Jump to content

ScipioAfricanus

Members
  • Content Count

    20
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

About ScipioAfricanus

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Once per day seems adopted by a lot of test takers. I'd say twice per day definitely is beyond the reach of the vast majority of test takers. I've only read ONE such person: at least he/she claimed he/she did twice per day. I only did twice a day a couple of days and definitely cannot keep doing twice a day. Regardless, once per day for two weeks before the test days seems to be widely used by a lot of test takers.
  2. I don't believe one's IQ or intelligence is dominant in such a standard test. I believe discipline is much more important if the test taker has a not-too-low intelligence. So to your objection, I would say, is it really intelligence, or is it they didn't work hard enough? Did they for instance: Finished every single one of PrepTests? retook everything again? Did they really 100% focus on LSAT and wasted no time on other things such as films, TV programs, dining out, travel trips? For instance, one could read books to improve RC. That is still preparing for LSAT but relaxing at the same time Do they know every logical games by heart? I could be wrong, of course. Or it could be I am too American and believe too much in self-determination and self-improvement. Forgive my accusations and impoliteness if you will.
  3. Skype, google voice, google Fi, in addition.
  4. For an averagely intelligent test taker, one likely needs at least 40 PrepTest to reach 170+/-5. If you do every section individually timed, and then get your scores for a PrepTest. Your score is inflated; minus the score by at least five for a honest reflection of your game day performance. An improvement of 20 points seems common for hard-working test takers. This means averagely speaking, before you hit 170, it is mostly a matter of workload for you. have faith and drill!
  5. Go with your heart and don't let the statistics deter you. The heart desires what the heart wishes to have. The only question for you is how strongly do you want it. I recently "ran" into This person. Read his multiple career change at https://kenliu.name/about/ Even if one is 30/40/50 years old, so what? Even if someone discriminate based on age, so what? Know what you desire and have faith in yourself. The uglier the obstacles are, the more glory to you.
  6. There is feature called ignore offered by this forum so that you can add members to the ignore list, FYI.
  7. Even more fun can be had when the undergraduate school is foreign. From the data I've seen, it seems if the field of institution honor on the transcript has some notes about honor, your degree probably will be listed as a honor degree. One case is one's transcript listed graduated with the highest honor, the degree was listed as a honor degree by OUAC. or Maybe it is just a 4 years vs 3 Years things. It is that simple
  8. Follow Deadpool's advice and seek information in TLS. U.S. is different from Canada in some subtle ways. For a lot of if not most canadians, sometimes the seemingly similarity would lead to disastrous consequences, due to wrong assumptions in decision-making process. Without going too much in details, I can list some common issues on the big picture: As a foreigner, you must comply with the requirement of the work permit, TN, OPT, or H1B. That means your freedom of action is much reduced. Shackles translate more pressure in your life. Can you handle it? Is it worth it? The south has what I call the spirit of the empire, which takes a terribly long time to explain in full details. Can you really handle the aggressiveness, the pressure and the stress? Burn-out lawyers from Canada in major cities such as NYC isn't uncommon. For instance, the south's attitude is you pay more if you want more. Although this sounds seemingly logical, the attitude often translates into exceedingly high pressure on individuals for expenses such as child rearing. I admit that all the above matter not if your heart desires it. Millions of Canadians immigrated to U.S.A. for all sorts of different reasons. I merely urge you to research intensively before commiting. Caveat emptor !
  9. Of course it would or did. I guess your real question is how do people balance against such overwhelming inconvenience if not burdens. For inconvenience such as dependents: Some have certain financial resources to fall back on due to various reasons such as savings, investment and inheritance. They can largely buy their way out: hiring nannies and etc. Some have very supportive, capable partners, who can either support financially, or take care of the domestic side of the family or a combination of the both, to a significant degree. Some have supportive, capable parents, bla bla bla. Some people just have one of the listed above. Some people have a combination of the above listed, to different degrees. for those people, the decision is not lightly taken but a bit more understandable or at least easier to make. For other people without significant support, I estimate they just take a leap a faith against overwhelming odds. age Lest it sound like I engage in age discrimination, let me tread carefully here. Most if not all people would squash their consideration to apply once they reach certain age for various reasons such as lack of energy, way too much family commitment and etc. I would say, averagely speaking 35-40 may be a cut-off region, however arbitrary it may be, in the minds of this kind of potential applicants. The older one is, the more uncomfortable for one to make such a commitment and/or drastic change averagely speaking. I would argue not matter the age and support, everyone is taking a leap of faith to some degree to apply for a law school. The decision of course is much harder to make when one is a bit older and has various unusual inconvenience in comparison to fresh college graduates. It is in the end an individualistic struggle, against God knows how many different combinations of pros and cons.
  10. This kind of inquiries is more frequent than the common perception. I can assert that we've been asked in high tech-industry by HR staff: What other companies you have been actively interviewing with? Why do you rejection us salary? Stock options? Benefits? something else? What company did you choose eventually? I hazard it could be just common curiosity. However, due to the frequency, I speculate the likely reason is only one word: competition. Companies may or may not care about you per se, but always want to know how to improve their profit margin. The extensions of this obsession are: They want to know who are the common competitors in the job market Even if they already know the picture, they want to know if there is some change or trend recently. This is in principle not very different from everyone watches Goldman sachs in financial market[I exaggerate for effects]. They want to know more information in order to set a salary to maximize the profit margin: not too high for obvious reason not too low, because they would get too many rejections or you would just jump ship after joining very soon. They want to know how they should balance between various components in the compensation package for the best "balance", accordingly to the current labor market. Maybe the vast majority of the new recruits care slightly more about XX. Maybe we should adjust accordingly in the compensation package. etc I don't see law firms any different from any other companies on the earth. They want to know things to maximize their profit. Or to use economics to illustrate: You are a labor in the huge labor market, ready to sell for a price. Due to certain transparency issue, both you and the buyers are gambling against each other. You want to sell as high as you could; the buyers wants to pay as little as they could. The buyer is trying his/her best to know more about you so they can get the best bang for the buck. If they know enough about you, they can engage in price discrimination. If they know perfectly about you, they can engage in first-degree price discrimination against you, for example. Worst case, they can do price discrimination to some degree to someone like you latter on on by their estimation. Don't take it personally. it is business.
  11. We had a long-distance relationship and end up with a great, happy marriage and one child [for now]. I would try to bring some balance in the discussion, if you could please bear my ramblings. It is almost always hard for outsiders to judge on behalf of you for your own situations for a lot of reasons: Maybe there is something you did not or could not tell us. Maybe it is too personal and private. Maybe you forgot something Maybe there is some subjective perceptions on your side. Humble beings like us are not all-knowing God and thus cannot possibly know the full truth. Maybe there is something special about your relationship that we cannot possibly understand without going through it ourselves. Ergo, the expression "you just don't get it" by some movie stars after a lot of explanations and arguing in movie scenes. It all comes down to various worldings of the same old issue that human beings cannot possibly know the full truth, including the future, the past and arguably the present. With such limitation, humans always have to face so many ifs and what ifs. Yes, he did not move for you. But maybe he did something for you in the past to balance it out. Yes, you could achieve local optimal by planning the future regardless of him. But what if I express my opposition that the idea of marriage or a union of some kinds at least partially if not wholly rest upon aiming for the collective if not global optimal, instead of the local optimal? etc As you can tell, the list can go on and on. With every proposition, there is always some what-ifs to counter against it. Hence I would suggest you to ignore the mess of ifs and what-ifs but focus on principles: Overall, does he treat you unfairly or fairly? Alternative giving and taking are fine. But overall, if he takes too much but gives you too little, it is hard to see your relationship is worth keeping. For instance, if he did a lot for you in the past, I would say it is totally okay for him not to sacrifice this time for you. Maybe it should be your turn to do something for him this turn. But if he always ask you to sacrifice for him, it is extremely hard to say your relationship with him is worth keeping. You have to figure out the definition of too much and too much yourself. I am afraid no one can help you on this. Overall, is he a good mate or at least has the potential to be a good mate for your life? It can be complex: some people break it down to different categories like finance, intelligence, industriousness, and morality. It can be simple: do you think he is a keeper? For obvious reasons, if you are planning for a long term one such as marriage, the the threshold for sacrifice would be much higher than the one for a one-night stand. Mated souls are supposed to go through hell and move mountains and seas for some mutually agreed goals such as the good of the family. I can certainly tell you, you likely would have a lot of difficulties if not sufferings that dwarf the difficulties of a long-distance relationship. For instance, bringing up multiple children properly, taking good care of the old parents and in-laws, old age issues such as Parkinson's disease, etc. Ask yourself if he is the one or at least has a good potential to be the one. If he is, don't be afraid of the difficulties. Go through hell with him; it will only make the union stronger for the tsunamis down the timeline. There is no warmer feeling to have a true mate that you know would always have your best interests in the heart, against the cruel world. Some critics laugh at the idea of union by pointing out it is in some way just an alternating arrangement: one sacrifices this time, the other does next time. Everyone "chooses" to believe the other one does more for her or him, although the contribution is fairly equal. Even so, I wish the game never stops as it is so warm and beautiful. I would reply to the critics: be my guest and be the lone wolf, the smartest guy alone in your own room. If not, move on and look for the one, because why the hell won't you? I quote Dante, hoping to bring you more courage: "When I had journeyed half of our life’s way, I found myself within a shadowed forest, for I had lost the path that does not stray. Ah, it is hard to speak of what it was, that savage forest, dense and difficult, which even in recall renews my fear: so bitter—death is hardly more severe! But to retell the good discovered there, I’ll also tell the other things I saw. I cannot clearly say how I had entered the wood; I was so full of sleep just at the point where I abandoned the true path. But when I’d reached the bottom of a hill— it rose along the boundary of the valley that had harassed my heart with so much fear— I looked on high and saw its shoulders clothed already by the rays of that same planet which serves to lead men straight along all roads."
  12. You sound very similar to to us, who are very anxious. We went to see an psychologist for anxiety issues. Here is something you may find useful, in terms of understanding yourself in case you happen not to know. Being anxious is a trait of personality and is at least partially linked with your genetic inheritance. If you can recall a close relative who is very anxious, then likely you got the genes that make you very prone to be anxious. Anxiety is mostly linked with low tolerance of uncertainty in some way. Being anxious and conscientiousness at the same time is even worse. You work all the time due to anxiety but often find it to be counterproductive. For instance, a person may come up with an extremely detailed life plan if not road map for every single seniceros even for the long term. In a different world, you are not very different from a crazy perfectionist in other people's eyes.[ no offense intended.] The trouble however is how to deal with the anxiety. This is easier said than done. Often, anxiety have origins in real, solid difficulties in life: Anxiety is a magnifier, rather than an originator. This is where I emphasize one piece of advice of @Malicious Prosecutor: you really should see a psychologist for anxiety issues if you have serious anxiety issues. You could achieve a deep-level of understanding upon your anxiety issue. but I fear you do not have so much time for self-learning. An expert could save you a lot of time. You are right: In the worst case, it could mean you should change your position. But often, the issue is not so serious and just need some tactics and management.
  13. Thank you for your story. An interesting read. I doubt there is a causal relationship between your quick adaptability and the time you spent learning to write. Some people become rigid because they spent so much time. Nonetheless I cannot ascertain the exact reason for your adaptability, could be your IQ, could be your personality(high openness, industrious, etc). God knows.
  14. Thank you two. 😀 @Ryn @ZineZ I will adjust my understanding accordingly. @Ladybug8712 My understanding about auto rejection is wrong, please see the discussion among Ryn, Zinez and me.
  15. @ZineZ My perception of auto-rejection is based on Ray's worlds above. It could be Ryn is wrong or my understanding is off trail. However, I speculate the more likely case is the auto-rejection threshold based on cGPA is too low to matter for most candidates. [not for all candidates, as there are people I know who graduated with 2.X cGPA on a math/physics major from a top university in U.S.A., such as Caltech. I would by no means say they have lower IQ than I do. ] Even with holistic approach, it seems admission committees must reply on expedience due to the sheer volume of applications. Forgive me in trying to define the cGPA ranges, it is partially due to my training of Engineering and mechanical thinking. But I do understand in matters like this, all so-called defined ranges have fuzzy edges. Thus it is extremely hard to provide a number for the lower threshold of high GPA. This probably is one reason among many why people are frustrated to answer chance questions: Is 3.6 high ? extremely hard to say as it is on the edge. Is LSAT 160 high or low? Extremely hard to say as it is on the edge, not to mention the difference across schools.
×
×
  • Create New...