Date: November 4th, 2005 4:47 PM Author: Curious gaping hall
Calling is the only way to get a candid response. Any reply by e-mail would be disingenuous and therefore useless in determining why Fish was rejected.
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:45 PM Author: lascivious pungent windowlicker
I was also turned down by my home state firms after callback. However I have offers from other places.
My advice is, dont worry about the associates. just chat with them and ask them whatever questions you like. you can even ask them something funny about the partners you're going to interview with. lunch doesn't really matter either. just follow their lead.
But make sure to be on guard with the partners. especially the one on the hiring committee.
Date: November 4th, 2005 5:07 PM Author: stimulating shivering house nibblets Subject: I wouldn't
Because law firms look at you as a source of billable hours, I've been told not to mention pro bono, since it means hours you won't be billing. Extremely strong candidates can ask about pro bono, bc law firms realize other firms want to hire them, too. But the average Joe has no such leverage.
Date: November 4th, 2005 5:10 PM Author: Bat Shit Crazy Mint Station Puppy
Law firms brag about their excellent pro bono work all the time. It's supposed to be a source of pride. Pro bono is also an important way to let young associates get real, substantive experience/training w/out the risk of fucking up for a paying client.
Date: November 4th, 2005 5:12 PM Author: red potus laser beams
some firms are all about it, but i had a guy from one firm tell me he doesn't believe in pro bono because it's "unfair." i don't think it's across the board a good idea to ask about it, so i would avoid it, personally.
Date: November 4th, 2005 5:14 PM Author: Hilarious macaca
Okay, cool. That's what I've been doing so far. I have enough non-profit and other stuff on my resume that its clear that I'll participate if they take that seriously.
Date: November 4th, 2005 5:21 PM Author: red potus laser beams
yes, that is an extreme example, but i'm telling you, i had a list of firms I did OCI with by order of date, and my yeild percentage was MUCH higher after I stopped asking about pro bono. i just don't think fish should take any risks when there is other stuff to ask about like training, kinds of work people do, etc.
Date: November 4th, 2005 5:16 PM Author: Bat Shit Crazy Mint Station Puppy
Pro bono serves a useful function, unlike diversity (i.e., associate training). If diversity were useful in a non-charitable/good-feelings way, firms would care more about it. And some firms do care about it...mine seems to, anyway.
Let's not be crazy...of course no law firm is going to let associates bill 500 hours of pro bono. But I'm sure they probably want you to do some...or at the very least they don't mind.
Date: November 4th, 2005 5:18 PM Author: Hilarious macaca
I can see how it would be risky though. I think its better left unsaid, especially since I have stuff on my resume that indicates that I'd be interested in it.
Date: November 4th, 2005 5:23 PM Author: Bat Shit Crazy Mint Station Puppy
And I'm saying it's not a risk...it looks good that you think about the training ops that pro bono provides. I mean, why ask about formal training at all, then? Every hour you spend getting CLE credit is an hour you can't bill, right?
Date: November 4th, 2005 5:24 PM Author: Hilarious macaca
But training indicates you want to become a good attorney. Pro bono might just indicate that you really want to do non-profit but just need the money, so you'll leave in 2 years once your loans are paid off.
Date: November 4th, 2005 5:28 PM Author: Bat Shit Crazy Mint Station Puppy
No dude...pro bono shows that you want to be a good attorney too, in both senses of the word. I think it's viewed as an insightful and mature question. Again, especially if you're interested in litigation. The best way to learn is by doing, and firms know this. Firms will most likely be able to tell if you're a public interest person or not. I mean, present the question as though it's about the training/substantive work aspect of pro bono, not merely the goody-goody aspect.
Date: November 5th, 2005 6:58 PM Author: know-it-all foreskin
Pro bono is good to talk about. Not because you want to do something bleeding-hearty, but because it'll give you more experience with trials etc. then you'd get as part of a huge litigation team.
A good question to ask if the interviewer brings up pro bono is whether the interviewer has done any pro bono cases themselves. They are happy to talk about themselves. Even if they don't talk about themselves, they probably know of some pro bono case the firm did that they're proud of becasue it makes them look less evil.
Date: November 4th, 2005 5:19 PM Author: stimulating shivering house nibblets
I'm guessing you're not their first choice, so you'll have to charm the pants off them. (Interpersonal skills can make up for not being a top student.) What worked best for me was researching the interviewers' recent triumphs, and just asking them about them. The more they talk, the better they liked me.
One question I got: tell me something about yourself that's not on the resume. Turned out this guy wanted to know what my core values were.
Date: November 4th, 2005 5:21 PM Author: Titillating voyeur university
Hmm. Yeah, if they still have slots at this point (yale's flyback week was a week ago) they must have had low yield, so the timing is probably favorable.
Date: November 5th, 2005 10:01 AM Author: aromatic sickened national security agency library
hey, FYI if you bowl a perfect game in Strooooooock bowl, they send you a bunch of shit including a letter that basically amounts to a job offer. I am DEAD serious.
Date: November 4th, 2005 5:35 PM Author: dashing learning disabled idea he suggested
Being without a job seems daunting, but the truth is, just by having gone to college and then two years of law school, you have a marketable set of skills that extends far beyond the narrow subset of jobs affiliated with private stateside law firms.
Buck up. It'll get better. You may need to look around rather than directly forward, but you've got some good stuff going for you.
Date: November 4th, 2005 5:50 PM Author: dashing learning disabled idea he suggested
They didn't really play into the job I eventually got.
Thing is, most of the lucrative work in this country and others is outside of the practice of law. There are a lot of different agencies and organizations out there that may not initially be lucrative, but can get you new contacts, and new opportunities for other jobs you may not have considered.
Some of my friends in law school who went the firm route, and are now associates at large firms, seem to regret it. Some of them feel that by going straight up that well-trod path, they amputated their opportunities outside of firm-law at the knees.
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:31 AM Author: Hilarious macaca
Update: Hiring partner actually emails back and writes out a long email detailing where I went wrong. Conclusion: those of you who said it was all personality were correct. That is all.
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:37 AM Author: aggressive big-titted garrison
Self-absorbed as in self-impressed? Self-absorbed as in only talks about yourself and doesnt seem to have questions about the firm? I mean, its an interview. Its about you.
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:38 AM Author: Hilarious macaca
I think as in "you're an asshole, dude." In another place one guy stated that I build relationships for strategic purposes only. Bad news, bad news. But at least I have a clue on what's killing me.
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:45 AM Author: Hilarious macaca
Well... My first interview went badly. The dude didn't seem to want to talk to me (maybe like he was in a hurry). 30 minute interview, he gets done asking me questions (which consisted of "do I really wanted to be in location X, no really, because that's really the question...") in 5 minutes. I ask questions for 15-20 minutes - he gives quick answers. I ask if he has more Qs for me and he says "no" and takes me to my next interview. Interview ends 5 minutes early. Apparently, he thought I had no interest in talking to him (because he was an associate and not a partner?) which led to this issue. Totally incorrect. Then I guess my answers were also too short and too the point, which didn't lead to trust.
On the bright side, the email specifically stated that my grades, school, and talent were excellent. Its just me that sucks.
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:50 AM Author: Hilarious macaca
That's what I'm hoping for. This also makes me wonder the extent to which I should change. I have some clear pointers ("don't let the interview end early, ever!"), but otherwise, I don't want to overcompensate when going to an intense market.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:05 AM Author: cyan ladyboy wagecucks
I used a combination of self-deprecating/arrogance that played very well. I would confidently say what I wanted to do then add the caveat "but hey, I've only been in law school for a year so I'll be honest when I say I don't know a whole lot, which is why I want to be with you guys because you have (x)". Answers like these made me come off as a person who knew what he wanted but didn't feel like he had all the answers.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:16 AM Author: Hilarious macaca
My next firm is a reach. I'm not sure that's a good idea since they'll already be wondering about my grades. Aside from which, I have a lot of extras that make me a pretty qualified candidate.
Honestly, I just need to make more smalltalk and focus less on selling myself.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:26 AM Author: cyan ladyboy wagecucks
I also spent the first minute or two before the talking began collecting information about the person based off of what I could see. I then tailored my personality to match. I had something like a 95% success rate at finding a topic the person was genuinely interested in and once I found that I just sat there and relaxed while the conversation flowed naturally.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:28 AM Author: cyan ladyboy wagecucks
Well, normally they stand up for the handshake. By the time they sit down and arrange my papers so they know who the hell they're dealing with I normally have a pretty grasp of who the hell I'm dealing with.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:33 AM Author: Hilarious macaca
How? I mean, what can you tell in those few seconds? I guess you can look around the office. Maybe I'm failing to read something I should be reading in those few critical moments.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:41 AM Author: Hilarious macaca
That's what's odd to me. I didn't think I remotely came off that way. But I guess I had a very "here's what I can do for the firm, here's what experience I have..." I mean, I always figure that you sell yourself at interviews. I never do crap like say "well, I go to NU and I rock, so you should be happy to have me..."
Also, I've been worrying about seeming desperate and insecure, so I guess I haven't been watching as much for this.
Date: November 5th, 2005 10:07 AM Author: aromatic sickened national security agency library
Question: are you saying stuff like when they talk about client relationships you say "yeah that's like when i was working at XXX and my clients would do blah blah blah" or are you just randomly throwing in "Well my bosses all loved me and thought i was supersweet."
Date: November 5th, 2005 10:37 AM Author: sienna black woman
this is VERY good information. something you can definitely fix. just act less self absorbed. ask mandy if she knows what they are talking about. she probably does and can help.
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:35 AM Author: Magenta Bbw Quadroon
(Before I post, I want to apologize for starting that thread the other day about Ruskie having 4 offers - it was pretty fucking mean)
OK, you have 3 more callbacks. You have to figure out where you're going wrong. You need to be enthusiastic without being cheesy, confident without being arrogant. And you have to express a genuine interest in being at these firms in NY next week. You don't need to sell yourself on why you want to be in NY - they will assume you do. But if they ask the question, just say that "its the top legal market and I want to have a career here."
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:14 AM Author: Histrionic forum
The most important factor in whether most people will give you a good review or not is whether you are someone that they would want to work with. You need to make yourself likeable.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:25 AM Author: Histrionic forum
If you are not someone that they would want to spend time working with, be stuck at the office with at 2 in the morning, etc, then you probably are in trouble. There are enough people out there that there is no reason to hire someone that people don't like. At a lot of firms, I think even a top student at a top school could be in trouble if people generally don't like them.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:13 AM Author: Turquoise trailer park
I would disagree. When his parents cut him off financially and mandy cheats on him, then perhaps I'll...actually, I'll still probably laugh and ask for more shit to be piled on. It's a shame his parents aren't dead so I can't post their obituaries.
What can I say? I think he's a rotten person, and it's nice to see that every law firm in the country agrees with me.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:17 AM Author: cyan ladyboy wagecucks
Bleh, I'll just write this off as a pissy day for you. I realize you've got some serious bitterness toward this guy, but your messing with the way I picture you--please stop. I like the idea of you beading happily, mean J messes with my fragile reality.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:27 AM Author: Turquoise trailer park
I'm not bitter.
Fish is just an unlikeable fuck, and apparently a million out of a million lawyers agree. He has no problems piling it on me, and thus I have no problems piling it on him.
He is an asshole through and through. But please, guys, keep building up his confidence and telling him how great he seems like on the board. It will make his rejections from New York all that more enjoyable.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:34 AM Author: cyan ladyboy wagecucks
For some reason I just don't see why it matters enough to you to spend the time decrying him here. It's apparent he's getting pwn3d, and I figure that's enough without the added salt on the wounds. Yea, you take a lot of shit here, but it always seemed to me that it wasn't a big deal to you. It just strikes me as odd that you've begun such a violent lash-out against some of the people on the board.
It's entirely your perogative, but I liked you a lot better when you beaded and gave excellent analysis on various musicians.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:38 AM Author: Turquoise trailer park
Begun?
What the fuck? Where have you been?
I was actually sympathetic to Fish at the beginning as I was having trouble finding a job as well. But he showed himself to be an asshole and I have treated him as such ever since.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:46 AM Author: Turquoise trailer park
See, now you're back to being funny and amusing. Good on you. It would have been much funnier had you bawled, but I'll take what I can get.
What was the name of the thread where you were bragging about how well you did in this interview and how you were going to get the job? I'd like to bump it now.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:58 AM Author: cyan ladyboy wagecucks
If I was around was the operative phrase there. I haven't seen him do it to you elsewhere, but I don't dispute that he has done so. Normally the threads of yours that I click on don't have him on there. Either way, let me re-iterate that I am not attacking you. Not everyone on this board thinks of you poorly.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:07 AM Author: Passionate alcoholic pervert den
Your willingness to help out people on fire by spraying them with gasoline is refreshingly honest. If I made a list of posters who suck, you wouldn't be on it.
Date: November 5th, 2005 6:29 AM Author: coral thirsty stage
it's difficult to be sure exactly what's going on. obviously something is going wrong at the interview. i haven't done interviews for a while, but thinking back, in all honesty, if someone like a middle-of-the-class person from northwestern came in, they would tend not to look as good as the great majority of people who came from harvard, yale and stanford. most generally, those who have, or are likely to have, numerous offers tend to ask real questions.
by contrast, consider how plainly disingenuous a question that purports to yearn for "early responsibility" is. you are effectively saying: i want to work more (even though the prospect of 2100 minimum billables is my primary source of a bleak outlook on life), and i want lots of "responsibility" in a job i know nothing of. better interviews basically take up the same sorts of questions people ask here: does working in a firm blow, how much do you actually have to work, what happens to people who don't make partner, etc.
there have to be places where your credentials are distinguished, rather than ordinary, or worse. just as everyone wants a girlfriend a little better looking than themselves, there's a tendency to seek out a job that represents some defiance of the odds. sooner or later, everyone is well served by coming to an accommodation with the fact that you're not always going to end up somewhere that makes your prestige trajectory an increasing function.
and for what it's worth, while "fish" seems like a decent guy, he exudes nothing like the qualities of someone who would seem to have long-term value to a law firm. i imagine him being well-intentioned, but having not much of an eye for detail, and not a great capacity for complex analysis.
Date: November 5th, 2005 6:42 AM Author: garnet temple karate
You: consider how plainly disingenuous a question that purports to yearn for "early responsibility" is. you are effectively saying: i want to work more (even though the prospect of 2100 minimum billables is my primary source of a bleak outlook on life), and i want lots of "responsibility" in a job i know nothing of.
For the sake of discussion, can't the question fairly be interpreted to be an inquiry about the quality of the work, not its quantity, which, as you rightly said, is fairly settled? Maybe he sincerely wanted to know how much document review lies ahead. (At this point, it probably doesn't matter so he can scratch the question on the grounds that it's moot but not because it's disingenuous.)
Date: November 5th, 2005 6:54 AM Author: coral thirsty stage
that's a reasonable point. but embedded in it is a caricature of what "document review" is. i waited all day today for some discovery responses to arrive today -- documents -- because they might answer questions i have had about a case for several months. to find out, i'll have to "review" them. a failure to understand what document review usually is if you're doing meaningful work utterly undermines any pretense to "early responsibility." by contrast, if there's even the slightest danger of being sequestered in the clasically monotonous document review, which really is a numbingly dull administrative and organizational task, then you're probably talking to the wrong firm -- wrong, that is, unless you are willing to trade doing heinous work for whatever the thrill is in telling people you work at a somewhat more prominent firm.
"early responsibility" is an empty phrase that law firms invented as a marketing device. while they might find some satisfaction in their slogan having attached to the minds of law students, they don't really want to hire people who seem to adopt it uncritically. the fact is, they are looking for people who can find an accommodation with the jadedness that's pervasive among those who work in firms, not do a second-rate job of pretending not to share the skepticism common to all but some of the very best students, who set an almost impossible interviewing standard for those who are conspicuously groveling to work in "biglaw," anywhere that will take them.
again, if you really want to play in the majors, but have only triple-A skills, even if you happen to find your way onto the big team, there will be a lot of time sitting on the bench. it's an "exit strategy," just not a very good one.
a really important qualification to this is that the only reason i might have anything at all useful to say is that i am describing my own misconceptions and fears around the time of interviewing for jobs, not suggesting that i was free of all the common delusions. now, sitting on the other side of it and with the advantage of time having passed, something very close to definite answers tends to come easily and obviously. bit it's impossible to convey in a believable way the key point to all of this, which is: it is an unusually complex job, in that ther eis a great deal to learn. there's a reason not even the greatest student in the history of harvard is not, and never will be, made a partner immediately upon graduating. there's at least two solid years' worth of learning just the fundamentals of the job, and at least another few years to grasp the nuances and come to the point of being genuinely and independently useful. it is within that passage that you either quit in despair, find a way to survive in mediocrity, or become truly good at it. and only the last of these possibilities holds the prospect of actually liking it.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:28 AM Author: garnet temple karate
Where is your office of career services in all this? Can't they intervene for you like in a way that a guidance counselor might help out a student who can't close the dea?
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:40 AM Author: garnet temple karate
They must have developed relationships with some firms over the years - they can go to bat for you, assure them of your solid qualifications. It's hard to believe that every firm demands a sparkling personality as a prerequisite for a job. Career services may have "ins" at smaller firms or firms operating below radar. Somebody out there wants someone who's simply a worker and not a dinner party partner. You're paying a lot of money for the school's resources, you might as well exploit them to the fullest.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:52 AM Author: garnet temple karate
Good luck. The idea is not for you to go crawling but to get someone from your school to intervene.
I don't mean to be facetious when I say that your personality might be more well-suited to the NYC market. (not from what you post here but from your description of what's going on) Also, if worse comes to worse, NYlawyer.com has a fairly large, active online classified ad section.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:37 AM Author: Hilarious macaca
Yeah, but its half time and my best (by far) opportunities are still ahead of me. I know what I'm doing wrong, and I think that combined with a market that suits my personality more I can pull through. At least they didn't say "damn, your resume just sucked and no one will hire you, loser..." Because I can't change that. I think I made a few critical mistakes that he detailed that I can avoid in future.
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:45 AM Author: tan rigpig
All right! I confess! I've been posting flyers all over your interviewing towns with your photo and the words "[Meanest Fish's real name] has airborne SuperAIDS! Plus, he's a communist! With rabies! DO NOT HIRE DEAD OR ALIVE!"
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:11 AM Author: cyan ladyboy wagecucks
Are there any particularly notable threads where you picked this info up? I totally missed this aspect of his personality. Only thing I remember was him and mandy getting into some random XOXO fight a few weeks back where she aired the dirty laundry.
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:59 PM Author: Hilarious macaca
Just about their experiences, about associate training and development, getting responsibility early. I mean, that's what I care about. I'm not asking questions just to ask questions.
Date: November 5th, 2005 9:57 AM Author: Razzmatazz yellow dilemma gaming laptop
I apologize if these questions seem obvious, but:
* Do you make eye contact with your interviewers? In a non-threatening way?
* Do you smile? Pleasantly? Ghoulishly? Are you sure?
* How's your handshake? How long do you hold the other person's hand when shaking?
* Do you check out your female interviewers?
* Do you use proper table manners during lunch? Do you slurp soup?
* Do you remember to use deodorant and to take a shower before your interview?
* If you have an afternoon interview, do you just shave at 6 AM in the morning, or do you come clean-shaven?
* Do you shine your shoes?
It might just be bad luck; some people just get screwed by the process. But there are some obvious things you can do that will put people's backs up, and you may be unaware that you're doing them.
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:48 PM Author: stimulating shivering house nibblets
I haven't been checking out my female interviewers; should I have been? I had trouble making eye contact with one because she looked like freaking Halle Berry. I had trouble making eye contact with another because her nose looked like an Idaho russet.
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:48 PM Author: Hilarious macaca
Check out the female interviewers? I have to admit that at this stage sex is the furthest thing from my mind at these interviews.
I actually pretty much always order something that's fool-proof at lunch - like a steak. No soup that can spill or salad that can get dressing on things or sandwiches that can fall apart.
Shit, I don't shine my shoes. Okay, I'll do that next time.
So far they've all been morning.
The first three - its one of those where I think I'm alright but what do I know.
Date: November 5th, 2005 10:05 AM Author: mauve stage ape
O.K. Here's my impression about what you're doing wrong: You're too high on yourself and your abilities. You stated above that you try to convince them of what you can do for the firms. This is the absolute wrong track to take in your interviews. At this point, you (and all of us) know absolutely nothing and can do very little. You should be trying to convey humbleness and a willingness to learn. The first step to conveying this is trying to get to know your interviewer and appear interested in who they are and what they have to say. Don't just treat them as a vehicle for information about the firm or a way to convince them of how great you are. Try to get them to talk about what they do in a typical day, outside interests, etc. and listen to what they have to say. Have a conversation with them, not an interview. Remember, you know nothing and if you're not interested in listening to them in the interview, they'll think that you're not going to listen to them at work. FWIW, I had 10 interviews, 8 callbacks, and 7 offers (no tech background). Good luck!
Date: November 5th, 2005 6:54 PM Author: mauve stage ape
Your self esteem may be in shambles, but your comments on this thread suggest that you're not coming across with the right attitude at interviews. Here's a couple of the things that you said:
"I have a lot of extras that make me a pretty qualified candidate"
"But I guess I had a very 'here's what I can do for the firm, here's what experience I have...' I mean, I always figure that you sell yourself at interviews"
Seriously--this is the wrong attitude to take. All of us know very little about the law and add very little to the firm. What you're selling is the capability to learn more and the willingness to work hard for the firm. All you need to convince them of is that you're not an ass and that you'll listen to what they'll tell you.
Date: November 5th, 2005 10:11 AM Author: aromatic sickened national security agency library
Question: are you saying stuff like when they talk about client relationships you say "yeah that's like when i was working at XXX and my clients would do blah blah blah" or are you just randomly throwing in "Well my bosses all loved me and thought i was supersweet."
Date: November 5th, 2005 10:24 AM Author: fighting international law enforcement agency
Why are people feeling sorry for this putz? There's nothing particularly sad about his story. Lots of people don't get high-paying 2L jobs, and his sense of entitlement on this board is long-running. Fuck him, his TTT, and his dumb slut of a girlfriend.
Date: November 5th, 2005 11:26 AM Author: Curious gaping hall
I don't feel sorry for him, but I don't contest his sense of entitlement, either. He's at the median at a top-10 school, so he has a reasonable expectation of BIGLAW.
Date: November 5th, 2005 11:35 AM Author: fighting international law enforcement agency
NU is the joke.
Fish shouldn't have gotten the worst grade in his section in most of his first semester classes if he wanted a job despite his utter TTT of a personality.
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:23 PM Author: Turquoise trailer park
I didn't realize he was only applying to top money jobs. I thought he was slumming it and applying to places beneath him - he certainly made it seem that way.
Well, this makes him all the more deserving of his situation. Eat shit and die, Fish.
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:57 PM Author: Hilarious macaca
I applied everywhere. Its just I have only big money job possibilities ahead. So this summer its either big money job or non-paying job. Weird but true.
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:49 PM Author: Hilarious macaca
Yes, though my alternative wasn't ranked higher and also gave money (though considerably less). The alternative was Duke.
I was also on a lot of WLs but when the money was offered I just took it.
Honestly, its hard to say. I'm not picking Duke instead of NU would have saved me here. I should have applied to UChicago, though I probably would have gotten dinged.
Fish, now that I've read this thread in greater detail, I have the following things to say.
If you *never* mention yourself once in the interview, you'll probably do better. Ask them about the interviewers, what they do in a day, what decisions they wish they'd made differently, what they think about and so forth.
You're *not* trying to sell yourself in the interview. They have your resume and your grades, and they know that you're adequate. You're trying to make them feel good about being around you. So talk about your interviewer, and not yourself. Ask what they do when they're not at work, and if people in the department hang out, and what the atmosphere is like.
Admittedly, most people can mention themselves more than once in an interview, but if you're talking about yourself to sell yourself, and you're coming off as arrogant, drastic measures may be called for.
One other question: when people ask you "who else have you talked to today," do you remember?
Date: November 5th, 2005 10:18 PM Author: Hilarious macaca
That was my understanding as well and that's also my hope. The only problem is that the firms I'm interviewing with are also significantly better than anywhere I've been before.
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:33 PM Author: ultramarine partner
Question about the "who else have you talked to" bit:
Do you mean that self-absorption would lead to a response in the negative, or that answering no to this question would have adversely impacted his chances?
Edit: Because if it's the latter, I don't think it would be a problem. Everyone knows callbacks are hectic and tend to run together. I've never been able to give an adequate answer to that question, and no one has cared.
I always just try to remember the name of the one or two bigshot partners and then just weasel my way through the rest. Usually this is basically a rhetorical question as the attorney looks at your schedule, so having one or two names handy is more than good enough in my experience. I'm really bad with names though, so I'm pretty experienced at ad-libbing my way out of situations where I can't remember someone's name.
Date: November 5th, 2005 6:54 PM Author: maroon school
Always know the name of the person you're with at the time. Reasoning...someone asks you whom you've met with. You say argh, I'm terrible with names. Person asks, what's my name?
Date: November 5th, 2005 9:05 PM Author: know-it-all foreskin
I hate this question too. I had a lot of trouble with it but woul dalways managed to pull one first or last name out or I'd remember the on-campus interviewer, that was enough. At the callback if you have the list of names I just pull it out and look at it (because you wouldn't really memorize the people you had coming up later int he day)
Also sucks if they ask about other firms you have offers at, and who you interviewed with there if they know people at that firm.