We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
should it be like this even when a reference intern works hard, does their assigned work diligently, and forms a good rapport with their team? is this not unfair? not everyone is able to get in just based on merit, but once they do (even if through connections), should the way they perform and intern not be a stronger indicator for stipends or call backs?
the rat race has blown out of proportion, the number of students pursuing llb has increased exponentially, and if some students are able to secure a good internship through whatever means, why does it reflect poorly in terms of how firms plan their recruitment?