Jump to content

FineCanadianFXs

Members
  • Content Count

    547
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

FineCanadianFXs last won the day on February 2

FineCanadianFXs had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

968 Good People

About FineCanadianFXs

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

2507 profile views
  1. Love how violently allergic to their own derision this hypothetical character is. Or are they just stress vomiting like Stan whenever he talks to Wendy?
  2. ooh la la lookit mr double-burger car-driving cineplex VIP with his fancy reclining seat still has time for the plebes
  3. Yeah, it's possible. I've been published in a couple journals; it isn't complicated. You have many options. You can publish in a journal or as part of a compendium on a particular topic. You can contribute to a blog. You can make your own blog. What your ultimate goal is, how quickly you want to published, and where and what kind of audience you're looking for is kind of up to you, and you should do that research yourself. You may find better help from the prof who liked it. You should ask them. They may have connections to a publication. Even without the prof's help, the submissions process is not complicated. Find reputable publications seeking content. Then you send them a copy of your thing. If they want to publish they will and if they need you to change it, they will give you a review and feedback and ask you to do so. A lot of publications accept rolling submissions--meaning your paper might not get in the next edition, or the one after that, but they'll keep it in the bank until they have space and it's appropriate. But that can take time. Which is why you submit broadly. Good luck. Talk to your prof.
  4. First, do what interests you more. Second, if you can't figure out what interests you more (and that's likely a problem you should try and resolve) it depends what kind of legal practice you're pursuing and in what areas/industries. The articling recruit is broad and this board has no idea what you want to do with your career. If you love and want to work exclusively doing legal research, keep doing that. If you want the kind of practice that requires you to draft client documents often, do that. Do you want a diverse experience? Then diversify. Otherwise, you'll really have to provide more specifics.
  5. What do people recommend in terms of how I should organize materials? Whatever works for you. I found the easiest and cheapest method was hole-punching the top left corner and using rings I bought at Staples to separate each section. Professional cerlox binding looks nice but if you want to rearrange or there's an error, good luck fixing it yourself! Some people just use good old staplers. There's no right answer. The exam is largely a page-flipping exercise so your organization method should cater to this. Is it true to that it is recommended to just skip the whole Tax section? Don't skip anything. What you focus on is a different story. Better to update old indices or make my own or buy one? Like @baklava, I made mine in a group. It was annoying to do but probably helped a bit or at least it gave me peace of mind. I'd never have paid for an index though. If you read the materials, highlight well, and learn to work the ToC, you'll be fine. Where do I find old indices? My group worked from an index from friends who had written the bar the year prior. Should I be updating indices as I read the material? Or should I read all the material once, highlight it and then go back and update indices? If you plan to update indexes entirely on your own, as you read the materials, that sounds like a humungous waste of time with very limited payoff. Either work in a group or learn to use the ToC. Don't try and create an index by yourself, that is way too much work for one person. If you create a group index, yeah you just update as you read that section, so reading that section will take you longer than the rest. Is there a recommended amount of time we should spend on studying each day? Do the math yourself. How many pages do you need to read? How many days do you want to read them in? Divide one by the other. Read that many pages a day. Is it worth it buying practise exams and doing them? Do we have time to do them? Practice was absolutely essential for me. If you can access free exams great. If you can't, I guess you'll have to buy them?
  6. They shouldn't wonder. For reasons already stated above. But also, a thank you email doesn't warrant a reply. Besides a polite "you're welcome", what are "many people" expecting? I wrote many thank you emails during law school, but I never expected a reply from busy lawyers. The purpose was for me to send a nice message to thank them for the opportunity. Maybe to show them I'm a polite, appreciative, and cool person. If I made a special connection that led to further correspondence, great. But in most cases, the thank you email represented the full conclusion of that communication. Now, if I get a thank you email for whatever reason, either I'm busy and lose track, or I'll respond "happy to help" and maybe a smiley emoji. It means absolutely nothing in either case.
  7. Nobody is recommending that anyone engage in more overanalysis. We agree on that. At a certain level, however, offering some low key preparedness options to reduce unknowns and build confidence is more helpful than suggesting that "well if you can't even talk about it, they aren't interests". I don't see how that helps except to make someone feel more embarrassed if they hesitate or stumble. That kind of advice, or at least the tone of it, tends to exacerbate.
  8. So, it sounds like you don't actually disagree with me, since you're suggesting a potential pre-considered answer to--or approach to answering--a question about interests that someone might not have thought of before an interview. This is all I'm suggesting too. And my earlier comments provided similar examples. Not everyone knows to answer questions like this. That's why it isn't a bad idea to take the time to think about it.
  9. Lol at your solution to anxiety "just relax!" In your experience, has that ever worked? Look, the main issue with your view is that you assume that people enter job interviews with the same conversational comfort as they do hanging out with friends and families. They don't. Some might be able to do this, but most don't. And the reason you as interviewer ask questions about a candidate's interests doesn't really help anxious candidates feel comfortable the way you might think it does. They want a job. Some desperately. It's a rough market and it has been a stressful year. If you can't empathize with a candidate who is nervous and anxious about getting a job and less capable of just chattin it up with you like you're their grampa, so you can glimpse inside their true self, then I'm not going to persuade you (but it probably isn't worth the effort anyway, I've made my point enough here and students can decide for themselves how best to prepare). I'm just surprised you think it's controversial to suggest that people think about how they'd answer a question before an interview. And I'm equally shocked that you think that "thinking about an answer to a question" leads automatically to "sounds like a prepared robot". That's simply untrue, from my experience on both sides of the table.
  10. I recommended spending 10 minutes thinking about answers to likely questions to avoid getting thrown off. I also said that writing things down helps commit things to memory if that helps. Nobody suggested sitting down and penning scripts. Adults--especially law students--get nervous at interviews. There are simple ways to manage that which I wrote above. Your helpful advice is "nah just talk like a human"? Not everyone is born with charisma and charm.
  11. I don't think this is accurate or helpful. People can and do freeze up, even when talking about things they love. And in an interview situation, not having a quick answer about something you're vested in can feel embarassing and that exacerbates the situation. That's understandable. But that's why you prepare a little. One of the interests I list on my resume, I have done my entire life and, at times, professionally. I have profound knowledge of it and strong opinions about it. I could talk for days about it, but at the same time that depth of knowledge makes simple questions complicated. I have enough interview experience by now to know that I could answer a question like "what's your favourite X" with "well that's a complicated question and it depends on..." and just go off. Sometimes I may not want to do that, though. Sometimes I don't want to come off as a snob. Additionally, if I want to give the interviewers something to respond to (depending on who's interviewing me) it is better to give a simple answer even if it's inaccurate because it promotes a dialogue instead of a boring ass monologue. If I don't think about these things before the interview, then when the question arrives I may be unprepared to answer. Then I'm likely to feel embarassed. But that is also really easy to avoid.
  12. Truly not unfair or unexpected. You're expected to prepare for interviews. When I was doing OCIs, my interests section included that I was a cinephile. Before my interviews I thought about what my favourite movies/actors/actresses were. I got the question I anticipated, several times. I included some sports in my interests and was prepared to talk about my involvement in them along with what I thought about my local sports teams. Guess what? I was asked what position I played, why I liked/excelled in that position, and what I thought about the Jays' and Raps' current teams. Pretty much every interest I put on on my resume throughout OCIs and later interviews led to a conversation with someone that I'd anticipated and was prepared to talk about. Those conversations sometimes went in unexpected directions which is fine. And those were fun conversations usually because I got to just talk about myself and my interests. At a certain point, you should absolutely be expected to receive and understand a question about your hobby/passion and improvise an honest answer, unexpected or not. "Actually, I love baseball but I despise the Jays" is a fair answer to being asked about the Jays. "I didn't realize Toronto had a baseball team" is suspect. "You know, I don't have a favourite movie but I love science fiction and here are some recent examples of movies I've really enjoyed in that genre" is a fine answer. "I don't know" is suspicious. To be clear, you shouldn't fabricate interests and prepare canned answers about them to appear knowledgable. But you really should be anticipating questions about your entire application package--you submitted it! And in the legal profession, failure to anticipate questions--especially as a litigator--yikes, that doesn't reflect well. Take 10 minutes the day before your interview and think about what you put as an interest and what you'd say if asked about it. It isn't a gruelling task. Writing down your answers may help commit to memory.
  13. Answering your question depends on so many unknown variables: which firm; what practice area; what kind of experience you get; your networking and self-marketing abilities; et cetera. On its own, nobody looks down at the general idea of a "small firm". What matters more is whether that small firm or the lawyers who work there have a bad reputation, whether you're working in some irrelevant practice area from the one you'd like to work in, whether you aren't getting any broadly applicable experience, or if maybe you're just not very good at selling yourself. Any or several of those in combination are not going to help your case. Rather than thinking three steps ahead, I'd consider what kind of legal work you want to do, find good lawyers who practice in that area, and apply for available jobs with those lawyers/firms. OCIs aren't the only game in town.
  14. Seconded. Summer's a long ways away and there will always be students interested in the position; you aren't leaving the professor in the lurch unless you bring something extra special to the table. You can always use the financial aspect (assuming the firm is paying more) to justify your decision. Don't leave the decision too long though.
×
×
  • Create New...