Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


lookingaround last won the day on November 21 2011

lookingaround had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

196 Good People

About lookingaround

  • Rank

  1. Lawyers with accents

    ... I don't think either of those descriptions are accurate, and even if they were, neither of them has anything to do with accent. As you've been told many times: You're focusing on, and trying to 'fix', the wrong problem.
  2. Lawyers with accents

    To be honest - they both sounded like a computer. You know how Stephen Hawking, or a recorded bus/rail announcer grabs disconnected syllables from the database to put them together? It was like every individual sound was fine, but they were run together with the wrong emphasis and gaps (which made it quite hard to follow). I'd say don't worry about an accent - any accent - just work on speaking naturally. Follow along with TV, and songs, and movies, where you can have a script in front of you, and try to make the words sound similar to what you're hearing. I don't mean to be discouraging - I have no doubt that your English is far, far better than I could ever be at your native language. But you shouldn't be worrying about accent, you should be focusing on putting the words together so they sound more natural. That's going to help you a lot more. Locking onto an accent, and just acknowledging 'there's an accent' is much more user-friendly than having to focus because the words are coming across forced.
  3. Should I cancel my second Lsat score?

    Alberta are the strictest for averaging, they only use the average. Calgary (what is is about AB?!) as I recall use both - think it's accept highest score but sort by average or something.
  4. Disclosing Institutions/Schools Attended

    They don't think it's useless - if they did, they'd ask for something like 'All schools where you undertook work which was graded'. An example just off the top of my head, enrolling in five schools in successive years, and dropping out after two weeks is something that admissions committees could find very relevant when deciding whether or not to extend an offer. A single one, probably not so much. But they want to know. If you're contemplating hiding it, then it is an issue of being deliberately dishonest, and the quicker you disabuse yourself of that notion, the better. If you're not contemplating hiding it, you have no need to be so defensive.
  5. Disclosing Institutions/Schools Attended

    Sure it's pertinent. You attended. They want to know. The 'why would you leave it off' was more rhetorical; you're seeking entry to a profession based on following rules, and ethical integrity. If you're seriously considering hiding something in response to a simple question like 'Where have you gone to university?', it's a damning indictment of your ability to either follow instructions, or act with probity.
  6. Disclosing Institutions/Schools Attended

    Did you attend? If so, and they say they want to know everywhere you attended, why would you leave it off?
  7. disclaimer, private email

    Seen that a lot in both emails and forum signatures for lawyers and accountants - 'the above is not legal/financial advice yada yada'. What effect it has I can't say, but seems to be at least sometimes a useful thing to remind people.
  8. How much do real estate lawyers make in Canada

    It's only on a third reading that I realised "gies" was meant to be "guys". Serious piece of guidance: Before you even think about law school, you need to work on your English writing skills (or French, if you aim for Quebec). Your spelling, grammar, use of capitals, punctuation, and sentence structure are all over the map. It's not easy to read what you're writing (not to say it's impossible - but law is a field that requires meticulous use of language). I hope you're not yet in university, in which case you still have time to improve. If you write like this in exams, papers, LSAT writing sample, etc, you are going to do yourself a disservice. Finally - no, there isn't quick and easy money anywhere. If there were, people would already have taken it. Some fields are very rewarding to people who put in a great deal of time and effort, but that's not the same thing.
  9. Walking or cycling to work

    Cycle to work in t-shirt, shorts, sneakers (adjust as weather requires), shower & change at offices that had showers, cycle in slower and deoderise & change at offices that didn't have showers. Kept a suit and dress shoes slung over my desk chair.
  10. Tech Gadgets for School and Beyond

    Blech. Personal preference (others will vary), I'd only ever use a Surface if they were mandatory. Had one for my work device, found it worse than useless. Trying to be laptop and tablet, didn't do either of them well. Repeated hardware faults (like screen not turning off, battery draining while off overnight), just barely ran Office, didn't run IE, WiFi connection best described as 'optional', lack of ports by default.... If they work for people go for it, but loads of us wound up using our own iPads just because we couldn't get our jobs done with those things!
  11. I've never heard of a BBA before (or NUST), so won't comment on desirability - what admissions want is hard numbers. One of the biggest disadvantages to going to school outside North America and then applying for Canadian law school is that degrees have to be converted - instead of a 4.0-4.5 scale, you could have any one of letter grades, percentages, numbers going up or down to signify better, etc. Different schools will all convert these in different ways. In my experience, with a foreign undergrad, schools came back with wildly varying numbers on what they thought I had. Some of this can be explained by their different criteria (best 3,last 2, worst dropped, etc), some of it is simply that different schools will look at you differently. That is an ambiguity that you will not have if you study in Canada. In addition, if you plan on going straight through, you will have far more LSAT options open to you in Canada (in terms of test centre locations, numbers of tutors if you want one, even the test being non-disclosed for foreign administrations), so while you may be able to write it in Pakistan (again, I don't know how many/where they have in Asia), you may be limiting your options. If you're currently in Canada, and want to go to Canadian law school, I'd say the only reasons to go abroad are for either cost of living, or to experience living there. You won't be making things easier coming back (you may or may not be making them harder - I can't say for certain).
  12. Hired but snooping around

  13. I didn't apply anywhere in Ontario, so have no OLSAS experience, but every school I applied to asked if you were registered for a future LSAT date. I cannot imagine that OLSAS does not do the same. Best case scenario is to have a single score, where you want it, before you apply. You can't do that, so- If you take in Sept, you will have a score in time for the first round of offers, be it good or not. If you wait until December, you're (as good as) guaranteed not to get offers with a 155 (although you won't be auto-refused, knowing a resit is coming, unless even a 180 would render your complete package uncompetitive). Your question to consider is do you want a score that's earlier, for round #1, which would give you time for an emergency resit if it's awful, or do you want to take a couple of extra months, basically sit out round #1, and pin everything on December. It really depends on what you think the extra couple of months are going to do for you.
  14. Hired but snooping around

    There are ways of saying, and of thinking, the sort of thing you're thinking above. It's not necessarily invalid to say you want to play for higher stakes; to take a nearby neighbour example, it's often thought that American lawyers who win, win bigger than Canadian lawyers, but the tradeoff for that is that those who lose have a JD and nothing good to come of it; graduates of Canadian schools in Canada are relatively unlikely to be flipping burgers with a JD and $200k of undischargable student debt. However, to phrase it as your 'not being satisfied with how much lawyers earn in Canada' is - whether you realise it or not - an insult to everyone here, students who want to be lawyers in Canada and the posters who already are, all of whom have apparently decided that's a income band they're fine to exist in. It contains an implication that others have settled for something that wouldn't 'satisfy' you, which necessarily means you think you deserve more. So to say that you want the chance to win bigger than everyone else, having already nullified some of the downside risk by getting your Canadian legal education, at good quality and cheaper than many of the other countries where the disparity is larger - you can't be surprised that's rubbing people up the wrong way.
  15. Percentile change on previously written LSAT

    Most places. Victoria take percentile, so if my higher score had moved percentiles, that could've mattered there. Either way, no change, so no effect