Test Center Violations

[Richie Tenenbaum]

Ok, the fact that this motherfucker is trolling became obvious 5 pages ago. Why is he still here?

I'm convinced the person is for real. Maybe I'm gullible though.

Seemed pretty clear when the supposed middle-aged professor referred to someone as "bro" a page back. Also, I'm surprised no one has brought this up, but would LSAC actually take any action based on a random test taker's unverified claim of foul play?

His name is uvabro, hence I called him bro. Let the thread die. You guys surely have better things to do than trash me, which has absolutely no effect.

You might become a little bit more self-aware about how you are actually a bad person under the delusion that you're a really ethical person?

[WanderingPondering]

Ok, the fact that this motherfucker is trolling became obvious 5 pages ago. Why is he still here?

I'm convinced the person is for real. Maybe I'm gullible though.

Seemed pretty clear when the supposed middle-aged professor referred to someone as "bro" a page back. Also, I'm surprised no one has brought this up, but would LSAC actually take any action based on a random test taker's unverified claim of foul play?

Ding ding ding! I actually brought this up earlier when I said "But why would the LSAC put any credence into her claims? So Professor Herpington says Bobby Fischer had a cell phone. Bobby Fischer says Professor Herpington is lying. Why would the LSAC believe one person over another? They wouldn't."

There is no reason LSAC would take action on one clearly deranged lady saying she saw someone being naughty.

I wish I could say I thought this was a masterful troll attempt, but I really think the OP was serious. And is, in my opinion from what I witnessed on TLS, not a good human being.

[aroquentin]

I must say I'm really shocked at all of you defending this guy. Maybe it's my military background that requires discipline and adherence to rules but if all of you were able to read and follow the regulations knowing this exam can make or break your future plans, why in the world would you tolerate someone in your midst who did not? Is this really the guy you want in the seat next to you for the next few years? Is this the guy you want to work with in a firm? Would you want him to represent your mother in a legal proceeding knowing he CHOOSES not to follow the rules? These were not difficult or arbitrary regulations. They have a purpose and that is to ensure test security. Call me anything you wish for turning him in but the proctor did not do her job and whether or not it affected me is irrelevant. I see him as another potential drag on the legal profession. I caused him no harm-he caused it to himself.

Thank you Eberry.

We're not defending him. You just made a really, really shitty utilitarian calculation. That's all.
Edit: It doesn't actually look like you made a utilitarian calculation at all. Which is the problem.

Personally I believe that if an action is wrong (violation of rules) I should report the same regardless of the harm to myself. The utilitarian judgement I made here is that adherence to the rules ultimately provides the best outcome to everyone as a group even if it causes an undesirable outcome to one individual (whose outcome I am, again, not responsible for-he is).

Sentence one is deontological. Sentence two is conflating adherence to rules with enforcement, and utility in this case would have been maximized by failing to act because the cost of delaying scores for everyone outweighs the benefit of retribution. By the way, utilitarian calculus is a terrible method for seeking justice.

[sunynp]

So once OP realizes that LSAC watches this forum, she wants to let the thread die.

I do feel like contacting them and asking what the rules are for someone turning in someone else. After reading this thread I wouldn't take OPs word and I doubt LSAC does either. Do we as ethical lawyers have an obligation to let the LSAC know about this thread?

[Puffin]

OP is a total tool.

[paratactical]

My Porsche is paid for and bank account is full.

Google says you drive a 1997 BMW.

[Eberry]

My Porsche is paid for and bank account is full.

Google says you drive a 1997 BMW.

But surely Op wouldn't lie!

[uvabro]

I probably won't make the most ethical lawyer, but have spent most of my life in cities and haven't always been surrounded by baby boomers. Why OP will be a bad lawyer and bad law student is there's no distinguishing. When you read cases, judges D-fucking-stinguish all the time. Your saying you just see a rule, and report it doesn't make you a sassy lawyer. It makes you a jerk. When you see a guy hit a girl, a 10 yr old smoking, yeah, you intervene but what you did here is just drain resources from LSAC. Nobody is hurt or benefits on this situation.

You broke the Coase Theorem, which no one has done. Congrats. You valued the dumb rules more than the test itself, lost everyone's tests and may have ruined someone else for what would have otherwise been a victimless crime. If your job was to be a lawyer was to step on everyone who follows less laws than you, then they'd just send out robots. If OP is real and does decent on her LSAT, she still needs to combine her passion with humanity and a sense of humor to have any success anywhere. But what do I know? I'm not a baby boomer with a porsche.

[Richie Tenenbaum]

I probably won't make the most ethical lawyer, but have spent most of my life in cities and haven't always been surrounded by baby boomers. Why OP will be a bad lawyer and bad law student is there's no distinguishing. When you read cases, judges D-fucking-stinguish all the time. Your saying you just see a rule, and report it doesn't make you a sassy lawyer. It makes you a jerk. When you see a guy hit a girl, a 10 yr old smoking, yeah, you intervene but what you did here is just drain resources from LSAC. Nobody is hurt or benefits on this situation.

You broke the Coase Theorem, which no one has done. Congrats. You valued the dumb rules more than the test itself, lost everyone's tests and may have ruined someone else for what would have otherwise been a victimless crime. If your job was to be a lawyer was to step on everyone who follows less laws than you, then they'd just send out robots. If OP is real and does decent on her LSAT, she still needs to combine her passion with humanity and a sense of humor to have any success anywhere. But what do I know? I'm not a baby boomer with a porsche.

This is kind of incomprehensible. You been butt-chugging wine?

[CyanIdes Of March]

You're an idiot.

Exactly why am I the idiot? I did NOTHING wrong. I am also no troll. Generally a very happy go lucky person but after studying, worrying over pictures and baggies I was completely floored by the lack of adherence to the rules. He had a baggie so he must have read the requirements at some point. The reality is I chose to report him knowing it would be likely to delay my score but decided that this was the appropriate course of action. I'm mostly frustrated that he and the proctor put any of us in this position.

I am personally tired of people who think that somehow the rules do not apply to them. Guess if he can't follow rules, he must have bombed LG, esp Zones.

Because they didn't do anything that actually had any impact to anyone around them it seems. The kind of people that get so self-righteously over these mundane events that have no bearing on them in any sort of way is one of the worst kinds of tools there are.

[finnandjake2]

+1

Troll or not this thread was already entertaining and then this happened. Priceless.

[EvilClinton]

His name is uvabro, hence I called him bro. Let the thread die. You guys surely have better things to do than trash me, which has absolutely no effect.

This was the worst troll job ever. It wasn't even funny. It had no punchline or big pay off. That and Vanwinkle's comments lead me to believe this is a real person.

What a sad, sorry person. I am feel bad for anyone that has to interact with you in the future. You seem like a miserable human being.

I think TLS took it relatively light on you. If I had seen this thread yesterday I would have made fun of you until they locked this thread or you started crying and uploaded a video as proof.

[hume85]

lshopes,

You are an objectively bad human being. You are also incredibly lacking in self-awareness. The fact that you don't understand why people are reacting to poorly to your original post is very telling. The world will be a better place when you're gone.


...Also, welcome to TLS.

Really?

[20130312]

I am feel bad

[uvabro]

so is the verdict they're a troll as in this never happened or a troll as in they're a douche?

[paratactical]

so is the verdict they're a troll as in this never happened or a troll as in they're a douche?

I'm pretty sure it's not a troll at this point. I'm guessing I was right about the beamer and they won't be back.

[uvabro]

so is the verdict they're a troll as in this never happened or a troll as in they're a douche?

I'm pretty sure it's not a troll at this point. I'm guessing I was right about the beamer and they won't be back.

what beamer? i took offense to their car payment. ad hominem attacks all day, overconfidence in score?

[alwayssunnyinfl]

Overconfidence in LSAT scores by recent test takes is hilarious because even if they did score well, relying on your LSAT score for self confidence is pretty weak.

[paratactical]

so is the verdict they're a troll as in this never happened or a troll as in they're a douche?

I'm pretty sure it's not a troll at this point. I'm guessing I was right about the beamer and they won't be back.

what beamer? i took offense to their car payment. ad hominem attacks all day, overconfidence in score?

My Porsche is paid for and bank account is full.

Google says you drive a 1997 BMW.

[abcde12345]

Overconfidence in LSAT scores by recent test takes is hilarious because even if they did score well, relying on your LSAT score for self confidence is pretty weak.

Err have you read the waiting thread? I don't think any of us recent takers are overconfident at all. Our confidence got !Kunged right in the zone, if you catch my drift.

[alwayssunnyinfl]

Overconfidence in LSAT scores by recent test takes is hilarious because even if they did score well, relying on your LSAT score for self confidence is pretty weak.

Err have you read the waiting thread? I don't think any of us recent takers are overconfident at all. Our confidence got !Kunged right in the zone, if you catch my drift.

I don't.

[vanwinkle]

so is the verdict they're a troll as in this never happened or a troll as in they're a douche?

I'm pretty sure it's not a troll at this point. I'm guessing I was right about the beamer and they won't be back.

Fun facts for you guys:

1) OP actually is posting from Tennessee like they said.

2) OP doesn't appear to be an alt of an existing poster.

3) Poster who claimed to be there and corroborate the story is not an alt of OP, and posts from a different account in Tennessee.

I'm gonna guess OP is real. Just thought I'd share to put an end to that debate.

[abcde12345]

I don't.

Did you take the test? Do you know what !Kung is? What zones is? If not, you shall never understand the plight of the October 2012 taker. I'm sure you have your own battle scars. But bonds are strongest when they come from a collective experience.

3) Poster who claimed to be there and corroborate the story is not an alt of OP, and posts from a different account in Tennessee..

But does more than one person live in Tennessee?

[paratactical]

Overconfidence in LSAT scores by recent test takes is hilarious because even if they did score well, relying on your LSAT score for self confidence is pretty weak.

Err have you read the waiting thread? I don't think any of us recent takers are overconfident at all. Our confidence got !Kunged right in the zone, if you catch my drift.

I don't.

Did you take the test? Do you know what !Kung is? What zones is? If not, you shall never understand the plight of the October 2012 taker. I'm sure you have your own battle scars. But bonds are strongest when they come from a collective experience.

You are acting retarded.

Sunny's comment says that overconfidence is hilarious, not that you have overconfidence. However, I will say that given your ability to read and comprehend, any confidence in your LSAT performance is probably overconfidence.

ETA: Better, sunnybooboochild?

[alwayssunnyinfl]

You are retarded.

Sunny's comment says that overconfidence is hilarious not that you have overconfidence. However, I will say that given your ability to read and comprehend, any confidence in your LSAT performance is probably overconfidence.

OMG YOU'RE SO MEAN