UCLA?

Share Your Experiences, Read About Other Experiences. Please keep posts organized by school and expected year of graduation.
User avatar
Veritas
Posts: 2722
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby Veritas » Wed Nov 18, 2009 4:57 pm

did you make an alt?

Every1Needs2Chill
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 4:33 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby Every1Needs2Chill » Wed Nov 18, 2009 4:58 pm

finalaspects wrote:
Every1Needs2Chill wrote:It's called making inferences, he posted that and has been calling me a "flamer" a rude degrading homosexual insult that should not be tolerated by any student pursuing a law degree. If you failed to make inferences on the LSAT that's your problem, and based off this small sample, I see that it's a possibility.


Yes, but that inference wasn't necessarily 100%. High probability but not 100%.

and you manged to avoid my question on why you came back, after stating that you wouldn't?


wow...it's 100% go and read back through all the quotes. And even if that's not what it meant and it was a "high probability" I will take that instead of a low one. Gluck in LS you're going to need it.

Every1Needs2Chill
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 4:33 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby Every1Needs2Chill » Wed Nov 18, 2009 4:59 pm

Veritas wrote:did you make an alt?


Yes Butters, Yes.

User avatar
MC Southstar
Posts: 1238
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 3:27 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby MC Southstar » Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:00 pm

Every1Needs2Chill wrote:
finalaspects wrote:
Every1Needs2Chill wrote:It's called making inferences, he posted that and has been calling me a "flamer" a rude degrading homosexual insult that should not be tolerated by any student pursuing a law degree. If you failed to make inferences on the LSAT that's your problem, and based off this small sample, I see that it's a possibility.


Yes, but that inference wasn't necessarily 100%. High probability but not 100%.

and you manged to avoid my question on why you came back, after stating that you wouldn't?


wow...it's 100% go and read back through all the quotes. And even if that's not what it meant and it was a "high probability" I will take that instead of a low one. Gluck in LS you're going to need it.


LAWL GL at LIFe bro! Can't even let your own flaming go! However are you gonna deal with reality?

User avatar
Jacques
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 3:59 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby Jacques » Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:00 pm

Every1Needs2Chill, for what it's worth, I have no problem with you -- if I had some sweet acceptances like that, I'd be proud of them too. How you choose to express that pride is your own choice.

This being said, for what it's worth, this thread is designed for updates to status, admission, waitlist, denial, etc. In future years, applicants will call this thread up to look at it as a resource, to compare their own numbers, etc. with those that were reported here (much as I have done, myself, with previous year's threads).

They're not going to want to wade through a dozen pages of flame wars, trust me. I'm very happy for you, and that you've been accepted to UCLA. I hope to be accepted as well. Now that you've reported your acceptance, your role here is over, much as mine will be once I have a final result from the school, positive or negative.

There are quite literally hundreds of OT threads on this website, places that you can go and talk yourself up, compare results with others, heck, make your own thread about how awesome it is to get two acceptances into two top 20 schools this early in the game.

The UCLA acceptance thread, and for that matter, any acceptance thread, just isn't the place to do it; please, go explore the rest of the site and have yourself a ball.

User avatar
Veritas
Posts: 2722
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby Veritas » Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:00 pm

Every1Needs2Chill wrote:
Veritas wrote:did you make an alt?


Yes Butters, Yes.

oh good, that's against the rules.

reported.

finalaspects
Posts: 1866
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 12:21 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby finalaspects » Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:01 pm

Every1Needs2Chill wrote:
finalaspects wrote:
Every1Needs2Chill wrote:It's called making inferences, he posted that and has been calling me a "flamer" a rude degrading homosexual insult that should not be tolerated by any student pursuing a law degree. If you failed to make inferences on the LSAT that's your problem, and based off this small sample, I see that it's a possibility.


Yes, but that inference wasn't necessarily 100%. High probability but not 100%.

and you manged to avoid my question on why you came back, after stating that you wouldn't?


wow...it's 100% go and read back through all the quotes. And even if that's not what it meant and it was a "high probability" I will take that instead of a low one. Gluck in LS you're going to need it.


Sun came up everyday for the last 1000 years. You cannot make a 100% inference that it will still come up tomorrow. I understand your point about taking your chances with the high probability though.

And if you still think it was 100%, its no wonder that i scored higher than you on the LSAT.

And you manged to avoid my question again. Nice.

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby Helmholtz » Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:02 pm

Every1Needs2Chill wrote:
Veritas wrote:did you make an alt?


Yes Butters, Yes.


Banned for eternity. Jesus, I don't want to deal with these morons today.

User avatar
Veritas
Posts: 2722
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby Veritas » Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:03 pm

Helmholtz wrote:
Every1Needs2Chill wrote:
Veritas wrote:did you make an alt?


Yes Butters, Yes.


Banned for eternity. Jesus, I don't want to deal with these morons today.

:D <3

User avatar
rondemarino
Posts: 529
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 12:29 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby rondemarino » Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:03 pm

Veritas wrote:
Every1Needs2Chill wrote:
Veritas wrote:did you make an alt?


Yes Butters, Yes.

oh good, that's against the rules.

reported.


I thought you were a mod?

User avatar
Jacques
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 3:59 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby Jacques » Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:03 pm

Helmholtz wrote:
Every1Needs2Chill wrote:
Veritas wrote:did you make an alt?


Yes Butters, Yes.


Banned for eternity. Jesus, I don't want to deal with these morons today.


Thank you. Any way to lock down an IP addy?

User avatar
jgulia45
Posts: 179
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 10:03 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby jgulia45 » Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:05 pm

Every1Needs2Chill wrote:not sure, me and my friend received ours via snail mail. Although he did receive his a week earlier than mine.



You have a friend???? :lol:
Last edited by jgulia45 on Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Helmholtz
Posts: 4394
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:48 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby Helmholtz » Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:05 pm

Jacques wrote:
Helmholtz wrote:
Every1Needs2Chill wrote:
Veritas wrote:did you make an alt?


Yes Butters, Yes.


Banned for eternity. Jesus, I don't want to deal with these morons today.


Thank you. Any way to lock down an IP addy?


Taken care of.

User avatar
bighead715
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 1:02 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby bighead715 » Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:05 pm

Helmholtz wrote:
Every1Needs2Chill wrote:
Veritas wrote:did you make an alt?


Yes Butters, Yes.


Banned for eternity. Jesus, I don't want to deal with these morons today.


BUT HELMMM

i was so going to throw more logs under that fire! you could of left him around for another 15 minutes or so i could jump into the fray...

User avatar
Veritas
Posts: 2722
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:50 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby Veritas » Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:05 pm

rondemarino wrote:
Veritas wrote:
Every1Needs2Chill wrote:
Veritas wrote:did you make an alt?


Yes Butters, Yes.

oh good, that's against the rules.

reported.


I thought you were a mod?

ya I was.

User avatar
panadera
Posts: 307
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 6:36 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby panadera » Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:06 pm

I agree with everything in Jacques' first post.

And now back to the subject at hand, I am eagerly waiting until 4PM pacific time in hopes that I might get a phone call. Only 3 more hours....
Last edited by panadera on Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
parker09
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 5:15 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby parker09 » Wed Nov 18, 2009 5:09 pm

Helmholtz wrote:
Taken care of.


:D ! Thanks.

...that did entertain me for a good couple of hours though.

now, back to status-checking... (well, not for UCLA.)

User avatar
jgulia45
Posts: 179
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 10:03 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby jgulia45 » Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:22 pm

anybody getting any phone calls tonight??

User avatar
nixxers
Posts: 393
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:47 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby nixxers » Wed Nov 18, 2009 9:01 pm

jgulia45 wrote:anybody getting any phone calls tonight??


+1 wondering the same thing...

User avatar
TooHot4TLS
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby TooHot4TLS » Wed Nov 18, 2009 11:17 pm

wow you boys sure do have a lot of time on your hands :wink:

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

Re: UCLA?

Postby crackberry » Wed Nov 18, 2009 11:28 pm

TooHot4TLS wrote:wow you boys sure do have a lot of time on your hands :wink:

Oh boy, are you really back?

User avatar
TooHot4TLS
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby TooHot4TLS » Wed Nov 18, 2009 11:35 pm

?

User avatar
TheWire
Posts: 480
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 9:24 pm

Re: UCLA?

Postby TheWire » Wed Nov 18, 2009 11:42 pm

TooHot4TLS wrote:?


he thought u were a flame from earlier with a similar username

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

Re: UCLA?

Postby crackberry » Wed Nov 18, 2009 11:44 pm

TooHot4TLS wrote:?

Sorry. My apologies. The fact that it was your first post raised a red flag.

User avatar
tintin
Posts: 952
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 12:26 am

Re: UCLA?

Postby tintin » Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:01 am

damn, no one got a call tonight?

that makes me sad.




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

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: nathjf and 5 guests