.

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
User avatar
zozin
Posts: 3733
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 10:13 pm

Re: .

Postby zozin » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:15 pm

shredderrrrrr wrote:
Lawl Shcool wrote:This thread just keeps delivering. I can't wait for someone to troll in OP's interest and see that reaction too.


Never have I been happier to click on a "." thread.

Also, I'm surprised by how most everyone ITT is on the same side. Usually in situtations like this, half of the posters start telling people to relax and discourage narking.

--ImageRemoved--

User avatar
Kikero
Posts: 1208
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2010 12:28 am

Re: .

Postby Kikero » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:16 pm

shredderrrrrr wrote:
Lawl Shcool wrote:This thread just keeps delivering. I can't wait for someone to troll in OP's interest and see that reaction too.


Never have I been happier to click on a "." thread.

Also, I'm surprised by how most everyone ITT is on the same side. Usually in situtations like this, half of the posters start telling people to relax and discourage narking.


Image

LEAVE OP ALONE!

User avatar
Systematic1
Posts: 237
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 5:14 pm

Re: .

Postby Systematic1 » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:17 pm

I'm always entertained by the demise of a cheater.

If it was an ALT account I would bet he's one of the people on here claiming they want to "see the OP go down...etc., etc." Just like a criminal returns to the scene of a crime. Prime suspects "chrispronger" or "beachbum"

User avatar
beachbum
Posts: 2766
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 9:35 pm

Re: .

Postby beachbum » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:19 pm

That beachbum guy sounds shady as fuck. I don't trust him.

User avatar
stillwater
Posts: 3811
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:59 pm

Re: .

Postby stillwater » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:19 pm

Systematic1 wrote:I'm always entertained by the demise of a cheater.

If it was an ALT account I would bet he's one of the people on here claiming they want to "see the OP go down...etc., etc." Just like a criminal returns to the scene of a crime. Prime suspects "chrispronger" or "beachbum"


like an arsonist who returns to watch his own fire...

User avatar
chrispronger
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:12 pm

Re: .

Postby chrispronger » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:21 pm

beachbum wrote:That beachbum guy sounds shady as fuck. I don't trust him.


chrispronger was an oafish waste of space when he played for the blues anyways... probably racist too because he plays hockey.

rad lulz
Posts: 9844
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm

Re: .

Postby rad lulz » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:22 pm

PitchO20 wrote:Doesn't signing up for TLS forums require an e-mail address? I'd imagine that would narrow things down.

Use a throwaway you n00b

User avatar
shredderrrrrr
Posts: 4673
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 2:36 am

Re: .

Postby shredderrrrrr » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:22 pm

Systematic1 wrote:I'm always entertained by the demise of a cheater.

If it was an ALT account I would bet he's one of the people on here claiming they want to "see the OP go down...etc., etc." Just like a criminal returns to the scene of a crime. Prime suspects "chrispronger" or "beachbum"


And I almost got away with it, if it weren't for you pesky kids.

User avatar
shredderrrrrr
Posts: 4673
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 2:36 am

Re: .

Postby shredderrrrrr » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:23 pm

rad lulz wrote:
PitchO20 wrote:Doesn't signing up for TLS forums require an e-mail address? I'd imagine that would narrow things down.

Use a throwaway you n00b


You sure seem to know an awful lot about this...

Image

minutemanmike
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:13 pm

Re: .

Postby minutemanmike » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:24 pm

Always Credited wrote:
Morgan12Oak wrote:It sounds like at least one, probably multiple people have already turned him in already so I think that is going to be satisfied. I doubt the mod's turn over much unless they get some sort of formal nice request from Duke. The higher chance is if someone already knows who he is. Or, in the alternative he turns himself in thinking that it becomes less severe and calculates his chances of being caught from the above two are relatively high.


Non-content electronic information (including basic subscriber information, IP addresses, and any email accounts he registered under) can be turned over by a private party (TLS) to another private party (Duke) without violating either the Wiretap Act or the Stored Communications Act.

Just saying.

GO MODS GO


Wouldn't this be a breach of TOS, would you ever want to post here again if they did that? I mean in the "anonymous" portion of Legal Employment I'd be deathly afraid to ever post if it could be linked to me.

Reminder of the TOS

Registration will require your email address confirming your registration details and password, but your email will never be provided to anyone. Please click on the links below to begin registering after reading the standard disclaimer below.

As a user you agree to any information you have entered above being stored in a database. While this information will not be disclosed to any third party without your consent the webmaster, administrator and moderators cannot be held responsible for any hacking attempt that may lead to the data being compromised

User avatar
shredderrrrrr
Posts: 4673
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 2:36 am

Re: .

Postby shredderrrrrr » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:26 pm

minutemanmike wrote:
Always Credited wrote:
Morgan12Oak wrote:It sounds like at least one, probably multiple people have already turned him in already so I think that is going to be satisfied. I doubt the mod's turn over much unless they get some sort of formal nice request from Duke. The higher chance is if someone already knows who he is. Or, in the alternative he turns himself in thinking that it becomes less severe and calculates his chances of being caught from the above two are relatively high.


Non-content electronic information (including basic subscriber information, IP addresses, and any email accounts he registered under) can be turned over by a private party (TLS) to another private party (Duke) without violating either the Wiretap Act or the Stored Communications Act.

Just saying.

GO MODS GO


Wouldn't this be a breach of TOS, would you ever want to post here again if they did that? I mean in the "anonymous" portion of Legal Employment I'd be deathly afraid to ever post if it could be linked to me.

Reminder of the TOS

Registration will require your email address confirming your registration details and password, but your email will never be provided to anyone. Please click on the links below to begin registering after reading the standard disclaimer below.

As a user you agree to any information you have entered above being stored in a database. While this information will not be disclosed to any third party without your consent the webmaster, administrator and moderators cannot be held responsible for any hacking attempt that may lead to the data being compromised


TOS do appear to be a roadblock, but I wouldn't worry about precedent lol.

minutemanmike
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:13 pm

Re: .

Postby minutemanmike » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:30 pm

shredderrrrrr wrote:
minutemanmike wrote:
Always Credited wrote:
Morgan12Oak wrote:It sounds like at least one, probably multiple people have already turned him in already so I think that is going to be satisfied. I doubt the mod's turn over much unless they get some sort of formal nice request from Duke. The higher chance is if someone already knows who he is. Or, in the alternative he turns himself in thinking that it becomes less severe and calculates his chances of being caught from the above two are relatively high.


Non-content electronic information (including basic subscriber information, IP addresses, and any email accounts he registered under) can be turned over by a private party (TLS) to another private party (Duke) without violating either the Wiretap Act or the Stored Communications Act.

Just saying.

GO MODS GO


Wouldn't this be a breach of TOS, would you ever want to post here again if they did that? I mean in the "anonymous" portion of Legal Employment I'd be deathly afraid to ever post if it could be linked to me.

Reminder of the TOS

Registration will require your email address confirming your registration details and password, but your email will never be provided to anyone. Please click on the links below to begin registering after reading the standard disclaimer below.

As a user you agree to any information you have entered above being stored in a database. While this information will not be disclosed to any third party without your consent the webmaster, administrator and moderators cannot be held responsible for any hacking attempt that may lead to the data being compromised


TOS do appear to be a roadblock, but I wouldn't worry about precedent lol.


Don't really care since, I lurk mostly in Employment, guess I'll just refrain from posting anonymously since most questions are usually covered by other posters. Better them then me.

User avatar
shredderrrrrr
Posts: 4673
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 2:36 am

Re: .

Postby shredderrrrrr » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:32 pm

Don't really care since, I lurk mostly in Employment, guess I'll just refrain from posting anonymously since most questions are usually covered by other posters. Better them then me.


Just don't post stuff you wouldn't say in real life. Whether TLS gives out your info or not, nothing is really anonymous.

User avatar
dailygrind
Posts: 19639
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:08 am

Re: .

Postby dailygrind » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:39 pm

minutemanmike wrote:
Always Credited wrote:
Morgan12Oak wrote:It sounds like at least one, probably multiple people have already turned him in already so I think that is going to be satisfied. I doubt the mod's turn over much unless they get some sort of formal nice request from Duke. The higher chance is if someone already knows who he is. Or, in the alternative he turns himself in thinking that it becomes less severe and calculates his chances of being caught from the above two are relatively high.


Non-content electronic information (including basic subscriber information, IP addresses, and any email accounts he registered under) can be turned over by a private party (TLS) to another private party (Duke) without violating either the Wiretap Act or the Stored Communications Act.

Just saying.

GO MODS GO


Wouldn't this be a breach of TOS, would you ever want to post here again if they did that? I mean in the "anonymous" portion of Legal Employment I'd be deathly afraid to ever post if it could be linked to me.

Reminder of the TOS

Registration will require your email address confirming your registration details and password, but your email will never be provided to anyone. Please click on the links below to begin registering after reading the standard disclaimer below.

As a user you agree to any information you have entered above being stored in a database. While this information will not be disclosed to any third party without your consent the webmaster, administrator and moderators cannot be held responsible for any hacking attempt that may lead to the data being compromised


Nice try, OP. Banned.

User avatar
zozin
Posts: 3733
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 10:13 pm

Re: .

Postby zozin » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:42 pm

dailygrind wrote:Nice try, OP. Banned.

:lol: :lol:

User avatar
PitchO20
Posts: 160
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 12:35 pm

Re: .

Postby PitchO20 » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:42 pm

dailygrind wrote:
minutemanmike wrote:
Always Credited wrote:
Morgan12Oak wrote:It sounds like at least one, probably multiple people have already turned him in already so I think that is going to be satisfied. I doubt the mod's turn over much unless they get some sort of formal nice request from Duke. The higher chance is if someone already knows who he is. Or, in the alternative he turns himself in thinking that it becomes less severe and calculates his chances of being caught from the above two are relatively high.


Non-content electronic information (including basic subscriber information, IP addresses, and any email accounts he registered under) can be turned over by a private party (TLS) to another private party (Duke) without violating either the Wiretap Act or the Stored Communications Act.

Just saying.

GO MODS GO


Wouldn't this be a breach of TOS, would you ever want to post here again if they did that? I mean in the "anonymous" portion of Legal Employment I'd be deathly afraid to ever post if it could be linked to me.

Reminder of the TOS

Registration will require your email address confirming your registration details and password, but your email will never be provided to anyone. Please click on the links below to begin registering after reading the standard disclaimer below.

As a user you agree to any information you have entered above being stored in a database. While this information will not be disclosed to any third party without your consent the webmaster, administrator and moderators cannot be held responsible for any hacking attempt that may lead to the data being compromised


Nice try, OP. Banned.


The plot thickens! I thought it was kind of suspicious that someone's FIRST POST ON TLS happened to be in this thread, and happened to be (indirectly) defending OP. C'mon, mods, send that info down to Duke.

User avatar
SilverE2
Posts: 931
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 10:04 pm

Re: .

Postby SilverE2 » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:43 pm

dailygrind wrote:
minutemanmike wrote:
Always Credited wrote:
Morgan12Oak wrote:It sounds like at least one, probably multiple people have already turned him in already so I think that is going to be satisfied. I doubt the mod's turn over much unless they get some sort of formal nice request from Duke. The higher chance is if someone already knows who he is. Or, in the alternative he turns himself in thinking that it becomes less severe and calculates his chances of being caught from the above two are relatively high.


Non-content electronic information (including basic subscriber information, IP addresses, and any email accounts he registered under) can be turned over by a private party (TLS) to another private party (Duke) without violating either the Wiretap Act or the Stored Communications Act.

Just saying.

GO MODS GO


Wouldn't this be a breach of TOS, would you ever want to post here again if they did that? I mean in the "anonymous" portion of Legal Employment I'd be deathly afraid to ever post if it could be linked to me.

Reminder of the TOS

Registration will require your email address confirming your registration details and password, but your email will never be provided to anyone. Please click on the links below to begin registering after reading the standard disclaimer below.

As a user you agree to any information you have entered above being stored in a database. While this information will not be disclosed to any third party without your consent the webmaster, administrator and moderators cannot be held responsible for any hacking attempt that may lead to the data being compromised


Nice try, OP. Banned.


LOL

BEST. THREAD. EVAR.

User avatar
Ludo!
Posts: 4764
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 1:22 pm

Re: .

Postby Ludo! » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:43 pm

Oh shit how many times can his thread deliver

User avatar
shredderrrrrr
Posts: 4673
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 2:36 am

Re: .

Postby shredderrrrrr » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:44 pm

The plot thickens! I thought it was kind of suspicious that someone's FIRST POST ON TLS happened to be in this thread, and happened to be (indirectly) defending OP. C'mon, mods, send that info down to Duke.


Lol shit, I didn't even catch that. Shows what kind of lawyer I'll be :oops:

Morgan12Oak
Posts: 451
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 1:59 am

Re: .

Postby Morgan12Oak » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:45 pm

and that was a good idea.... how?

User avatar
Lawl Shcool
Posts: 763
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 6:44 pm

Re: .

Postby Lawl Shcool » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:48 pm

YES!

I vote for an un-banning so this thread doesn't die. I guarantee OP's third attempt at thread entry will be even better than his second.

User avatar
shredderrrrrr
Posts: 4673
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 2:36 am

Re: .

Postby shredderrrrrr » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:49 pm

Morgan12Oak wrote:and that was a good idea.... how?


Lol it
A. shows that the OP was serious/not a troll (and is now nervous),
B. provides another IP address/email from which to be identified,
C. provides his name (Mike)...unless of course he was anticipating being called out and intentionally gave a fake name,
D. makes him look like a douche.

Morgan12Oak
Posts: 451
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 1:59 am

Re: .

Postby Morgan12Oak » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:49 pm

Give him credit: he argued statute AND policy... now if only he spent a fraction of that time trying to figure out his original question he asked in this thread...

User avatar
Systematic1
Posts: 237
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 5:14 pm

Re: .

Postby Systematic1 » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:50 pm

dailygrind wrote:Nice try, OP. Banned.


:D :D :D Justice!!!...kind of

User avatar
shredderrrrrr
Posts: 4673
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2011 2:36 am

Re: .

Postby shredderrrrrr » Sun Apr 29, 2012 4:50 pm

Lawl Shcool wrote:YES!

I vote for an un-banning so this thread doesn't die. I guarantee OP's third attempt at thread entry will be even better than his second.


Should've let the guy stay longer so he could've called himself out even more...he obviously showed he was plenty capable of doing something that dumb.




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests