• Hey Guest, Have an interview coming up? We’ve opened new mock interview slots this week. Book here
  • TCLA Premium: Now half price (£30/month). Applications, interviews, commercial awareness + 700+ examples.
    Join →

2020-21 Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
To be explicitly clear, they used the term "shut me down", I used it back in response. I did not initiate the use of that phraseology. And you've conveniently cut the full phrase to a point where it looks substantially ruder than it was. Whisperingrock was complaining that their comment had been shut down (their wording) without due consideration or a valid counter argument. I responded that I'd shut down their comment with substantial consideration and multiple counter arguments.
Secondly, their knowledge is limited and biased. That's an objective fact. I stated in my response that my own experience is also limited and biased, the difference between us is that I'm not projecting my limited and biased opinion as a universal truth.
And it is a clear, legitimate possibility that they aren't good as assessing the quality of other people's essays. Why is it somehow rude or insulting to question whether it's possible that they're fallible in some way?

I'm sorry if I offended you in any way - it was not my intention. However, the ability to determine objective fact from opinion based upon limited data is a basic skill required by lawyers. As is the ability to consider our own flaws and the implications of that.
You seem to have conveniently ignored my comment where I said my opinion wasn't a universal truth and I wasn't projecting it as such. You seem to all be reading an awful lot into what I'm saying. All I expected is that Jessica actually respond to what I said instead of saying something that had literally nothing to do with it as a "gotcha" comment.
 
To be explicitly clear, they used the term "shut me down", I used it back in response. I did not initiate the use of that phraseology. And you've conveniently cut the full phrase to a point where it looks substantially ruder than it was. Whisperingrock was complaining that their comment had been shut down (their wording) without due consideration or a valid counter argument. I responded that I'd shut down their comment with substantial consideration and multiple counter arguments.
Secondly, their knowledge is limited and biased. That's an objective fact. I stated in my response that my own experience is also limited and biased, the difference between us is that I'm not projecting my limited and biased opinion as a universal truth.
And it is a clear, legitimate possibility that they aren't good as assessing the quality of other people's essays. Why is it somehow rude or insulting to question whether it's possible that they're fallible in some way?

I'm sorry if I offended you in any way - it was not my intention. However, the ability to determine objective fact from opinion based upon limited data is a basic skill required by lawyers. As is the ability to consider our own flaws and the implications of that.

You seem to have conveniently ignored my comment where I said my opinion wasn't a universal truth and I wasn't projecting it as such. You seem to all be reading an awful lot into what I'm saying. All I expected is that Jessica actually respond to what I said instead of saying something that had literally nothing to do with it as a "gotcha" comment.

Can we just put this to bed now please? This forum really isn't the place for squabbling.
 
You seem to have conveniently ignored my comment where I said my opinion wasn't a universal truth and I wasn't projecting it as such. You seem to all be reading an awful lot into what I'm saying. All I expected is that Jessica actually respond to what I said instead of saying something that had literally nothing to do with it as a "gotcha" comment.
Often your tone is set in a way I don’t want to get into a discussion with you any further. It often isn’t a pleasant experience for me.
 
Just got an email from Linklaters with the subject line 'time is running out...'

Yes, before my patience completely evaporates.

Tik Tok Time GIF by Bear Hands
 
At the risk of sounding like a broken record - is anyone else still waiting on DLA?

Heard zilch since submitting the tests on 13 November. I'm not pulling petals from flowers so we move on

I emailed them the other day for an update. Apparently they rejected me months ago but they had a problem in December where they couldn't send emails to anyone with gmail so
 
  • Like
Reactions: FM302989
I emailed them the other day for an update. Apparently they rejected me months ago but they had a problem in December where they couldn't send emails to anyone with gmail so
That's such a naff response DLmAo.

Yeah like I said, I moved on when I didn't hear back and put my work into more and better applications

Never put all your eggs in one basket folks, cos that basket may have faulty software
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

About Us

The Corporate Law Academy (TCLA) was founded in 2018 because we wanted to improve the legal journey. We wanted more transparency and better training. We wanted to form a community of aspiring lawyers who care about becoming the best version of themselves.

Get Our 2026 Vacation Scheme Guide

Nail your vacation scheme applications this year with our latest guide, with sample answers to law firm questions.