Stanford 2010!!!

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
Core
Posts: 977
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 3:09 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby Core » Mon Mar 08, 2010 7:11 pm

Bah no JR2 today, hope tomorrow brings a SLS acceptance so I can finally put an end to the anxiety...

User avatar
Sakura3210
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:29 am

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby Sakura3210 » Tue Mar 09, 2010 12:02 pm

Core wrote:Bah no JR2 today, hope tomorrow brings a SLS acceptance so I can finally put an end to the anxiety...

+1000000

I'm sending out a LOCI just in case; I know they say to wait 'til you're waitlisted/held, but not hearing a thing from S. has made me antsy.:(

Kretzy
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:11 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby Kretzy » Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:39 pm

Giant envelope from SLS in my mailbox today. Freaked out, thinking it was my financial aid award.

Nope, just an invitation to apply for housing, and a copy of the Independence Test that I sent in 3 weeks ago...

User avatar
anmo
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 1:50 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby anmo » Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:44 pm

Kretzy wrote:Giant envelope from SLS in my mailbox today. Freaked out, thinking it was my financial aid award.

Nope, just an invitation to apply for housing, and a copy of the Independence Test that I sent in 3 weeks ago...


Same... got it yesterday. :x

User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby crackberry » Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:45 pm

Kretzy wrote:Giant envelope from SLS in my mailbox today. Freaked out, thinking it was my financial aid award.

Nope, just an invitation to apply for housing, and a copy of the Independence Test that I sent in 3 weeks ago...

Haha yeah, I got that a couple days ago and was similarly confused and disappointed upon opening it. Also, a PSA: EV and Rains are NOT cool. I guess if you're married and looking for couples housing, EV is okay, but you would probably be better served getting an apartment off campus at Oak Creek or Sharon Green provided you have a car. If you're single and you can afford Munger, it is SO much nicer than Rains. No one should pick Rains over Munger unless they absolutely cannot stomach the extra cost. Trust me, it is worth it.

User avatar
Kronk
Posts: 28240
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby Kronk » Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:47 pm

I am meeting an infamous Stanford TLS poaster tomorrow.

User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby crackberry » Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:48 pm

Kronk wrote:I am meeting an infamous Stanford TLS poaster tomorrow.

Interesting spelling. Also, who? Anyone I know?

User avatar
Kronk
Posts: 28240
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby Kronk » Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:53 pm

crackberry wrote:
Kronk wrote:I am meeting an infamous Stanford TLS poaster tomorrow.

Interesting spelling. Also, who? Anyone I know?


Yes, perhaps he/she will out him/herself. And I do most of my poasting in the mornings. It's when I prefer to poast.

User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby crackberry » Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:57 pm

Kronk wrote:
crackberry wrote:
Kronk wrote:I am meeting an infamous Stanford TLS poaster tomorrow.

Interesting spelling. Also, who? Anyone I know?


Yes, perhaps he/she will out him/herself. And I do most of my poasting in the mornings. It's when I prefer to poast.

Was "infamous" indeed the right word? The only "infamous" Stanford posters I can think of on TLS are myself (blatant me trolling) and CR. The 1Ls who post on here regularly could hardly be called "infamous," and I can't think of any other 0L who I would so immediately ID with Stanford. I suppose you could be referring to an older student, but then I don't really care because I won't get the significance.

Kretzy
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:11 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby Kretzy » Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:58 pm

Kronk wrote:
crackberry wrote:
Kronk wrote:I am meeting an infamous Stanford TLS poaster tomorrow.

Interesting spelling. Also, who? Anyone I know?


Yes, perhaps he/she will out him/herself. And I do most of my poasting in the mornings. It's when I prefer to poast.


That'd be me. I get to meet the infamous Kronkers tomorrow afternoon up in Dtown.

User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby crackberry » Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:59 pm

Kretzy wrote:
Kronk wrote:
crackberry wrote:
Kronk wrote:I am meeting an infamous Stanford TLS poaster tomorrow.

Interesting spelling. Also, who? Anyone I know?


Yes, perhaps he/she will out him/herself. And I do most of my poasting in the mornings. It's when I prefer to poast.


That'd be me. I get to meet the infamous Kronkers tomorrow afternoon up in Dtown.

Terrible misuse of the word "infamous" on Kronk's part.

User avatar
Kronk
Posts: 28240
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby Kronk » Tue Mar 09, 2010 4:59 pm

crackberry wrote:
Kronk wrote:
crackberry wrote:
Kronk wrote:I am meeting an infamous Stanford TLS poaster tomorrow.

Interesting spelling. Also, who? Anyone I know?


Yes, perhaps he/she will out him/herself. And I do most of my poasting in the mornings. It's when I prefer to poast.

Was "infamous" indeed the right word? The only "infamous" Stanford posters I can think of on TLS are myself (blatant me trolling) and CR. The 1Ls who post on here regularly could hardly be called "infamous," and I can't think of any other 0L who I would so immediately ID with Stanford. I suppose you could be referring to an older student, but then I don't really care because I won't get the significance.


Using the wrong word is for sub-170 proles.
Last edited by Kronk on Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby crackberry » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:00 pm

Kronk wrote:Using the wrong words is for sub-170 proles.

See above post.

User avatar
Kronk
Posts: 28240
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby Kronk » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:02 pm

crackberry wrote:
Kronk wrote:Using the wrong word is for sub-170 proles.

See above post.


Pfft--are you claiming Kretzy isn't MVP?

User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby crackberry » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:06 pm

Kronk wrote:
crackberry wrote:
Kronk wrote:Using the wrong word is for sub-170 proles.

See above post.


Pfft--are you claiming Kretzy isn't MVP?

1) I'm not sure what MVP refers to here.
2) I am most certainly claiming that Kretzy cannot reasonable be classified as an "infamous" poster.

For reference:

1. disreputable, ill-famed, notorious. 2. disgraceful, scandalous; nefarious, odious, wicked, shocking, vile, base, heinous, villainous.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/infamous

Kretzy
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:11 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby Kretzy » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:07 pm

crackberry wrote:
Kronk wrote:
crackberry wrote:
Kronk wrote:Using the wrong word is for sub-170 proles.

See above post.


Pfft--are you claiming Kretzy isn't MVP?

1) I'm not sure what MVP refers to here.
2) I am most certainly claiming that Kretzy cannot reasonable be classified as an "infamous" poster.

For reference:

1. disreputable, ill-famed, notorious. 2. disgraceful, scandalous; nefarious, odious, wicked, shocking, vile, base, heinous, villainous.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/infamous


I don't like any of those words describing me. Except notorious. RIP Biggie.
Last edited by Kretzy on Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Kronk
Posts: 28240
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby Kronk » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:08 pm

crackberry wrote:
Kronk wrote:
crackberry wrote:
Kronk wrote:Using the wrong word is for sub-170 proles.

See above post.


Pfft--are you claiming Kretzy isn't MVP?

1) I'm not sure what MVP refers to here.
2) I am most certainly claiming that Kretzy cannot reasonable be classified as an "infamous" poster.

For reference:

1. disreputable, ill-famed, notorious. 2. disgraceful, scandalous; nefarious, odious, wicked, shocking, vile, base, heinous, villainous.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/infamous


tbf, the California lexicon has updated most of those words to mean generally positive things.

User avatar
Kronk
Posts: 28240
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby Kronk » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:12 pm

Also, given your "definitions" from the "dictionary," I'd wonder why you're bragging about yourself being an infamous poaster. I believe this proves my point. If not, you're giving yourself far too much credit for annoying people. The only person you successfully troll is me.

User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby crackberry » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:14 pm

Kronk wrote:Also, given your "definitions" from the "dictionary," I'd wonder why you're bragging about yourself being an infamous poaster. I believe this proves my point. If not, you're giving yourself far too much credit for annoying people. The only person you successfully troll is me.

When you hear the words "Stanford" and "TLS" who is the first poster you think of?

Kretzy
Posts: 1431
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:11 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby Kretzy » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:15 pm

crackberry wrote:
Kronk wrote:Also, given your "definitions" from the "dictionary," I'd wonder why you're bragging about yourself being an infamous poaster. I believe this proves my point. If not, you're giving yourself far too much credit for annoying people. The only person you successfully troll is me.

When you hear the words "Stanford" and "TLS" who is the first poster you think of?


Everyone but you.

User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby crackberry » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:15 pm

Also, to quote adameus from the Chicago vs. NYU thread:

adameus wrote:wow it seems any thread on here longer than 2 pages gets hijacked by people talking about vaguely related issues and crackberry coming in to whore/troll for Stanford. I don't think crack even has a friend who was considering between Chi and NYU, he just wanted to have a reason to come in here and weasel in some Stanford trolling :P

http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... &start=100
Last edited by crackberry on Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Kronk
Posts: 28240
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby Kronk » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:16 pm

crackberry wrote:
Kronk wrote:Also, given your "definitions" from the "dictionary," I'd wonder why you're bragging about yourself being an infamous poaster. I believe this proves my point. If not, you're giving yourself far too much credit for annoying people. The only person you successfully troll is me.

When you hear the words "Stanford" and "TLS" who is the first poster you think of?


Doesn't make either of you disreputable. Note that I don't care about intricacies in definition, but you tend to correct my internet grammar so often I feel obligated.

User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby crackberry » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:16 pm

Kronk wrote:
crackberry wrote:
Kronk wrote:Also, given your "definitions" from the "dictionary," I'd wonder why you're bragging about yourself being an infamous poaster. I believe this proves my point. If not, you're giving yourself far too much credit for annoying people. The only person you successfully troll is me.

When you hear the words "Stanford" and "TLS" who is the first poster you think of?


Doesn't make either of you disreputable. Note that I don't care about intricacies in definition, but you tend to correct my internet grammar so often I feel obligated.

TBF, your grammar sucks.

User avatar
Kronk
Posts: 28240
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 9:18 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby Kronk » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:16 pm

crackberry wrote:Also, to quote adameus from the Chicago vs. NYU thread:

adameus wrote:wow it seems any thread on here longer than 2 pages gets hijacked by people talking about vaguely related issues and crackberry coming in to whore/troll for Stanford. I don't think crack even has a friend who was considering between Chi and NYU, he just wanted to have a reason to come in here and weasel in some Stanford trolling :P

http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... &start=100


Really proud of that one eh, boss?

User avatar
crackberry
Posts: 3252
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 3:23 pm

Re: Stanford 2010!!!

Postby crackberry » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:17 pm

Kronk wrote:
crackberry wrote:Also, to quote adameus from the Chicago vs. NYU thread:

adameus wrote:wow it seems any thread on here longer than 2 pages gets hijacked by people talking about vaguely related issues and crackberry coming in to whore/troll for Stanford. I don't think crack even has a friend who was considering between Chi and NYU, he just wanted to have a reason to come in here and weasel in some Stanford trolling :P

http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... &start=100


Really proud of that one eh, boss?

No, not particularly, but I think it qualifies me as "infamous," which, to be fair, is not a good thing.




Return to “Law School Acceptances, Denials, and Waitlists”