They are TTT b/c humans (esp Americans) are compelled to list/rank everything from toilet paper to cars and even law schools.TheLuckyOne wrote:Ohh, I'm sorry for not using the spell check.let/them/eat/cake wrote:
Your posts ITT have been, almost without fail, laughable. Also, you used the word "likelyhood." That is all.
And my post are laughable because I don't doubt that TTT is TTT for a reason
T4 transfer question Forum
- GATORTIM
- Posts: 1213
- Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 3:51 pm
Re: URM with 4.19 1L GPA - T4 transfer question (NY)
- let/them/eat/cake
- Posts: 595
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 7:20 pm
Re: URM with 4.19 1L GPA - T4 transfer question (NY)
the use of "likelyhood" isn't a spell check issue. it's not like you misspelled verdict as vedrict. it's that your a jackass who can't spell trying to call other people morons.TheLuckyOne wrote:Ohh, I'm sorry for not using the spell check.let/them/eat/cake wrote:
Your posts ITT have been, almost without fail, laughable. Also, you used the word "likelyhood." That is all.
And my post are laughable because I don't doubt that TTT is TTT for a reason
- ndirish2010
- Posts: 2985
- Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:41 pm
Re: URM with 4.19 1L GPA - T4 transfer question (NY)
You are = you're...probably a good thing to get things like these right when criticizing other people's postslet/them/eat/cake wrote:the use of "likelyhood" isn't a spell check issue. it's not like you misspelled verdict as vedrict. it's that your a jackass who can't spell trying to call other people morons.TheLuckyOne wrote:Ohh, I'm sorry for not using the spell check.let/them/eat/cake wrote:
Your posts ITT have been, almost without fail, laughable. Also, you used the word "likelyhood." That is all.
And my post are laughable because I don't doubt that TTT is TTT for a reason
- TheLuckyOne
- Posts: 318
- Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 1:00 pm
Re: URM with 4.19 1L GPA - T4 transfer question (NY)
let/them/eat/cake wrote:the use of "likelyhood" isn't a spell check issue. it's not like you misspelled verdict as vedrict. it's that your a jackass who can't spell trying to call other people morons.TheLuckyOne wrote:Ohh, I'm sorry for not using the spell check.let/them/eat/cake wrote:
Your posts ITT have been, almost without fail, laughable. Also, you used the word "likelyhood." That is all.
And my post are laughable because I don't doubt that TTT is TTT for a reason
What???
Dude, get over it and, yes, the other poster is right, learn to spell the most obvious words first, and then maybe your criticism of the others can be taken seriously.
Honestly, I can't get this tendency of picking up on the slightest misspellings on this board especially when trying to critisize something the poster SAID. LOL, people, get over your own insecurities, and, no, you're not cool by doing it.
BTW, aren't you the one who was constantly mas....ting at your 180s, making tons of threads of how to maintain that score, and then scored "not so good" on the real thing. If yes, I think I don't need to go any further ... everything else is obvious....
- reasonable_man
- Posts: 2194
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 5:41 pm
Re: URM with 4.19 1L GPA - T4 transfer question (NY)
ITT having an 'advanced degree' = understanding the relative difficulty and educational value of schools one has never walked through the halls of, let alone attended a class.... because USNWR tells us that a hand full of old judges that can hardly remember the name of their own law school rank some better than others and the low ranked schools are filled with kids that didn't arrange john, sue, bob, kim and pete around a table with only 4 chairs on a tuesday afternoon where pete won't sit at a green chair and sue won't sit at a red one, quickly enough.
I've got news for ya junior. Besides the federal bench, most judges went to TTTs. So if they are teaching the law differently at the TTTs, I guess it shouldn't hurt us sad-TTT-grads all that much, since most of the people crafting the law are TTT anyway.
I've got news for ya junior. Besides the federal bench, most judges went to TTTs. So if they are teaching the law differently at the TTTs, I guess it shouldn't hurt us sad-TTT-grads all that much, since most of the people crafting the law are TTT anyway.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- let/them/eat/cake
- Posts: 595
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 7:20 pm
Re: URM with 4.19 1L GPA - T4 transfer question (NY)
ahh FML. now i have to respond to this because i didn't reread my post. serves me right. i still stand by it, btw-- 'likelyhood' is laughable. just because i used the wrong 'your/you're' while dashing off a post doesn't mean that it's not laughable that that is how you thought likelihood was spelled, after 20 some odd years on earth.TheLuckyOne wrote:let/them/eat/cake wrote:the use of "likelyhood" isn't a spell check issue. it's not like you misspelled verdict as vedrict. it's that your a jackass who can't spell trying to call other people morons.TheLuckyOne wrote:Ohh, I'm sorry for not using the spell check.let/them/eat/cake wrote:
Your posts ITT have been, almost without fail, laughable. Also, you used the word "likelyhood." That is all.
And my post are laughable because I don't doubt that TTT is TTT for a reason
What???
Dude, get over it and, yes, the other poster is right, learn to spell the most obvious words first, and then maybe your criticism of the others can be taken seriously.
Honestly, I can't get this tendency of picking up on the slightest misspellings on this board especially when trying to critisize something the poster SAID. LOL, people, get over your own insecurities, and, no, you're not cool by doing it.
BTW, aren't you the one who was constantly mas....ting at your 180s, making tons of threads of how to maintain that score, and then scored "not so good" on the real thing. If yes, I think I don't need to go any further ... everything else is obvious....
i didn't respond to the substance of your position because RM was doing so. if you've taken a look at my posts, which it seems you have, you know that they are of the sardonic/ironic joking variety. I don't do this whole 'extended pissing contest' thing on TLS.
That being said, I got A 180 on a PT, multiple ones, and was excited about it. that's part of the benefit of the this website, that you have a community of people with which to share the ups and downs of the test-prep and test-taking process. That aside, I don't think i've ever given any advice that was wrong/bad advice about how to go about taking this test (and i didn't create any threads to do it, btw). A 172 isn't 'not so good', it's pretty damn good, tho not great.
People like you are the reason most law students (and prospective law students at that--I don't know which one you are at the moment) should be made to wear bells.
- TheLuckyOne
- Posts: 318
- Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 1:00 pm
Re: URM with 4.19 1L GPA - T4 transfer question (NY)
English is my third language, asshole.. On the other hand,even though I spelled it that way (probably because I was thinking about "likely" and then reconstructed the sentence or somehting like that), you are a tool if you're picking on me for spelling it incorrectly. As for the spell check, if I spellchecked it, you wouldn't even know it was wrong on the first place. I'm just probably not that incesure about myself to be afraid of what others might think of my spelling errors. LOLlet/them/eat/cake wrote:
ahh FML. now i have to respond to this because i didn't reread my post. serves me right. i still stand by it, btw-- 'likelyhood' is laughable. just because i used the wrong 'your/you're' while dashing off a post doesn't mean that it's not laughable that that is how you thought likelihood was spelled, after 20 some odd years on earth.
No, I haven't. Do you really think I've got nothing better to do? I merely happen to have quite a good memory to remember you bitching around about your score, though, to tell the truth I though it was somewhere in the 160s. Anyway, it doesn't matter since the score doesn't reflect a person's intelligence, obviously...let/them/eat/cake wrote: i didn't respond to the substance of your position because RM was doing so. if you've taken a look at my posts, which it seems you have, you know that they are of the sardonic/ironic joking variety. I don't do this whole 'extended pissing contest' thing on TLS.