Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    I mean, Ghoul is a stool but this statement is ridiculous. You took your own experience and generalised it as if it's applicable to everyone.

    I personally love, love, love the subject. I didn't even expect to like it that much. So your case was personal and that is absolutely finds but don't deter other people because YOU didn't like it.
    You admitted your affections for me in the previous thread, and now you're following me across TSR? I am flattered, Stefan, but I do worry about you sometimes. I hope you're OK xx
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nameless Ghoul)
    You admitted your affections for me in the previous thread, and now you're following me across TSR? I am flattered, Stefan, but I do worry about you sometimes. I hope you're OK xx
    Well, and here come the hallucinations.

    I'm great, thank you.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    I mean, Ghoul is a stool but this statement is ridiculous. You took your own experience and generalised it as if it's applicable to everyone.

    I personally love, love, love the subject. I didn't even expect to like it that much. So your case was personal and that is absolutely finds but don't deter other people because YOU didn't like it.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    1) why are you accusing me of being objective when I actually told you that there would be people who'd disagree with my "perspective"?
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    ...are you really saying that you don't understand that what I'm saying is opinion-based...?
    here you go, dears. for the 3rd time now, this is my opinion. do I really have to spoon feed you people this concept? when you read non-fiction books where the author is giving their opinion about a matter, and they don't put ""in my opinion" at the beginning of every sentence, do you continuously strike out that sentence as invalid?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    Well, and here come the hallucinations.

    I'm great, thank you.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Glad to hear, bud.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    here you go, dears. for the 3rd time now, this is my opinion. do I really have to spoon feed you people this concept? when you read non-fiction books where the author is giving their opinion about a matter, and they don't put ""in my opinion" at the beginning of every sentence, do you continuously strike out that sentence as invalid?
    Please don't be a whiny baby. The original statement made your claim generic and was aimed directly at the OP. You said "don't take law".

    Now whatever else you say is reactionary and nothing more.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I was accepted to attend an insight evening of a major law firm, does that mean that I impressed them with my CV and i have good chances to get a TC? There were only 25 places.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    Please don't be a whiny baby. The original statement made your claim generic and was aimed directly at the OP. You said "don't take law".

    Now whatever else you say is reactionary and nothing more.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I advised him "don't take law". yes.
    I didn't command him to not do it. was I being threatening or authoritative? I think you've just read my first message of this thread out of context and you're only now realising it, assuming you might have now noticed my other messages.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by studos)
    I was accepted to attend an insight evening of a major law firm, does that mean that I impressed them with my CV and i have good chances to get a TC? There were only 25 places.
    What scheme was it?

    And no, a TC will be significantly more difficult to come by for obvious reasons.

    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    I advised him "don't take law". yes.
    I didn't command him to not do it. was I being threatening or authoritative? I think you've just read my first message of this thread out of context and you're only now realising it, assuming you might have now noticed my other messages.
    Does it have to be a command or authoritative? What am I reading for goodness sake.

    In case you haven't noticed, your first post would be what the OP would have read had Ghoul not asked you these questions (to which you are being aggressive). And that nessage as is amply clear to anyone who can read is that law sucks and people should take it. You also said people do it for the money which I shall set aside for now. Focus.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    *sigh* you're thinking of somebody else - I took it for a whole year and got a 57% overall - but I didn't work very hard, because I found the subject so loathsome and dry, like I explained before. I am in my 2nd year of a different course now (politics) and I'm averaging out at a high 2:1, so it's not a matter of "not making the cut", it's a matter of working only if you actually enjoy something, or at least that's how it goes for me, seeing as I'm not the kind of person who's prepared to be miserable for the sake of money
    A whole year? Wow. That's like impressive and ****?

    The point I was making was that you were not wholly engaged with the subject and didn't explore the depths of law as a result. It is not simply remembering cases and principles (maybe it is if you're only looking to pass); it is about understanding why particular judgments were decided in particular ways and what we can extract from that why. It is about debate and argument, and why particular arguments prevail in some debates and maybe why they don't prevail in others. It's as interesting as figuring out why Nazism succeeded in the '30s or why quantitative easing might not be a good idea. As scholars, why is hugely interesting. You just have to find it. You did not. Others might.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    Does it have to be a command or authoritative? What am I reading for goodness sake.
    well that would contextualise an imperative statement. what else would? if somebody makes a suggestion, what other than context causes it to become a direct commandment?

    In case you haven't noticed, your first post would be what the OP would have read had Ghoul not asked you these questions (to which you are being aggressive).
    you'll notice I started responding "aggressively" after they began making accusations against me, actually. e.g. assuming me of only taking it for a few weeks, and saying that I didn't know what I was talking about (based on that accusation, which, again, was completely wrong)

    And that nessage as is amply clear to anyone who can read is that law sucks and people should take it. You also said people do it for the money which I shall set aside for now. Focus.
    you *honestly* think most people take law *not* for the money? were you born yesterday? that's so naive I can't help but assume you dont anybody studying law - out of all the people I know who're law students, I think I met one person out of about 15 that *actually* seemed to really appreciate the subject
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nameless Ghoul)
    A whole year? Wow. That's like impressive and ****?
    what are you implying? that it counts for ****ing *nothing* relative to my statement? if I took it for a year, does that give me absolutely no right to comment on my experience whatsoever? if the first year was duller than a 20-watt lightbulb, why would the 2nd year be any better? why would I make that assumption? maybe you're forgetting that I have a lot of friends who're studying law who happen to comment on the difficulty and boringness of the 2nd year (and 3rd) - are they all lying through their teeth?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    It wasn't a scheme, it was an insight evening! But they obviously chose me among perhaps many applicants? And I didn't find any truly outstanding students there, one was from London Metropolitan! Others studied biochemistry or mickey mouse degrees like English Literature. I am really confused.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    well that would contextualise an imperative statement. what else would? if somebody makes a suggestion, what other than context causes it to become a direct commandment?



    you'll notice I started responding "aggressively" after they began making accusations against me, actually. e.g. assuming me of only taking it for a few weeks, and saying that I didn't know what I was talking about (based on that accusation, which, again, was completely wrong)



    you *honestly* think most people take law *not* for the money? were you born yesterday? that's so naive I can't help but assume you dont anybody studying law - out of all the people I know who're law students, I think I met one person out of about 15 that *actually* seemed to really appreciate the subject
    Don't be ridiculous please. The OP asked something completely irrelevant and you went on with full force to say how bad it is, how it sucks and how it's only for the money. How do you expect them to receive this? It's not surprising that you failed Law if you think commands or authoritative requests are the only persuasive claims one can make.

    That still doesn't address the point.

    No, I simply don't make silly assertions I can't prove, unlike you. Considering I'm a law student myself I'd say I'm pretty sure I know people studying the subject lol. And that anecdotal evidence is laughable at best.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by studos)
    It wasn't a scheme, it was an insight evening! But they obviously chose me among perhaps many applicants? And I didn't find any truly outstanding students there, one was from London Metropolitan! Others studied biochemistry or mickey mouse degrees like English Literature. I am really confused.
    Link the "insight evening".

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    what are you implying? that it counts for ****ing *nothing* relative to my statement? if I took it for a year, does that give me absolutely no right to comment on my experience whatsoever? if the first year was duller than a 20-watt lightbulb, why would the 2nd year be any better? why would I make that assumption? maybe you're forgetting that I have a lot of friends who're studying law who happen to comment on the difficulty and boringness of the 2nd year (and 3rd) - are they all lying through their teeth?
    I don't need to imply anything because, lucky for you, I explicitly asserted my point. You were not engaging with the subject seriously and so cannot comment about what the subject has to offer. Simple as that. Clear cut. Full stop.

    They are not necessarily lying that they don't enjoy it. But that is not my point. I was responding to the argument that your studying law means that you know what you're talking about. Saying law is just memorising, because that's how you treated the course, is not reliable insight.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by studos)
    Others studied biochemistry or mickey mouse degrees like English Literature. I am really confused.
    If you'd actually done any research into your chosen career you wouldn't be confused.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    Don't be ridiculous please. The OP asked something completely irrelevant and you went on with full force to say how bad it is, how it sucks and how it's only for the money. How do you expect them to receive this? It's not surprising that you failed Law if you think commands or authoritative requests are the only persuasive claims one can make.

    That still doesn't address the point.

    No, I simply don't make silly assertions I can't prove, unlike you. Considering I'm a law student myself I'd say I'm pretty sure I know people studying the subject lol. And that anecdotal evidence is laughable at best.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    oh I see what's up here - you're obviously just cross with me because I criticised your course. you're angry because I had the *nerve* to state my opinion that contrasts heavily with your own and you're trying to represent your offence as a problem of my portray of my advice as a commandment, even though I am only making that suggesting as somebody who tried it and hated it (so obviously that's the reason why I'm saying it - as somebody with a subjective viewpoint that differs from other people's). and you think 57% without any determination is "failure"? oh piss off you snooty sod - did you stop to think I may be in a university that has higher standards than your own to warrant such difficulty? and who said *you* didn't know law students? again, this would make this a matter of the force of my opinion and my friends' opinions vs your own and your friends'. again, this would be subjectivity, something you apparently aren't familiar with when people give suggestions with the best of intentions and you strike it down, all butt-hurt, because I didn't have the OCD to mark it out as merely an opinion as if I have to spoon feed you people
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Shumaya)
    If you'd actually done any research into your chosen career you wouldn't be confused.
    Can you buzz off with the smartars replies? It is not even my chosen career, I just started exploring it
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by J-SP)
    I said that because your private messages were pretty annoying. I gave you some direction and then you asked me to basically do all your research for you. When I refused you just started to harass me for information about me which you don't need.

    You have an attitude problem and your lack of ability to even do some basic research suggests you have little chance of actually succeeding. I don't think you are really motivated, despite stating yourself as an ambitious individual. If you truly were you wouldn't have to ask me or others for what is basic information easily found via a quick Google search.






    Posted from TSR Mobile
    This ^

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sleepysnooze)
    oh I see what's up here - you're obviously just cross with me because I criticised your course. you're angry because I had the *nerve* to state my opinion that contrasts heavily with your own and you're trying to represent your offence as a problem of my portray of my advice as a commandment, even though I am only making that suggesting as somebody who tried it and hated it (so obviously that's the reason why I'm saying it - as somebody with a subjective viewpoint that differs from other people's). and you think 57% without any determination is "failure"? oh piss off you snooty sod - did you stop to think I may be in a university that has higher standards than your own to warrant such difficulty? and who said *you* didn't know law students? again, this would make this a matter of the force of my opinion and my friends' opinions vs your own and your friends'. again, this would be subjectivity, something you apparently aren't familiar with when people give suggestions with the best of intentions and you strike it down, all butt-hurt, because I didn't have the OCD to mark it out as merely an opinion as if I have to spoon feed you people
    Is that what you got? Really? Where did I say that I don't like people criticising my course? Do you even know what criticism stands for?

    All you did was say "Law sucks, don't do it, there's more to life than money". In what way, shape or form is this criticism? This is just you displaying your bitterness. You didn't even give a single reason.

    Excuse me, did you just use the "no determination" argument to support yourself? Is this serious? We've all had to do subjects we didn't like, you know. And I didn't say you failed the course with regards to grades, but that you left and then come here with such bitter comments. Learn to dissect sentences.

    Only two universities have higher standards than my university, and 3-4 others have equal. Are you telling me you went to Oxbridge?

    So much whining, lol. If you think what you did involves the notions of an opinion you have no clue what you're talking about.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.