is regardless. McGill undergrad carries a similar "harder than all other schools" brand. It really really isn't, at least in my (albeit limited) experience. Now I've gone on before on this forum for why the u of t assertion in general doesn't hold. U of T doesn't only recruit geniuses, in general (certain exceptions like engineering sci). The competition isn't so much more difficult that it's any materially more difficult to do well in a u of t undergrad vs brock. It really isn't. People at u of t graduate with straight As every year. In fact some of them are my colleagues right now. Accomplished? Yes. More accomplished than another undergrad student at a different university with straight As? No.
  4. Accommodations

    I can see why Toteda was brought on then..
  5. Accommodations

    you've obviously never been acquainted with the CCQ
  6. Accommodations

    I haven't. And I'll note not to take him as a professor Now, Thanks!
  7. Accommodations

    Yes @epeeist! For example my 1L contracts exam was a 4 hour take home, with a word limit. You got an extra hour to make your answer concise. I didn't need the extra time. My answer was concise to begin with. I did well. Contrast it with my 1.5 hour legal ethics exam which had a fact pattern with 6 separate issues (each with sub issues) and 10 multiple choice which required flipping through the model code like a mad man - it didn't test understanding as much as typing speed and wrote memorization. Which is a shame because ethics can present cases where analysis is significantly important (in practice).
  8. U of T vs Osgoode - Tax Law /CPA related question

    Nepotism is insidious too, in the sense that just having more connections in the industry will help you land somewhere better - all else equal - than without it. It's the ugly side of networking (where you're born into a network rather than hustle into one). I've seen it. I've accepted it because there isn't enough people with those sort of connections to fill all of the legal jobs. Yeah it sucks that my parents are engineers and not lawyers, and so I have less going for me than my classmate who's last name is well known in the community. But then, I've had certain advantages by being born into a certain class of wealth (and ability, I guess..). We should try to minimize it. But it's not the end of the world for sure, in today's market, if you're not on the "in".
  9. High LSAT (173), abysmal gpa (2.0)

    I don't believe it. It's simply true. To pretend otherwise is to spread falsities to high schoolers keen to go to law school who may miss out on an excellent institution like u of t, simply because of fear that they won't get into law school if they did. Not that highschoolers should care about getting into law school 4 years later. But they do. So at the very least let's not get them missing out on excellent education in light of wholly unsubstantiated claims.
  10. Accommodations

    Yes @ProfReader. That's actually exactly what I do normally. I condense my class notes into a long summary. Then I make a short summary/map with case names and how the whole thing works (I.e not lecture 1... - but rather step x JURISDICTION - VANBREDA). That being said for certain courses you definitely need your long summary for some obscure fact somewhere to distinguish/make a smart point. That's why I have it and it's my map cross references it. The majority of strong students do just this I've found.
  11. Accommodations

    I don't know what kind of exams u of t had but that's certainly not the case for us. We have over 100 cases, plus a code of civil procedure, and all the Ontario Rules for our civil procedure class. Try NOT having a summary that's not at least 60 pages long. Or better yet for public international law. We had roughly 1400 pages of reading in 3 months. Easily over 150 cases. And the exam today was asking about a specific application of a treaty based on a provision buried deep in our documentary supplement. And yes the questions can require going into the summary. I've done fairly alright - not amazing but certainly above average - and I've definitely needed to look up some distinguishing fact from a case I read 6 months ago. I agree certain exams lend themselves well to just knowing the material. Torts for example. Or contracts. But public international law? Civil procedure? Judicial review (this last one because the law is so damn convoluted that you need your summary for distinguishing factors).
  12. Is law school fun?

    @theycancallyouhoju agree with your point generally. But just to add to it: There's certainly a minimal level of hard work (or work, generally) required or anyone - genius or not - to "get" the material. Now the amount of work needed, I.e that base threshold, differs based on how easily you get it of course. But you can't learn through osmosis. Just like in undergrad - courses where for example I did absolutely no work because I just did not care, I got a poorer grade than my usual. I just didn't pay attention in class, or do an ounce of reading, to even know the name of the case I was citing to back up my marketing plan, or what have you. That being said, the same works in reverse. I.e there's diminishing (severely) returns once you pass that threshold. Now - if someone needs 100 hours to get to that threshold - but their maximum "getting it" is till a B-, they may spend an additional 100 hours to pull it to a B. And that's perfectly fine. And in fact should be somewhat rewarded - I.e if I'm ever in a position to hire, I'll take the equally smart kid who worked harder and got a half a letter grade better in general, over the kid who didn't.
  13. Is law school fun?

    Do you listen to yourself? How would, assuming the tests are the same, a B student get to an A+ with the same amount of work as an A student? That only happens in a world where law school exams are bullshit. They're not. Furthermore just spend the goddamn time again! If you know you're hurting yourself by not studying, stop complaining about the system and just.. Do the work.
  14. Is law school fun?

    They likely won't be hired back after articling if they continued with that work ethic. Which is sort of the point - lack of work ethic will eventually bite you in the ass, no matter how smart you are.
  15. Is law school fun?

    It's not fair that Colleges recruit for basketball based on talent and hard work. I'm supremely talented, but I just didn't work that hard at basketball in highschool. They should have taken me Anyway! Of course their focus on height and athletisicm is obviously wrong. Look at Lowry - he's barely 6 feet and one of the best point guards in the NBA. I'm sure my 5'11 200 pound frame and steady diet of pizza and coke won't impact my basketball ability. It's all a conspiracy!
×