Top Law Schools

SchopenhauerFTW wrote:I remember screwing up on game involving a student's course load, with two statistics classes offered at different times and one of these never being with other subjects but the other one being okay and sometimes neither of them being okay but one could be taken if the kid took history but never the other but what about learning Russian or Japanese and holy crap I'm way over my time limit for this one game why did I choose to do this game second I have two games left dammit dammit dammit

I remember doing that game on a PT and feeling like I finally got games.

Lonagan wrote:

SchopenhauerFTW wrote:I remember screwing up on game involving a student's course load, with two statistics classes offered at different times and one of these never being with other subjects but the other one being okay and sometimes neither of them being okay but one could be taken if the kid took history but never the other but what about learning Russian or Japanese and holy crap I'm way over my time limit for this one game why did I choose to do this game second I have two games left dammit dammit dammit

I remember doing that game on a PT and feeling like I finally got games.

I pulled through after a few minutes, but it was the first time for me after sufficient practice that I began acting as if I had never seen the LSAT before. I was bummed about it for a day. If I had just properly noted the different timed classes I would have been okay.

I hated that one.

Thank the gods for LSAT Blog. Once I learned his method of diagramming with arrows instead of trying to turn everything into a linear game, I finally felt comfortable with the LG section. You can knock out those questions in 10-30 seconds, no hypothetical or anything. It is just a shame that I didn't learn this earlier.

D. H2Oman wrote:

IAFG wrote:

BruceWayne wrote:
You're an utter dumbass. The part that you edited out was the most relevant to the entire sentence (then again that's about the only way you could ever argue with someone with any sort of success---by using strawmans). You're reasoning is analogous to when Fox News edited out the NAACP speech of Shirley Sherrod--not surprising as you seem to share a lot of the same viewpoints and reasoning ability of Fox News. In case you are not aware, Logic games are actually a lot closer to discreet mathematics in many of their principles (I even had a PHD in math tell me this after he glanced over some games). If you think juggling finite numerical issues is the same thing as keeping up with how many different torts this person may have committed, you are an idiot. HTMFH

omg you're d brooks aren't you

holy hell, I think you're right. What a snipe by IAFG.

URM attending UVA were big hints, but what tipped me over was using his friend's accomplishment to buy himself credibility.

IAFG wrote: URM attending UVA were big hints, but what tipped me over was using his friend's accomplishment to buy himself credibility.

It may behoove you to stop attempting to solve, analyze, or reason, as it seems to quickly lead to you coming up with bullshit. Definitely not D Brooks. Although even if I was that doesn't amount to some sort of insult, now if you said I was Iafg that would have been a hell of a put down.

"Using his friend's accomplishment to buy himself credibility"? WTH are you talking about, unless you're assuming I'm "friend" with Shirley Sherrod; that's very plausible considering you seem to be one of those ignorant types who equates all Blacks as the same---the real "tip" you used in your "deduction" that I'm D Brooks. I'm still attempting to figure out what you even mean by credibility considering this is an online anonymous internet forum where the topic in the thread is purely opinion based. Then again I notice you have a very hard time distinguishing between opinion and fact.

BruceWayne wrote:

IAFG wrote: URM attending UVA were big hints, but what tipped me over was using his friend's accomplishment to buy himself credibility.

It may behoove you to stop attempting to solve, analyze, or reason, as it seems to quickly lead to you coming up with bullshit. Definitely not D Brooks. Although even if I was that doesn't amount to some sort of insult, now if you said I was Iafg that would have been a hell of a put down.

"Using his friend's accomplishment to buy himself credibility"? WTH are you talking about, unless you're assuming I'm "friend" with Shirley Sherrod; that's very plausible considering you seem to be one of those ignorant types who equates all Blacks as the same---the real "tip" you used in your "deduction" that I'm D Brooks. I'm still attempting to figure out what you even mean by credibility considering this is an online anonymous internet forum where the topic in the thread is purely opinion based. Then again I notice you have a very hard time distinguishing between opinion and fact.

outed

D. H2Oman wrote:outed

Clearly, as we are both Black. You're pretty sharp; before I know it you'll have figured out that I'm on welfare too!

BruceWayne wrote:

D. H2Oman wrote:outed

Clearly, as we are both Black. You're pretty sharp; before I know it you'll have figured out that I'm on welfare too!

Why are you trying to turn logic games into a racial issue? Take that shit to the URM forum.

naterj wrote:

BruceWayne wrote:

D. H2Oman wrote:outed

Clearly, as we are both Black. You're pretty sharp; before I know it you'll have figured out that I'm on welfare too!

Why are you trying to turn logic games into a racial issue? Take that shit to the URM forum.

IAFG and H20 man are not discussing LG, they've gotten into this weird thing where they are trying to say that every Black male poster is the same one. Not surprising considering they think all Blacks are the same, excluding that one Black guy they find really cool---Clarence Thomas. Interesting how you view racial issues as "shit" that should be taken to the URM forum though.

IBTL

BruceWayne wrote:

naterj wrote:

BruceWayne wrote:

D. H2Oman wrote:outed

Clearly, as we are both Black. You're pretty sharp; before I know it you'll have figured out that I'm on welfare too!

Why are you trying to turn logic games into a racial issue? Take that shit to the URM forum.

IAFG and H20 man are not discussing LG, they've gotten into this weird thing where they are trying to say that every Black male poster is the same one. Not surprising considering they think all Blacks are the same, excluding that one Black guy they find really cool---Clarence Thomas. Interesting how you view racial issues as "shit" that should be taken to the URM forum though.

So now you're calling me racist simply for asking you to tone it down a bit? You have an interesting defense strategy, I'm guessing law
school will work out great for you.

Thread of the month clearly. IAFG I owe you a beer.

naterj wrote:So now you're calling me racist simply for asking you to tone it down a bit? You have an interesting defense strategy, I'm guessing law
school will work out great for you.

So you're making the assumption that I consider you a racist because I pointed out the fact that you used the term "shit" in regards to URM issues? You have a interesting level of RC, I'm guessing that law school won't be your cup of tea.

Let's talk about race and see what happens!

Lonagan wrote:Let's talk about race and see what happens!

How much longer until this thread gets locked.... Anyone want to place any bets?

BruceWayne wrote: I consider you a racist because I pointed out the fact that you used the term "shit" in regards to URM issues.

I'm not racist dude. I just asked you to take it to another forum.

naterj wrote:

BruceWayne wrote:

D. H2Oman wrote:outed

Clearly, as we are both Black. You're pretty sharp; before I know it you'll have figured out that I'm on welfare too!

Why are you trying to turn logic games into a racial issue? Take that shit to the URM forum.

That.... Was really unnecessary though.... I hope I don't run into too many people like you while I'm in law school. Smh.

naterj wrote:

BruceWayne wrote: I consider you a racist because I pointed out the fact that you used the term "shit" in regards to URM issues.

I'm not racist dude. I just asked you to take it to another forum.

Oh? Now it's just "another" forum? I thought it was a specific forum... The URM one perhaps....

I like this new concept of shitty posters typing in brown. Let's me know what I'm getting myself into before reading it.

Keep up the innovation tainted praise.

Tainted_Praise wrote:

naterj wrote:

BruceWayne wrote: I consider you a racist because I pointed out the fact that you used the term "shit" in regards to URM issues.

I'm not racist dude. I just asked you to take it to another forum.

Oh? Now it's just "another" forum? I thought it was a specific forum... The URM one perhaps....

Lolwut? I'm not denying I said take it to the URM forum. If race is to be discussed at all on this website it should be in that forum or a a thread that specifically deals with race. Not the LSAT forum. Haha that was terrible, like you caught me in a lie or something. hahaha.

D. H2Oman wrote:I like this new concept of shitty posters typing in brown. Let's me know what I'm getting myself into before reading it.

Keep up the innovation tainted praise.

Says the person with Justin Bieber as their avatar. Your words have no validity.

Tainted_Praise wrote:

D. H2Oman wrote:I like this new concept of shitty posters typing in brown. Let's me know what I'm getting myself into before reading it.

Keep up the innovation tainted praise.

Says the person with Justin Beiber as their avatar. Your words have no validity.

She changed it for you Biebs!!! <3<3<3<3<3<3<3<3

naterj wrote:

Tainted_Praise wrote:

naterj wrote:

BruceWayne wrote: I consider you a racist because I pointed out the fact that you used the term "shit" in regards to URM issues.

I'm not racist dude. I just asked you to take it to another forum.

Oh? Now it's just "another" forum? I thought it was a specific forum... The URM one perhaps....

Lolwut? I'm not denying I said take it to the URM forum. If race is to be discussed at all on this website it should be in that forum or a a thread that specifically deals with race. Not the LSAT forum. Haha that was terrible, like you caught me in a lie or something. hahaha.

It's this kind of thinking that will prevent this country from moving forward.... A wise man said don't argue with fools, because at a distance no one can tell who is who. You.....Are a fool. And it's a shame that you feel that anything race related should be taken to the URM forum. So if we were having a discussion about Caucasians, would we also have to take it to the URM section?

Blacks are URM's. Anything that is race related should be discussed in the URM forum. Therefore, anything race related should not be discussed in the LSAT forum, and with this being said, anything related to white people should also be discussed in the URM forum.

The reasoning in this argument is flawed because:

A) naterj is a moron
B) Just because a topic deals with race, it does not mean that it belongs exclusively to one part of TLS
C) naterj is a moron
D) naterj is a moron
E) naterj is a moron

Tainted_Praise wrote: It's this kind of thinking that will prevent this country from moving forward.... A wise man said don't argue with fools, because at a distance no one can tell who is who. You.....Are a fool. And it's a shame that you feel that anything race related should be taken to the URM forum. So if we were having a discussion about Caucasians, would we also have to take it to the URM section?

Blacks are URM's. Anything that is race related should be discussed in the URM forum. Therefore, anything race related should not be discussed in the LSAT forum, and anything related to white people should also be discussed in the URM forum.

The reasoning in this argument is flawed because:

A) naterj is a moron
B) Just because a topic deals with race, it does not mean that it belongs exclusively to one part of TLS
C) naterj is a moron
D) naterj is a moron
E) naterj is a moron

TL;DR

Tainted_Praise wrote:

naterj wrote:

Tainted_Praise wrote:
Oh? Now it's just "another" forum? I thought it was a specific forum... The URM one perhaps....

Lolwut? I'm not denying I said take it to the URM forum. If race is to be discussed at all on this website it should be in that forum or a a thread that specifically deals with race. Not the LSAT forum. Haha that was terrible, like you caught me in a lie or something. hahaha.

It's this kind of thinking that will prevent this country from moving forward.... A wise man said don't argue with fools, because at a distance no one can tell who is who. You.....Are a fool. And it's a shame that you feel that anything race related should be taken to the URM forum. So if we were having a discussion about Caucasians, would we also have to take it to the URM section?

Blacks are URM's. Anything that is race related should be discussed in the URM forum. Therefore, anything race related should not be discussed in the LSAT forum, and with this being said, anything related to white people should also be discussed in the URM forum.

The reasoning in this argument is flawed because:

A) naterj is a moron
B) Just because a topic deals with race, it does not mean that it belongs exclusively to one part of TLS
C) naterj is a moron
D) naterj is a moron
E) naterj is a moron

lol

<--------- facepalm.

the level of stupidity in some of these arguments makes it clear why the legal profession is suffering so terribly.