tools

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2179452)

All year long he is watching over.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2179882)

http://ragebox.com/junkyard/lion.wmv

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2180029)

That's not a quote from me; but, I wouldn't strongly disagree. You brought a cadre of LSD douches here.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2185811)

That's funny, I always thought that posting things on an anonymous message board was the most cowardly activity around.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2180023)

It's completely anonymous, do you really think that all of the assholes on here are like this in real life? No chance in hell. Of course they'll tell you they are, lest their online ego be deflated.

You don't need to be brave to say things anonymously, including your lsat and gpa numbers.

What does it mean when you post lsat and gpa numbers anonymously? Why would that require "balls"? That just doesn't make any sense.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2180094)

And why would anyone with even one real life friend care if they were called "TTT" on an anonymous website?

Hey, I have a 2.8 and a 142! I'm going to cooley in august. Aren't I such a TTT loser?

Who cares?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2180155)

The cowardly thing is to never say anything at all, as then there is no chance you will be insulted, and no chance your arguments will be systematically ripped to shreds by someone who actually knows what he's (or she's) talking about.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2183076)

You are ASSUMING that people who don't post, fail to do so because of fear. That is stupid. You are assuming that these people are as much of a loser as you are, and that they would CARE if their pseudonym was "insulted" online.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2184743)

Re: Primer Methods (for prepping)

« Reply #27 on: Yesterday at 09:25:41 PM »

Quote from: happycat on Yesterday at 09:23:09 PM

How many hours per day over the next four or five months will you have to prep to get through BBL for all 1L courses? Just curious about how much time you feel will be enough/required to do a good job accomplishing your prepping goals?

I'm honestly not sure. I figure I will do al ittle here and there for now, until the whole admissions process is over."

Shouldn't this toolbox make sure he gets into law school first? Although I suppose reading the E&Es will help him get into Billybob's School for Paralegals if he gets rejected from every law school.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2179972)

What a fucking douche.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2180002)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2180123)

you all should really take it easy before you start law school. blindly outlining a course is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard of..."

The response:

"Yes, yes, yes. This is not the thread for the "let's smoke pot and take it easy" crowd. Please start your own thread. Also, no one here is suggesting "outlining a course" in the sense of outlining a class while reading cases, discussing in class, etc. If that's what you think, you really have no idea what we're talking about, which makes your own post quite ridiculous."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2183085)

Re: Primer Methods (for prepping)

« Reply #42 on: Today at 12:16:33 AM »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote from: boalt06 on Yesterday at 11:54:29 PM

My friend just sent me the link to this discussion for a good laugh. But than i realized this discussion is serious. you'll never learn the black letter law, not even in law school; and trying to remember it all is pointless, especially before you're even in school. don't waste your time buying the commercial outlines; enjoy your freedom now; you have three years of law school to become an annoying uptight overachiever that everyones hates (if thats what you want to do; and people WILL hate you). you all need to chill the #@!* out.

The same guy as in the quote above responds"

"As has been stated before, i believe there is a "just chill and smoke pot all summer, heck! - do it all 1L!" thread available somewhere for you to participate in.

And on a side note - all through my Comp Sci degree at UT i heard the continual chatter of the 'party crowd' who frowned upon those who worked their asses off, frowned upon those who raised their hand and asked questions in class, frowned upon those who did the extra assignments in order to learn more about the subject.

Now, we diligent students smile upon them as they answer phones in their McTech-Support jobs while the rest of us became software engineers. Every discipline has the same tired dynamic. The best solution is to let each crowd pursue its own interests as it sees fit.

You won't see me chiming in on the "lets' chill and smoke pot all summer" thread. If that's what they want to do, that's completely fine with me. Far be it for me to intrude and tell them they've got it all wrong.

We've made our decision. This thread is for refining our prep plans. Sincerely - good luck to you in your choice. "

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2183087)

lol

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2183113)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2183119)

Also, real computer science classes don't prepare you for developer jobs. They teach computer science -- the fundamentals and the underlying theories -- and don't really teach application.

I saw little correlation between grades and actual programming ability.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2183130)

Also Big Tex is quite a douche.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2183156)

i'd rather not know why he had to specify "at the mouth"

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2183741)

Re: Primer Methods (for prepping)

« Reply #58 on: Today at 01:26:11 AM »

Despite ilsox's request at the beginning, this thread has turned into a "prep v chill" debate. And there is a source of many of those who have turned it into one:

http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&mc=42&forum_id=2

Notice those who have the strongest words are also mostly new LSD members."

Oh oh. They don't like us anymore... ;)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2184000)

"Nice try though, that's the kind of deductive reasoning that separates a 157 from, say a 155."

http://www.lawschooldiscussion.org/prelaw/index.php/topic,25190.msg374518.html#msg374518

Bravo, Kilgore. 180.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2184100)

The comment above, "they won't even know what the prof will cover" is really retarded. I mean, it's torts for Christ's sake! The same shit is covered in every torts class in every law school across the country - intentional torts, negligence, and strict liability. Know that shit and you're golden. Torts is probably the most black-letter subject around.

Same thing with the other 1L classes. I mean, what do you cover in Civ Pro - personal/subject matter jurisdication, choice of law, complex litigation, etc. All that shit is in Glannon. Anything that the prof covers that isn't in Glannon can be learned throughout the semester, after one has already learned all the rest of the semester's material.

Furthermore, the E&E's are all about analysis. That's why they have the examples and the explanations, so the student can practice legal analysis. They are not merely outlines of the black-letter rules (and besides, anyone who says memorization of the black-letter is not crucial is a fucking moron. Try getting good grades writing strictly about policy).

By learning the BLL/legal analysis up front, the semester is just review and orientation. Instead of struggling the first few weeks, these people will be ahead of the game.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2184285)

See that? Right there? Not true.

"The E&E's, especially torts, are pretty fucking necessary for the 1L classes (except Property, that book blows)."

That one? Too? Also not true.

The rest of your points range from arguable to silly, but those two are just misstatements of fact. Not every torts class covers intentional torts, and if E&Es were "pretty fucking necessary" it would be unusual for people to get As without using them. In fact, many, many people get As without ever opening an E&E.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2184400)

Let's not get into a John Marshall discussion about the definition of the word necessary here. i am sure there are people who get A's w/out using Gilbert's either, but they are necessary as well.

Also, it doesn't matter that some profs. don't cover intentional torts, but I am sure the vast, vast majority of them do.

The fact still remains that torts is probably the most black-letter subject around, and even if intentional torts aren't covered (which I'd say is so unlikely that that it's almost moot), it can't hurt to know them...

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2184439)

Well, you're just speculating, and even if that were true, that means nothing. The sample size of 'good students' on this board is incredibly low when compare to the amount of top students at law schools across the country. I mean, let's be realistic - off the top of my head, I can only think of you and Sexpert as people on this board who are generally respected as being successful law students. To my knowledge, you are the only Federal clerk who posts (at least the only one who does so somewhat regularly).

"So by 'necessary' you mean 'possibly somewhat helpful for some people'?"

No, I mean that it is incredibly likely that these study aids would be helpful. Although *you* did well without them, does that mean that most other people will too? Certainly not. Furthermore, it doesn't even mean that you wouldn't have found them helpful, had you used them. There is a reason that the commercial study aid industry is huge, and it's not just because law students are suckers.

The basic point of the post is that there are certain topics that will be covered in the vast majority of 1st year classes at the vast majority of law schools across the country. Even if it is conceded that Int. torts might not be covered (which, again, I would say is highly unlikely), it is a given that negligence will be covered. Everyone will learn about prox. cause, the reasonable person, B<PL, etc. everyone reads Palsgraf and Carrol Towing, just as everyone reads carbolic Smoke Ball and the case of the two ships Peerless in K's. While there may be minor variations in the curriculum, the major topics are static. The variations can be learned during the semester.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2184562)

i think the vast majority of commercial study aids are objectively superflous at best, however, more likely even hurtful, because you don't concentrate on what the class and professor were all about. it is by far more important, imho, to pay attention in class and do the reading assignments with an alert brain, not for the sake of reading alone.

accordingly, i didn't use a single one and rank in the top 5% at CCN. (this is not for the sake of bragging, but because you claimed rk and sexpert were strange animals around here... moreover, i admit that this is only 1L grades, so this might change later).

that being said, there might be people who find them helpful, be it because of the actual content, be it because they get a (wrong?) sense of security out of the fact that they are doing something most people seem to do. if they like it like that, fine. is it objectively necessary or even good advice? no.

"There is a reason that the commercial study aid industry is huge, and it's not just because law students are suckers."

no, it's because many law students are afraid and psyching out as 0Ls already.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2184977)

That said, I started using supplements 2L and 3L year. They did not noticeably change how I prepared for exams, or my grades.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2184992)

OTOH, she does have mighty fine Titties!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=139564&forum_id=2#2188938)