Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by 76th

  1. @albertabean You raised some good points but one of them struck out to me that iv been having put a lot of thought in previously. "Should we start with the proportion of black and indigenous students admitted to law schools comparative to white students? Or the relatively homogenous identities of those who review applications?" I don't think looking at numbers of x or y students accepted to law school in proportion to white people is a fair take because... well, you would have to assume that the 2 groups are on equal footing and then there is some systemic ad com problem going on - for your conclusion to be correct. (Your conclusion being that law schools are inherently a racist institution) The fact is that POC are less likely to be in a position to consider law school due to more broad systemic issues at play which effect their academic/financial viability - 2 factors really important for law school. Pointing the finger at law school itself I think is a pretty tunnel visioned take. It's not just the legal profession that experiences this phenomena. By virtue of not having access to the same resources that others would, there are visible differences in the applicant pools. I think the tech field is a great exemplar of a field that has identified a pressing issue on why there may be not many women (stigma). There's now many initiatives that aim at developing that applicant pool via high school programs and so on. This creates a pipeline of more women applicants so that you can work towards a more even access to the job itself. Id be happy to hear back from anyone that disagrees/point out if I missed something.
  2. The thread just had to pop off before I get my friday weekly Panda Express. Sheesh I'm going to have to catch up on this, brb.
  3. Per last years trend i believe there was 2 waves in April, early and late.And then an early May one. I wouldn't be surprised for delays this cycle tho
  4. I think you're speaking past my argument. I wish you well and if you want to continue this, you can go ahead but I don't want to continue because it's a waste of time. Waste of time because you're not reading the arguments I'm putting forward and you're simply looking at tree's within the forest and then claiming I'm moving the goal post. I lay out my fundamental line of reasoning in my previous comment and you decide to ignore it. Here's an example with the most recent reply you had - Oh so radical portions of groups are off limits? I said, pretty clearly, that generalising a radical viewpoint held within a niche portion of a group, to the entire movement/group of a political party is stupid, uneducated, and naive. Yes, using a radical viewpoint and applying it to entire group is not reasonable. You are doing exactly what the person I initially replied to is doing. -
  5. There is a spectrum within a political affiliation. What is the road of bullshit exactly? My argument is simply this- using a viewpoint that a radical portion of a political group subscribes to, to bolster your argument and make a sweeping generalisation about a large group, is cringy, uneducated, and stupid. Take a look at my past comments and apply my arguments line of reasoning to them. Your hypothetical is actually ridiculous. You're not reading my comments clearly - I'm curious what do you think my argument is based on?
  6. @HammurabiTime you're focusing on trees within a forest. Refer to the comment I made to you previously please. "Lots of generalizations can and should be made to "an entire group"." - I hope you know how damaging this rhetoric can be lol..(trump is a great case) Do you think that the average conservative believes that a person is poor because they are lazy and and violent due to the colour of their skin? In this specific case, a radical view is taken to be applied to a group - how is this a rational/reasonable take - can you answer this? Ideology is a scary thing, I would encourage a bit more nuance.
  7. no...? If you want me to make it clear and simple for you @HammurabiTime, the person I replied to was drawing up an argument that shit human alt-righters subscribe to, which is that these negative characteristics xyz are drawn from a persons race. They were applying this extremist view to an entire group (conservatives), which is whats laughably stupid and uneducated. Does this clarify things?
  8. I was mainly referring to the race baiting comment, which you casually removed from your comment. Too often I see both the left and right make arguments using premises that involve extremes and it's just so cringe.
  9. Are you implying conservatives do not have the capacity to understand people and their behaviour, from a sociological perspective? Also your take on how a con would view why people is poor is laughably stupid and quite uneducated. A modern day con would typically make the argument that a person is poor because of their bad free will decisions whereas a lib would say that societal/external forces create the conditions that create these terrible outcomes. When I hear libs make that characterisation its almost as bad as when I hear cons yell communist at any hint of a social safety net program.
  10. Do people actually believe Dave Rubin is a liberal or centrist? 😅 Love watching political commentators from both sides and it is just so obvious he's a closet conservative. Kind of reminds me of Joe Rogan who claims to be a liberal/democrat but has really libertarian viewpoints lol.
  11. Posting your GPA and then an LSAT score that you are averaging, in a chances thread comes pretty close to throwing out a hypothetical score. Writing out the words hypothetical isn't the only way of throwing out a hypothetical score. The comment was also meant to poke fun at that previous long thread. Go take a read where a large portion of it talks about people posting hypothetical scores. That's what I was making fun of. It's one thing to PT, but another to actually score something on test day.
  12. @Diplock hypothetical LSAT score alert
  13. Please don't let this be another MegBean thread. I'm getting flashbacks. Let's go into 2021 in peace 😅
  14. I read the same thing from Queens site - and I hope this is true because like @culitigator , one of my b2 would drop slightly because the semester, despite it being considered full course load, had 1 or 2 less courses than my other best year - if calculated the way culigator described.
  15. Is there any schools that specifies this way of calculating l2/b2? All I see is specifications around full course loads, which I believe are outlined from OLSAS. But I don't see where it talks about comparing years on the basis of exact number of courses
  16. I don't see the loophole by ellen cassidy being mentioned much on these forums, quite a contrast from the lsat subreddit. Can't recommend that book enough. Iv used lsat trainer, 7sage, Princeton review and the loophole does a way better job of providing tangible strategies for approaching LR. I find a lot of the other resources give the same platitudes. For LG, 7sage I found to be the best probably because of how much explanations and resources there are. RC is a bit more iffy because you can't level up in the same way you can with LR/LG, there are however a few fundamentals that I think 7sage does a great job of explaining.
  17. Yup the August Flex was the last flex LSAT that did not count towards your limit. All LSATs going further will count towards the limit, unless LSAC throws in something to change that.
  18. I wouldn't write the LSAT again unless you're scoring at least 165 on PT's (this comes from the assumption that you may score lower on the actual LSAT so you would still be able to likely score a low 160) - because I believe you can only write 5 LSAT's within a 5 year period. After the 5th you're kinda screwed if you don't hit your best score on the 5th try.
  19. It probably differs amongst HR professionals, but from my perspective it would prob be best that you answer those questions in general terms as best you can. If further and further probed you can hit them with a polite NDA response. Remember that a recruiter is also looking for culture-add, and having someone who seems a bit stuck up will not serve you well, even if you have the correct intentions.
  20. I was referring to the fact/concept that you can technically submit your application partially complete by Nov 1st; ie not have an active LSAT score on record or uploaded transcripts. That being said, It would probably be smart to apply knowing that you have your transcript uploaded to OLSAS
  21. I called them last week and the lady told me that when you submit your application, they request your transcripts and as long as you submit your application before Nov 1st, you're fine. So you can submit it on Nov 1 and technically not have your transcripts uploaded to OLSAS and still be fine. Same concept applies to LSAT scores in the case where you do not have 1 before Nov 1st. This seems contrary to what @erinl2 stated above, so I guess it's better to be safer in this scenerio and just apply in advance
  22. I also struggle with RC, but largely due to missing key words within the answer choices that distinguish the right from wrong. I found skimming through the questions before reading the passage to be helpful in guiding me to read with a purpose.
  23. were you given scrap paper to diagram the logical games? or are you expected to do that on the tablet.
  24. Check out fox encyclopedia for LR. I'm surprised i don't see much mention of this resource on these forums, it's an absolute game changer. I'v read several LSAT prep books and this one does a great job of drilling into you the many logical inconsistencies that are written into the LR stimuli. - It's become second nature at this point for me to look at clues that reveal these logical fallacies, such as how samples of studies are decided, corrolation-causation mistakes, etc.
  • Create New...