Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Trew last won the day on September 25 2017

Trew had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

190 Good People

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

2556 profile views
  1. Memes have been a big hit to the younger legal community
  2. I'm not hurt, just unimpressed by your natural aptitudes
  3. I could tell you were a dbag from your first post, and 3 sentences into your second I'm done.
  4. Some people are perfectionists and can't let go. A paper can be done but not according to their unreasonable standards. Like you said, smart studying
  5. Congratulations on being born with the legal analysis chromosome. No one here said 70 hours a week was necessary, but rather a personal decision. You're superficially glossing over some meaningful discussions about this shit.
  6. I don't mean to make you sigh but I did mean to make you concede. And yeah, this discussion is highly dependent on the individual so I don't know if reasonable is the most apt characterization of the amount of time needed to be prepared. But I take your point: there are some academically brilliant people in my class who have reasonably balanced lives for law students. Edited
  7. Yeah I don't dispute any of that. But it doesn't support your initial point that there is no direct correlation between time spent and marks. If anything, it goes against it. Edit: to put it in your words, there is direct correlation between how prepared you are and marks (or success in practice)
  8. I think that's open to debate. If you can agree that not spending any hours reading the cases, preparing the outlines, etc., will result in bad marks (as I assume you do), then it logically follows that there is now a continuum, from doing absolutely nothing to everything. This begs the question as to what is the point of diminishing returns? Surely, this depends on the person. I actually agree with what pzabby said about being able to do well in law school in 40-50 hours, with some points in the year requiring more. But simply put, reading a case twice will give you a better understanding of it than reading it once. Editing a paper 10 times is more likely to catch mistakes than editing it 5 times. It's a personal decision when enough is enough. I just don't think someone doing solely school work for 70 hours a week is doing it wrong if their marks say otherwise. They may be over-doing it and capable of getting the same marks in less hours (as pzabby mentioned), but who knows.
  9. Not at all. I simply said that the marks should speak for themselves, as in that's the appropriate measure as to whether it's being done right or wrong. This is a stretch, fall back.
  10. Ahh nothing says condescending like unnecessary italics. And if your third sentence was implicitly directed towards me, you should note that I agreed with the rest of your post (i.e. participating in extra-curriculars to spell it out for you).
  11. It's pretty clear, I don't see how that can be further explained. When Eddie Greenspan says he's putting in 18 hour days are you going to tell him he's doing it wrong?
  12. While I agree with the rest of your post, the marks should speak for themselves.
  13. I unfortunately agree with the main point prohavice made although I wouldn't have expressed it as such (i.e. the whims of the partners rather than the needs of the clients). I personally don't have time for hobbies, and while I could make the time, it just goes to OP's point that it would take away from law school endeavours.