URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

(BLS, URM status, non-traditional, GLBT)

What type of music do you listen to when you get into a school?

Hip Hop / Rap
35
52%
EDM
1
1%
Pop / Top 40
8
12%
R&B
1
1%
Reggaeton / Bachata / Latin Trap / Dance Hall / Soca
11
16%
Rock
3
4%
Something less lit than the options above
8
12%
 
Total votes: 67

User avatar
ljalba

New
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 4:04 pm

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby ljalba » Wed Dec 06, 2017 5:27 pm

BL2017 wrote:
mmart207 wrote:Super late, but that poster isn't wrong when they say that AAs get in with lower numbers than MAs and PRs do. Of course, that isn't the case for EVERYONE. But OVERALL, I see that it is true. Nonetheless, a separation of threads is ridiculous. Good luck to everyone this cycle! And if anyone took today's LSAT, what'd you think?


Just to piggyback off of this, maybe separate URM threads is undesirable for some but a separate "cycle results" thread makes all the sense in the world. As an MA URM, I had to go through several pages of past cycle results threads on TLS for only a couple of MA/PR stats. It would've been helpful and more efficient to have those results in one thread.

Similarly, when I check LSN I click on "exclude AA" to get an accurate picture of my numbers. I don't think that's divisive at all. That's just the reality of it as uncomfortable as it might be for some. The fact the MA/PRs get different bumps than other URMs isn't common wisdom yet for a lot of folks.

A lot of MA/PRs new to TLS make "what are my chances" threads with something like a 160/3.4 combo thinking they are gonna get into the T14 when that just isn't likely at all.

I get that we want to uplift and support each other and that's great. But TLS is also a place where we all come for objective information to help us with this process. More detailed information is always helpful.


I'm not sure if there is one for every year, but there has been a URM Cycle Results thread where a lot of URMs posted their info at the end of the cycle (http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 4&t=275052). I'm not sure what several pages you went through but in that thread, the first entry was an MA URM attending Stanford and just a few entries lower is a PR applicant, followed by another MA applicant right after that one. That felt very detailed as far and MA/PR stats go if you ask me—they're all in one thread. As an MA applicant, I found this thread both easy to navigate and not hidden. I agree more detailed information is always helpful, I'm just struggling to understand how the information isn't already clear. Do we need to sticky the end of cycle results thread?

I don't think information isn't efficiently displayed, I hypothesize that there are more active AA TLSers than MA/PR TLSers. Do I think our MA/PR TLS representation will increase if we make a separate "cycle results" thread? Nah, we should just sticky the URM Cycle Results thread. Again, on the first page of that thread, there are 3 MA/PR entries and 9 AA/Black entries. Are those 9 AA entries crowding the access to information for the 3 MA/PR entries? Do people really feel bogged down reading and scrolling through those 9 AA entries that they want to make a whole new results thread for us MA/PRs? I will continue saying that sounds silly. If it's about efficiency, let's make the URM Cycle Results thread a sticky.

ToddCraines

New
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:03 am

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby ToddCraines » Wed Dec 06, 2017 6:47 pm

Slowly made my way over here to check in. Long long long time lurker, finally making my debut.

AA Female, Applied to most schools late October/early November and have only heard back from Duke PT (placed on priority reserve), so to say I'm desperate to hear any news is an understatement! Starting to think something is horribly wrong with my App.

Any who, good luck to everyone this cycle!

BL2017

New
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2017 6:17 pm

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby BL2017 » Wed Dec 06, 2017 9:57 pm

ljalba wrote:
BL2017 wrote:
mmart207 wrote:Super late, but that poster isn't wrong when they say that AAs get in with lower numbers than MAs and PRs do. Of course, that isn't the case for EVERYONE. But OVERALL, I see that it is true. Nonetheless, a separation of threads is ridiculous. Good luck to everyone this cycle! And if anyone took today's LSAT, what'd you think?


Just to piggyback off of this, maybe separate URM threads is undesirable for some but a separate "cycle results" thread makes all the sense in the world. As an MA URM, I had to go through several pages of past cycle results threads on TLS for only a couple of MA/PR stats. It would've been helpful and more efficient to have those results in one thread.

Similarly, when I check LSN I click on "exclude AA" to get an accurate picture of my numbers. I don't think that's divisive at all. That's just the reality of it as uncomfortable as it might be for some. The fact the MA/PRs get different bumps than other URMs isn't common wisdom yet for a lot of folks.

A lot of MA/PRs new to TLS make "what are my chances" threads with something like a 160/3.4 combo thinking they are gonna get into the T14 when that just isn't likely at all.

I get that we want to uplift and support each other and that's great. But TLS is also a place where we all come for objective information to help us with this process. More detailed information is always helpful.


I'm not sure if there is one for every year, but there has been a URM Cycle Results thread where a lot of URMs posted their info at the end of the cycle (http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 4&t=275052). I'm not sure what several pages you went through but in that thread, the first entry was an MA URM attending Stanford and just a few entries lower is a PR applicant, followed by another MA applicant right after that one. That felt very detailed as far and MA/PR stats go if you ask me—they're all in one thread. As an MA applicant, I found this thread both easy to navigate and not hidden. I agree more detailed information is always helpful, I'm just struggling to understand how the information isn't already clear. Do we need to sticky the end of cycle results thread?

I don't think information isn't efficiently displayed, I hypothesize that there are more active AA TLSers than MA/PR TLSers. Do I think our MA/PR TLS representation will increase if we make a separate "cycle results" thread? Nah, we should just sticky the URM Cycle Results thread. Again, on the first page of that thread, there are 3 MA/PR entries and 9 AA/Black entries. Are those 9 AA entries crowding the access to information for the 3 MA/PR entries? Do people really feel bogged down reading and scrolling through those 9 AA entries that they want to make a whole new results thread for us MA/PRs? I will continue saying that sounds silly. If it's about efficiency, let's make the URM Cycle Results thread a sticky.


That's just one cycle though and you're just referencing the first page. Presumably, people check more than one cycle to get a sense of types of offers their numbers might garner.

Stickying the results threads would definitely help visibility. But as I mentioned in my previous post there is a reason LSN offers an "exclude AA" option. A 160/3.5 AA vs. 160/3.5 MA/PR will gain admission to vastly different schools. Having that information centralized will help current and future applicants. You may like reading through many posts to find one that is of interest to you but not everyone does.

Reading through this year's URM thread there at noticeably more MA/PRs than previous cycles so maybe this will all be moot come next spring.

User avatar
ljalba

New
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 4:04 pm

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby ljalba » Wed Dec 06, 2017 10:36 pm

Here we go again.

1. The OP in the URM Cycle Results thread explains they took the template from the year before (15-16), so it's safe to assume there are more than just last years. Additionally, I only referenced the first page to highlight how easily available MA/PR info is to find without their own MA/PR-only thread. There are multiple MA/PRs in the other pages as well. Now, if we stickied links to them all, we can see how many and how extensive they are. Would that be centralized enough for you and the TLSers who can't handle sharing this URM cycle space?

2. "You may like reading through many posts to find one that is of interest to you but not everyone does." This is the issue I see when it comes to this idea that separate "cycle results" threads "make all the sense in the world." You want a URM thread that allows you to "exclude AA" here on TLS. I think that's silly. As you explained, there is already a space for nothing but small data points to compare yourself too—LSN. If you want nothing but skewed, limited, data points, LSN is perfect to compare your arbitrary numbers with past applicants. However, this TLS URM space is not LSN and therefore, in my opinion, and we are free to disagree, this TLS URM space serves a different purpose than LSN. It's very convenient to click an "exclude AA" option and erase applicants if you just care about a limited pool of information and could care less about the people behind those numbers. As I wrote elsewhere, I am in support of this TLS URM space as far more than that—this is a place for support, coalition building, and not self-segregating. If you want a "centralized" space, one where consolidating past URM Cycle Results threads isn't enough, I'm guessing this isn't an issue of access to efficient information, rather, it seems you aren't content with the data on LSN and are hoping to find more data here.

But like I said before, maybe people aren't into coalition building and just care about the dumb, arbitrary, limited, data. And if you want to do that, and LSN doesn't make you content, maybe first take the time to parse out those URM Cycle Results threads instead of the easy alternative of splitting into a different thread.

Because I'm sure this thread is tired of this discussion, PM because I will not continue this conversation here in order to not bog down the thread.

BL2017

New
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2017 6:17 pm

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby BL2017 » Wed Dec 06, 2017 11:41 pm

ljalba wrote:Here we go again.

1. The OP in the URM Cycle Results thread explains they took the template from the year before (15-16), so it's safe to assume there are more than just last years. Additionally, I only referenced the first page to highlight how easily available MA/PR info is to find without their own MA/PR-only thread. There are multiple MA/PRs in the other pages as well. Now, if we stickied links to them all, we can see how many and how extensive they are. Would that be centralized enough for you and the TLSers who can't handle sharing this URM cycle space?

2. "You may like reading through many posts to find one that is of interest to you but not everyone does." This is the issue I see when it comes to this idea that separate "cycle results" threads "make all the sense in the world." You want a URM thread that allows you to "exclude AA" here on TLS. I think that's silly. As you explained, there is already a space for nothing but small data points to compare yourself too—LSN. If you want nothing but skewed, limited, data points, LSN is perfect to compare your arbitrary numbers with past applicants. However, this TLS URM space is not LSN and therefore, in my opinion, and we are free to disagree, this TLS URM space serves a different purpose than LSN. It's very convenient to click an "exclude AA" option and erase applicants if you just care about a limited pool of information and could care less about the people behind those numbers. As I wrote elsewhere, I am in support of this TLS URM space as far more than that—this is a place for support, coalition building, and not self-segregating. If you want a "centralized" space, one where consolidating past URM Cycle Results threads isn't enough, I'm guessing this isn't an issue of access to efficient information, rather, it seems you aren't content with the data on LSN and are hoping to find more data here.

But like I said before, maybe people aren't into coalition building and just care about the dumb, arbitrary, limited, data. And if you want to do that, and LSN doesn't make you content, maybe first take the time to parse out those URM Cycle Results threads instead of the easy alternative of splitting into a different thread.

Because I'm sure this thread is tired of this discussion, PM because I will not continue this conversation here in order to not bog down the thread.


Lol calm down man. People in this thread are too sensitive. That's cool if you guys want to "coalition build" with a group of people you may never even meet in person. Like I said in my response to Mmart, it makes sense to have separate "results" threads because of the difference in outcomes. That will help current and future applicants.

A unified URM thread makes sense because of the shared experience. That's it. I don't understand why you are so offended over a distinct "results" thread. You act like TLS is a place folks come to in order to assuage our fears. We are all here primarily for the data in comparison to other applicants as we go through our cycles. Calm down.

User avatar
ljalba

New
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 4:04 pm

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby ljalba » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:00 am

BL2017 wrote:
Lol calm down man. People in this thread are too sensitive. That's cool if you guys want to "coalition build" with a group of people you may never even meet in person. Like I said in my response to Mmart, it makes sense to have separate "results" threads because of the difference in outcomes. That will help current and future applicants.

A unified URM thread makes sense because of the shared experience. That's it. I don't understand why you are so offended over a distinct "results" thread. You act like TLS is a place folks come to in order to assuage our fears. We are all here primarily for the data in comparison to other applicants as we go through our cycles. Calm down.


I'm not offended by a distinct "results" thread. I think it's silly, pointless, lazy (considering the information is already present someone just doesn't like scrolling or doesn't know how to use the search bar), and unproductive in the grander project of coming together as a group. With that being said, I am offended that you feel the need to refer to me as "man" and to tell me to "calm down." Wait, are you not used to an assertive female standing by her opinion? You should learn how to do that sooner than later.

Finally, in my opinion, there is already a place for you to "exclude AA," it's called LSN. If everyone here is primarily on the TLS URM thread for data in comparison to other applicants—and nothing more—as you claim, then prove me wrong, create your silly thread, and let's see it thrive.

mmart207

Bronze
Posts: 220
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:40 pm

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby mmart207 » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:10 am

ljalba wrote:
BL2017 wrote:
Lol calm down man. People in this thread are too sensitive. That's cool if you guys want to "coalition build" with a group of people you may never even meet in person. Like I said in my response to Mmart, it makes sense to have separate "results" threads because of the difference in outcomes. That will help current and future applicants.

A unified URM thread makes sense because of the shared experience. That's it. I don't understand why you are so offended over a distinct "results" thread. You act like TLS is a place folks come to in order to assuage our fears. We are all here primarily for the data in comparison to other applicants as we go through our cycles. Calm down.


I'm not offended by a distinct "results" thread. I think it's silly, pointless, lazy (considering the information is already present someone just doesn't like scrolling or doesn't know how to use the search bar), and unproductive in the grander project of coming together as a group. With that being said, I am offended that you feel the need to refer to me as "man" and to tell me to "calm down." Wait, are you not used to an assertive female standing by her opinion? You should learn how to do that sooner than later.

Finally, in my opinion, there is already a place for you to "exclude AA," it's called LSN. If everyone here is primarily on the TLS URM thread for data in comparison to other applicants—and nothing more—as you claim, then prove me wrong, create your silly thread, and let's see it thrive.

Was he supposed to know that you're a female by your mushroom avatar? Or? I'm not sure how you even got to that assumption. Regardless, I agree that a separate results thread might be useful for those who are only looking for results of MA/PR applicants. Nonetheless, I don't mind just scrolling through the other URM threads that already exist.

BL2017

New
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2017 6:17 pm

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby BL2017 » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:19 am

ljalba wrote:
BL2017 wrote:
Lol calm down man. People in this thread are too sensitive. That's cool if you guys want to "coalition build" with a group of people you may never even meet in person. Like I said in my response to Mmart, it makes sense to have separate "results" threads because of the difference in outcomes. That will help current and future applicants.

A unified URM thread makes sense because of the shared experience. That's it. I don't understand why you are so offended over a distinct "results" thread. You act like TLS is a place folks come to in order to assuage our fears. We are all here primarily for the data in comparison to other applicants as we go through our cycles. Calm down.


I'm not offended by a distinct "results" thread. I think it's silly, pointless, lazy (considering the information is already present someone just doesn't like scrolling or doesn't know how to use the search bar), and unproductive in the grander project of coming together as a group. With that being said, I am offended that you feel the need to refer to me as "man" and to tell me to "calm down." Wait, are you not used to an assertive female standing by her opinion? You should learn how to do that sooner than later.

Finally, in my opinion, there is already a place for you to "exclude AA," it's called LSN. If everyone here is primarily on the TLS URM thread for data in comparison to other applicants—and nothing more—as you claim, then prove me wrong, create your silly thread, and let's see it thrive.


I had no idea whether you were a male or a female. I was merely responding to your posts. I said "man" colloquially and not in reference to your gender.

I never said everyone was here primarily for data, if you reference my previous posts. I said it would be helpful for current and future applicants!

And seriously, "lazy!?" Are you also going to call people who make a "Class of XYZ medians" spreadsheet lazy because they could get that info elsewhere? That's what makes TLS so great, all of us pooling our knowledge and data. I'm going to reiterate that you and others are too sensitive at the thought of different outcomes for different URMs. People are just quick to attack someone with a different perspective than them. So unnecessary.

BL2017

New
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2017 6:17 pm

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby BL2017 » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:20 am

mmart207 wrote:
ljalba wrote:
BL2017 wrote:
Lol calm down man. People in this thread are too sensitive. That's cool if you guys want to "coalition build" with a group of people you may never even meet in person. Like I said in my response to Mmart, it makes sense to have separate "results" threads because of the difference in outcomes. That will help current and future applicants.

A unified URM thread makes sense because of the shared experience. That's it. I don't understand why you are so offended over a distinct "results" thread. You act like TLS is a place folks come to in order to assuage our fears. We are all here primarily for the data in comparison to other applicants as we go through our cycles. Calm down.


I'm not offended by a distinct "results" thread. I think it's silly, pointless, lazy (considering the information is already present someone just doesn't like scrolling or doesn't know how to use the search bar), and unproductive in the grander project of coming together as a group. With that being said, I am offended that you feel the need to refer to me as "man" and to tell me to "calm down." Wait, are you not used to an assertive female standing by her opinion? You should learn how to do that sooner than later.

Finally, in my opinion, there is already a place for you to "exclude AA," it's called LSN. If everyone here is primarily on the TLS URM thread for data in comparison to other applicants—and nothing more—as you claim, then prove me wrong, create your silly thread, and let's see it thrive.

Was he supposed to know that you're a female by your mushroom avatar? Or? I'm not sure how you even got to that assumption. Regardless, I agree that a separate results thread might be useful for those who are only looking for results of MA/PR applicants. Nonetheless, I don't mind just scrolling through the other URM threads that already exist.


Seriously :roll:

User avatar
ljalba

New
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 4:04 pm

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby ljalba » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:32 am

Was he supposed to know? No.

Is it still disrespectful to default to male-centric nouns? In my opinion—it is. It won't hurt you to deconstruct the male-centered colloquialisms you use to refer to people.

I did reference your past post where you literally wrote, "We are all here primarily for the data in comparison to other applicants as we go through our cycles." You wrote that right before you told me to "Calm down."

I never called anyone outside of the TLS URM thread lazy. I wrote how I think it's lazy to make an MA/PR "results" thread when you can easily find that information in the multiple URM Cycle Results threads. I'm sorry you can't fathom reading the results of AA applicants.

Too sensitive? Just call me a snowflake already.

People? I'm the only one responding you.



P.S. My avatar is a Vileplume, the favorite Pokémon of my favorite gym leader, Erika.
Last edited by ljalba on Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:33 am, edited 1 time in total.

anacabana

New
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:41 am

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby anacabana » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:33 am

Lol guys could we maybe kill the debates now and get this thread back on topic? I miss seeing the positivity on here, it was very encouraging :(

User avatar
soca_dancer

Bronze
Posts: 178
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:13 am

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby soca_dancer » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:36 am

Getting this thread back on track...

I got into Berkeley and NYU over the past few days and I'm absolutely shocked and I still don't believe it. It feels amazing that the adcomms see and support the vision I outlined in my essays.

I know there has been a lot of other movement for many other URMs and I just wanted to congratulate each of you, y'all inspire me <3

BL2017

New
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2017 6:17 pm

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby BL2017 » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:40 am

ljalba wrote:Was he supposed to know? No.

Is it still disrespectful to default to male-centric nouns? In my opinion—it is. It won't hurt you to deconstruct the male-centered colloquialisms you use to refer to people.

I did reference your past post where you literally wrote, "We are all here primarily for the data in comparison to other applicants as we go through our cycles." You wrote that right before you told me to "Calm down."

I never called anyone outside of the TLS URM thread lazy. I wrote how I think it's lazy to make an MA/PR "results" thread when you can easily find that information in the multiple URM Cycle Results threads. I'm sorry you can't fathom reading the results of AA applicants.

Too sensitive? Just call me a snowflake already.

People? I'm the only one responding you.



P.S. My avatar is a Vileplume, the favorite Pokémon of my favorite gym leader, Erika.


If you came to TLS for "coalition building" then that's on you. People primarily come here for data and to understand how their cycle is going. Primarily is the key word. That doesn't exclude other activities. That is hardly ground breaking stuff.

Honestly, you're reaching. If you can call people lazy for asking for a MA/PR results thread, where else can you apply that logic? Using that logic this thread is inherently lazy since URM results are scattered amongst the other "cycle" threads. Just stop while you're ahead. You're white-knighting some unknown cause when all we said was it would be cool to have more centralized data.

BL2017

New
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2017 6:17 pm

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby BL2017 » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:42 am

anacabana wrote:Lol guys could we maybe kill the debates now and get this thread back on topic? I miss seeing the positivity on here, it was very encouraging :(


I mean that's cool but can we acknowledge that some of us have a valid point and not dismiss our thoughts cause we aren't being all "yay URMs?" I understand we present an unpopular opinion but that doesn't make it any less valid.

mmart207

Bronze
Posts: 220
Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:40 pm

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby mmart207 » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:44 am

soca_dancer wrote:Getting this thread back on track...

I got into Berkeley and NYU over the past few days and I'm absolutely shocked and I still don't believe it. It feels amazing that the adcomms see and support the vision I outlined in my essays.

I know there has been a lot of other movement for many other URMs and I just wanted to congratulate each of you, y'all inspire me <3

Congrats!

anacabana

New
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:41 am

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby anacabana » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:47 am

BL2017 wrote:
anacabana wrote:Lol guys could we maybe kill the debates now and get this thread back on topic? I miss seeing the positivity on here, it was very encouraging :(


I mean that's cool but can we acknowledge that some of us have a valid point and not dismiss our thoughts cause we aren't being all "yay URMs?" I understand we present an unpopular opinion but that doesn't make it any less valid.


Your point has been heard. Most people on here find having a unified thread to be useful. But if you want to make a separate thread, literally no one is stopping you from doing so, but this has been going on for two weeks now. That's all I have to say, and not about to go back and forth with you. :wink:

User avatar
ljalba

New
Posts: 34
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2016 4:04 pm

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby ljalba » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:48 am

anacabana wrote:Lol guys could we maybe kill the debates now and get this thread back on topic? I miss seeing the positivity on here, it was very encouraging :(


Sorry, I'll stop on my end. I will wait for the thread that solely focuses on the debating that matter and will stop derailing this one.

soca_dancer wrote:
Getting this thread back on track...

I got into Berkeley and NYU over the past few days and I'm absolutely shocked and I still don't believe it. It feels amazing that the adcomms see and support the vision I outlined in my essays.

I know there has been a lot of other movement for many other URMs and I just wanted to congratulate each of you, y'all inspire me <3



Don't forget you're inspiring others too.

anacabana

New
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2017 11:41 am

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby anacabana » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:48 am

soca_dancer wrote:Getting this thread back on track...

I got into Berkeley and NYU over the past few days and I'm absolutely shocked and I still don't believe it. It feels amazing that the adcomms see and support the vision I outlined in my essays.

I know there has been a lot of other movement for many other URMs and I just wanted to congratulate each of you, y'all inspire me <3


Congrats!!! And believe it, you've worked hard!

Also hoping to hear back before Christmas - fingers crossed -

User avatar
AlPastor

Bronze
Posts: 161
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 5:24 pm

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby AlPastor » Thu Dec 07, 2017 1:12 am

soca_dancer wrote:Getting this thread back on track...

I got into Berkeley and NYU over the past few days and I'm absolutely shocked and I still don't believe it. It feels amazing that the adcomms see and support the vision I outlined in my essays.

I know there has been a lot of other movement for many other URMs and I just wanted to congratulate each of you, y'all inspire me <3


Congrats! Hoping to hear back from Berk before Christmas...

BL2017

New
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2017 6:17 pm

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby BL2017 » Thu Dec 07, 2017 1:45 am

anacabana wrote:
BL2017 wrote:
anacabana wrote:Lol guys could we maybe kill the debates now and get this thread back on topic? I miss seeing the positivity on here, it was very encouraging :(


I mean that's cool but can we acknowledge that some of us have a valid point and not dismiss our thoughts cause we aren't being all "yay URMs?" I understand we present an unpopular opinion but that doesn't make it any less valid.


Your point has been heard. Most people on here find having a unified thread to be useful. But if you want to make a separate thread, literally no one is stopping you from doing so, but this has been going on for two weeks now. That's all I have to say, and not about to go back and forth with you. :wink:


Lmao if you read my reply to Mmart I said having a distinct "results" thread would be useful, NOT a separated URM cycle thread. But maybe you guys are too deep into your "positivity" and "coalition building" to acknowledge or read what we are actually proposing. 8)

User avatar
soca_dancer

Bronze
Posts: 178
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2017 7:13 am

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby soca_dancer » Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:59 am

Thank you all I appreciate the support!

AlPastor wrote:
Congrats! Hoping to hear back from Berk before Christmas...


I'm sure you will, and it will be great news for you :D

User avatar
Incrementalist

Bronze
Posts: 115
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2017 8:48 am

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby Incrementalist » Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:25 am

soca_dancer wrote:Getting this thread back on track...

I got into Berkeley and NYU over the past few days and I'm absolutely shocked and I still don't believe it. It feels amazing that the adcomms see and support the vision I outlined in my essays.

I know there has been a lot of other movement for many other URMs and I just wanted to congratulate each of you, y'all inspire me <3


Aye!!! Cue the twerk team!!! That's a big deal. Congratulations!!!
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
principalagent

Silver
Posts: 742
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2016 9:15 pm

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby principalagent » Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:39 am

Incrementalist wrote:
soca_dancer wrote:Getting this thread back on track...

I got into Berkeley and NYU over the past few days and I'm absolutely shocked and I still don't believe it. It feels amazing that the adcomms see and support the vision I outlined in my essays.

I know there has been a lot of other movement for many other URMs and I just wanted to congratulate each of you, y'all inspire me <3


Aye!!! Cue the twerk team!!! That's a big deal. Congratulations!!!
[+] Spoiler
Image
Image
Image


This is the type of content I created this thread for!!

hopefullya1L

New
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2017 12:50 pm

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby hopefullya1L » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:52 pm

jimmyplayer601 wrote:
anacabana wrote:For those of you applying to Harvard, do you think URM status will influence the timing of JS1s? For example, might the admissions committee send them out to URMs around the same time?



Someone told me that this is usually true and happens in Jan/Feb, not time to freak out yet


~ Prays this is true after consistently missing every JS1 wave ~

jimmyplayer601

Bronze
Posts: 107
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:19 am

Re: URM 2017-2018 Cycle Thread

Postby jimmyplayer601 » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:56 pm

hopefullya1L wrote:
jimmyplayer601 wrote:
anacabana wrote:For those of you applying to Harvard, do you think URM status will influence the timing of JS1s? For example, might the admissions committee send them out to URMs around the same time?



Someone told me that this is usually true and happens in Jan/Feb, not time to freak out yet


~ Prays this is true after consistently missing every JS1 wave ~



Hard af same here



Return to “Under Represented Law Student Forum?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests