Tuesday, April 7, 2015

Another Public Service Message from OTLSS

Much has been said already concerning dybbuk's excellent take-down of the Simkovic & McIntyre papers and the obvious conflict of interest involved, so it was time to commemorate this event with another LSAC parody-poster:



While we're at it, let's bring up our prior greatest hits, including taking a jab at representing dolphins:



And, given that "Better Call Saul" took off in its own right, here our prior jab at "S&M", the first time around:



Here is the ad it was based on (Thanks, UConn):


Friends of the movement, print these out and hang them up, give these out as flyers, e-mail them to people you care about.  The Cartel is faltering and the correction has been long overdue.  Help us spread the word and prevent good people from making a well-intentioned but uninformed educational and financial mistake.

Remember, we don't make any money by issuing warnings.  They, on the other hand, make money by enrolling the na├»ve.

28 comments:

  1. "It's not about your career. It's about theirs."

    Perfect. A tag line for the ages.

    ReplyDelete
  2. P.S. How much is UCONN paying him? UCONN is a public institution. Can OTLSS FOIA UCONN to get the invoice?

    ReplyDelete
  3. This is *extremely* good work, duped! The quality of work produced by the writers and artists here is astoundingly good. Absolutely amazing; it puts Leiter's dog turd of a blog to shame, along with those of countless other law school apologists.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Refreshments will be served." You mean beyond the smooth, delicious speech coming from the podium? Sounds like it was a fun time!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The refreshments:

      For the profe$$ors and admini$trators: pre-phylloxera cognac
      For law students, actual and prospective: poisoned Kool-Aid

      Old Guy

      Delete
  5. Is it just me, or does Professor Simkovic look really HOT in that picture?

    It's probably not just me that thinks it, which is why he's the one going around trying to attract students. Another crafty trick by the law school pushers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gross. He looks like a used Brillo pad. Check yourself before you wreck yourself. Mostly, I'm surprised by the apparent youthfulness of this scammer...like he should know better, and he does know better. He thinks this is an infinitely flexible academic masturbation thing. It's not. This bubble isn't theory, it's real people and real lives. Therein lies the problem with hackademia: they want theory, and untestable hypothesis, but they won't get it. Objectively, law is a terrible investment TODAY even if you're magic and fart rainbows. Mr. Brillo doesn't even deny that - he has to project a better future than the terrible, undeniable present.

      HACK with a poor moral character.

      Delete
    2. Actually, the hair on his head looks like should belong on another part of his body - the nether regions.
      In high school we called it "pube head." I'm not sure what it's called now.

      Delete
  6. Jesus. With a quarter of a million in funding, Simkovic can't even buy a razor.

    Old Guy

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. OK, so I guess I am the only person that finds Simkovic to be good looking.

      Delete
    2. This loser is simply lying in order to justify his job and lots of other law professors position. The scams never end in America. They just change form.

      Delete
    3. I also find Simkovic to be reasonably good-looking. Don't let that distract you from what he's trying to do for the law school cartel, namely prop up their sagging demand.

      Delete
    4. I think using a young professor is all part of a diabolical strategy.

      You find a young, hip, somewhat good looking law professor (or, at least, the best the law school cartel can do to find one), and you use him to reach out to the young 20-somethings.

      They probably focus-grouped the hell out of Simkovic's presentation.

      Delete
    5. The law school pigs aren't stupid, they realize they can squeeze more idiot lemmings into their gates and get them for a few years and make even more money off the federal loans.

      Delete
  7. News flash here: Lisa McElroy is a law professor at Drexel who last year was taunting penniless scam victims and flaunting her own luxurious lifestyle. Google her name and check out what she's been doing lately...I can't say any more than that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To be fair, it may have just been a virus that got onto her computer.

      I'm much more interested in hearing about what this Lisa McElroy did to taunt the penniless law graduates.

      Delete
    2. lol, I've never yet had an anal porn virus "get onto" my own computer. Of course, the fact that I never click on anal porn sites may contribute to that.

      Delete
    3. How come when I get a virus my computer becomes nonfunctional and I have to do a reformat, while McElroy gets decent quality porn and a helpful, grammatical email forwarding a link to it?

      Delete
    4. How did the "virus" know to append a note about writing legal briefs with the link?

      Delete
    5. Yeah pretty clear that was a "cut and paste" gone wrong. Poor girl. Anal beads. But kinda hawt...

      If only ever internet fuckup was explained away simply by "a virus did it." While I do sympathize with her plight - long story for another day - I also find it rather amusing that some douchbag middle aged highbrow law professorette has a thing for anal beads and got caught almost literally with her pants down in her office rubbing it to fetish porn.

      And if she's into anal beads, god knows what the ubiquitous 70 year old perv who looks at the girls' tits while he's answering their questions in depth is into. Lord knows what you'd find splattered all over their offices if you brought in the CSI ultraviolet lights and orange tinted glasses.

      Delete
    6. As a disclaimer of sorts, I don't think we know that she was in her office at the time, or even that she had her pants down and/or was "rubbing" "it." I think we should stick to the news article and video in question.

      I also do not want to endorse anyone using ultraviolet lights in a professor's office. What happens in the office stays in the office...until the cleaning folks show up.

      Delete
    7. I'm just LOLing trying to imagine what would happen if Brian Leiter "accidentally" forwarded the shit he's looking at.

      Delete
  8. UConn?!? My alma mater strikes again. What's the employment ranking of the law school again? 140? 150?

    ReplyDelete
  9. "You. Conned."

    I grew up in Connecticut. Everything has changed in a short space of 20 years since I've been gone. The insurance companies have moved headquarters to places like Iowa. The Caldor that once anchored a shopping plaza is now a Wal-Mart. The local bookstore (what's that?) is gone. Etc, etc.

    UConn law had a place back when CT had a real economy. Now, like the rest of the country, the middle class base is gone. There is little need for lawyers anymore in such a small state with a weak middle-to-poor population.

    Yet, look at tuition. It has done nothing but go up.

    UConn was moderately solid 20 years ago. Now, there is no need for it, IMO.

    And, btw, this is the only law school in CT that is "public"?!?

    Take a look at "Costs" from the Wikipedia entry for this "public" law school:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Connecticut_School_of_Law

    Costs

    The total cost of attendance (indicating the cost of tuition, fees, and living expenses) at University of Connecticut for the 2014-2015 academic year is $71,758.[25] The Law School Transparency estimated debt-financed cost of attendance for three years is $259,533.[26]

    Utterly ridiculous..

    And, IMO, inexcusable for a "public" law school. Complete nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
  10. More:

    To add insult to injury, take a look at the section above "Costs":

    Employment

    According to University of Connecticut's official 2013 ABA-required disclosures, 41.2% of the Class of 2013 obtained full-time, long-term, JD-required employment nine months after graduation, excluding solo practitioners.[23] University of Connecticut's Law School Transparency under-employment score is 23.5%, indicating the percentage of the Class of 2013 unemployed, pursuing an additional degree, or working in a non-professional, short-term, or part-time job nine months after graduation.[24]

    Wow!!

    A whole 41%!!

    WINNING!!

    It used to be that about 5 years out, half the class would remain practicing law.

    This school can't even place 50% of its graduates within 9 months into FT legal positions. As we know, the chances of ever obtaining a legal job decrease dramatically after the 1 year mark.

    I would surmise that the "New Normal" for 5 years out is.. what? 15% or less of a class year actively practicing law. 10 percent or less, perhaps?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is this going to be followed by the Tommy Wu seminar?

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HveMAHf2UBg

      This is what this kind of spin and garbage reminds me of.

      Delete