Jump to content

epeeist

Members
  • Content count

    8159
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

epeeist last won the day on January 1

epeeist had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2787 Good People

1 Follower

About epeeist

  • Rank

  1. Suits For Men

    You started it, Mr. Fruit Loops!
  2. Suits For Men

    If you order S&M, you have to expect some pain.
  3. High LSAT (173), abysmal gpa (2.0)

    I've already posted in an attempedly helpful way this thread, so I'm just going with the drift.
  4. High LSAT (173), abysmal gpa (2.0)

    If @pzabbythesecond was Fruit Looping - the second definition - I certainly hope he paid for it. Not that he would do this, of course (I assume - what do I know?). "Fruit looping After a bad night of sex with your girl, make her a bowl of fruit loops. Instead of filling the whole bowl with milk, fill half of it with skeet. Then sit and watch her, while laughing." https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Fruit Looping The first definition (I mentioned in another thread), if one person cleaned up afterwards, one would hope the other paid for the subject cereal...
  5. High LSAT (173), abysmal gpa (2.0)

    If someone's only goal is marks (which is not unreasonable if looking to get into law school, med school, etc.) then where they go will make a difference. It's just that it's not reasonably possible to accurately predict where that will be. For some it would be Brock, for others U of T, for others York. Or, maybe it is reasonably possible for some, and if so, great for them. To repeat personal anecdotes, at U of T two very similar courses with different profs (one was considered advanced, but same course name on transcript, same textbook, same exam) because of that had different curves, and the advanced section curve was about 10% below the non-advanced (suckers!), so that getting marks in the 90s in one section was not unusual, in the other the highest mark was in the 80s. Or one history prof said he never gave marks higher than 80-85 (and not many of those), another prof was willing to give marks in the high 90s. And those are variances of 10-15% just at one school in the same department. Let alone variations between different schools, who can predict which one will have higher marks, how keen are one's fellow students, etc.
  6. High LSAT (173), abysmal gpa (2.0)

    McGill sent me the nicest rejection letter - seriously, there was a handwritten postscript wishing me well (not that I was particularly competitive anyway, but I was honest as to how good my French was... ). Some of their students, though, aren't even entirely unilingual, let alone bilingual... 1. French not french. 2. Bijuridical not bijural. 3. Post-coital food should be better than cereal (that last one is re another thread...and I'm choosing not to use any other lingual words... ).
  7. Accommodations

    [emphasis added] Why is that a problem? I mean, some courts have very specific requirements about margins, font size, cover colours, etc. I've read some (US, don't know about Canada) sanctions against lawyers for violating the formatting rules. For assignments, if he specifies a ridiculous format, so what, isn't it good practice and learning experience in reading the rules? And a lesson in those who are too arrogant to follow them or think their words or so magical and important that they can't be bothered to fit the requirements?
  8. There's an "ignore user" feature - does that help? I've never used it, because I'm a very fast reader, and even someone I despise may nonetheless say something interesting or useful (just as someone I like may make bad posts...) - I think there's far too much ignoring of those one disagrees with in today's world, making compromise difficult if not impossible (politically or otherwise). Of course, it's possible that those to whom this advice is directed have already enabled this feature with respect to me or others...
  9. New York State Bar Exam

    Usual disclaimers, do NOT rely on anything I write, I wrote the NY bar years ago, so don't assume anything that was true for me is true for you, you have to check yourself! Since I'm trying to be helpful, albeit with a disclaimer, the price is I start with sarcasm. If you can't figure this out, are you really prepared to be a lawyer? Foreign law study at a Canadian law school, 3 years, common law studied, is the sort of foreign law degree that doesn't require doing a US LL.M., you can write the bar exam directly. For Canadian law schools, the assessment/approval is pretty much pro forma, as it's relatively common. Similarly for California, once called in Canada (or elsewhere) one qualifies to write the attorney's exam there. There are a few other states that essentially accept Canadian law degrees at par. If someone went to a civil law school (only, obviously McGill national program you have a common law degree also) or a 2-year foreign law school, or something, that's more the kind of thing where NY would require curing the deficiency with a US LL.M. http://www.nybarexam.org/Foreign/ForeignLegalEducation.htm
  10. Accommodations

    [portion only quoted, emphasis added] Of course, if it's a course that is closed-book except for permitting one double-sided aid sheet and you print it in 4 or 6 point, it's not really that short... I did that for one course in my first non-law degree, the prof gave me permission to print my aid sheet instead of handwriting it, and when he saw it in the exam he chuckled and asked to borrow it after the exam to show to others... I did fine in that course, but not because of the aid sheet (it was more of a security blanket, I didn't use it much in the exam).
  11. Accommodations

    [emphasis added] I agree to at least some extent. A well-designed exam that tests understanding, having extra time is not a big advantage (within reason, I mean giving someone a week to do an exam everyone else did in 3 hours would be unfair unless maybe the person has to communicate through blinks?). Unfortunately, while there are well-designed exams, there are also many poorly-designed ones that require so much reading/looking up that people with high reading speeds, or significantly better memories, are advantaged, even if their understanding of the material is worse. The professors with I thought the best philosophies explained that they tried to design exams that e.g. for a 4-hour exam period should take a student 3 hours to do, they didn't want people to have so much time that they wrote an excessive amount, but didn't want people to feel rushed either. So if for such an exam some people got 6 or 8 hours, they're not really advantaged compared to most people in the class. Indeed, for my first law school exam I overprepared (like, reading the entire casebook again for a start...) and wrote a huge amount, and understood the material really well, but I so overwrote that I got not a great mark. I learned from that, and future exams made sure to write much less, not rush, have lots of time, and did much better. Though again, unfortunately some (few) profs did seem to mark more on volume... I mean, if having extra time made such a difference, every paper (rather than exam) submitted in law school would deserve an A, wouldn't it?
  12. Is law school fun?

    [emphasis added] Yes, you should put in more effort, both for the reasons @providence noted, and because you have nothing else of importance going on in your life (I mean you in the example sense, not you specifically). If someone genuinely has more important things and demands on their time - they have a family, have to cope with illness (their own or as a caregiver), may need to work, etc., sure. And leisure time is important too. And religion, my mentioning it after leisure is not indicative of its relative importance to many people. But otherwise, WTF is someone going to do that's more important than preparing for the LSAT (or, more generally, law school exams) when their entire future career and life is premised upon getting into law school (or later, graduating and getting articles to become a lawyer as a necessary first step)?
  13. Is law school fun?

    Literally laughing - well, at least chuckling - out loud, the notion that getting B+ in law school is "just good enough to get by". I mean, maybe for you that's just good enough to get by, you seemed smart (my using the past tense is not indicative of any suggestion of present-day stupidity, but I mean having met you IRL, I am referring to that space-time locus ) so perhaps B+ is tragically low, but for some law students, they would be ecstatic to be getting such marks. But, I agree with your overall point.
  14. Is law school fun?

    [portion only quoted] See above posts, both re lack of correlation and my own post re spending ridiculously small time = incompetent. I strongly disagree that law school grades relate more to time invested than ability. Same with the LSAT. For both, ability far exceeds time spent in terms of effect (at least for exam courses, if paper/assignment course, time spent may correlate better). But re competence, for the LSAT, my first practice/diagnostic test I did very well. But I still spent more than an hour preparing for the LSAT, I wrote multiple practice tests, made sure I knew exactly where the test was, improved my sleep habits leading up to the test, etc. Because it would have been incompetent not to prepare, despite having the ability to do well without such preparation. Same with law school exams, it's incompetent not to prepare no matter how well one knows it from class and readings.
  15. Is law school fun?

    I thought I was okay so long as I used LS-approved emoticons... Okay, since you ask, less snarkily, results alone do not determine competence. An incompetent person could get a good result, and vice versa. Spending only an hour studying for a final exam is incompetent, unless there is good reason. In which case, if one gets a poor mark, one will either have an exam rewrite or good explanation for potential employers.
×