Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

16 Neutral

About YemenJemen

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

595 profile views
  1. Accepted to Lakehead 2018

    Hello! Yes, I was put on the waitlist a couple of months ago and they emailed me about it. I recommend calling the admissions office in your situation though.
  2. Accepted to Lakehead 2018

    Accepted (from the waitlist)! 3.03/3.15 L2 166 LSAT Born and raised in Northern Ontario
  3. I also got the email, very misleading. Why was it sent out? I checked my status and I'm still waitlisted. But I think I'm going to call them tomorrow anyway and ask what's up.
  4. Lakehead Waitlist 2018

    The waitlist here seems very mysterious, not a whole lot of people have posted about it. What are your stats?
  5. Lakehead Waitlist 2018

    Waitlisted March 7th 3.03 cGPA and 166 LSAT. Born and raised in Northern Ontario, I don't know how much of an impact that's going to have.
  6. So your AGPA is 2.54, and that's without your bottom 25% of classes yes? Manitoba law has drops. Even so, I think if you can score well on the LSAT you should be able to squeeze in, since you are a mature applicant
  7. Where did you do your undergraduate degree? Are these numbers calculated on the OLSAS conversion chart? If I were you I'd be going for U of M. If your diagnostic score is 155 I think you'll be able to score in the 160s on test day, 155 is a pretty good diagnostic. For Manitoba you need to recalculate your cGPA into an "AGPA" by converting all grades to their specific grade-point system and dropping the bottom 25% of your marks. Since Manitoba is an index school you'll be able to find out your chances in their general category quite easily, or find out the LSAT score you'd need for early admission. I know they also have special consideration, but that's a process I know nothing about. At this point, I'd say Manitoba is your best bet.
  8. June 2017 LSAT Release Date

    We've gone gray, they're coming today.
  9. UBC also drops your bottom 4 classes, so that's the number you'd need to calculate. Then, use that GPA to calculate your index score and compare that number to accepted/rejected threads to estimate your chances. For example, my cGPA is ~76.97 with drops (~75% without!, I punch that into the UBC predictor at http://lsutil.azurewebsites.net/UBC/Predict and I play around with the LSAT scores to see what I'd need: 169: 90.77, definitely out. 170: 90.97, still very low. Maybe I could squeak into the discretionary category but I wouldn't get my hopes up. Probably out. 171: 91.17, That's tricky, I've heard that 91.2 is the cutoff. I'd probably get on the waitlist? 172: 91.37, This is where I'd start feeling a little comfortable, there were some people admitted late in the process with 91.3. 173: 91.57, Unless 18/19 is a lot more competitive that this cycle, I'd expect to get in with a 91.57 Once that number goes over 92, I'd think it would be an auto-admit which occurs (for me) at 175. Now all I have to do is score 175 on the LSAT
  10. June 2017 LSAT Waiting Thread

    They very often come out earlier than the official score release date, Dave Killoran of Powerscore predicts that they will come out on the 5th (40% Chance) or the 3rd (35% Chance)
  11. June 2017 LSAT Waiting Thread

    How do you feel about it? OK?
  12. June 2017 LSAT Waiting Thread

    There is very little chance of it coming today unfortunately, I think the general prediction is next Wednesday?
  13. Is there anyone else waiting on their LSAT score this week?
  14. Accepted to Windsor 2017

    Congratulations! What were your stats like?
  15. Will Robots Take My Job?

    This is a valid point, and it's why the onus is on public policy makers to enact legislation that allows for this technological change to take place in such a way that doesn't necessarily burden the poor. Absolutely, unfettered corporations may use this new technology to increase profits and lay off thousands. But this is a paradigm shift in our economic system, one that has a lot more moving parts than the simplistic replacement of workers on assembly lines. Also, China has absolutely been reliant on new technology in order to catalyze their alleviation of poverty. The changes following Mao were more than bureaucratic, they have been developing and applying new technologies for decades. Let's look at Korea, a country that was torn by war and impoverished following WW2. Now it's a first-world country that leads the world in tech development. Through guided public policy initatives that consider both public and corporate interests they were able to put their population to work and capitalize on new technological developments. But you have legitimate concerns, absolutely. This is why it's so important that our technology policy reflects a variety of stakeholders, it must be beneficial to all. In my thesis I cited a DOE report on self-driving cars that really illustrates what I mean; the report found that these cars can either reduce fossil fuel demand in the USA by 90%, or increase it by 270%. The difference was policy implementation; if cars are shared and coordinated to maximize efficiency the demand is greatly reduced, but if they are freely owned and sold like cars today people will drive more, faster, and ultimately demand a greater amount of fuel. Here, environmental protection is a proxy for poverty reduction (many studies suggest that warmer global temperatures reduce development in the lowest tiers of socioeconomic status the most).