3.48/180

Not sure where your numbers will get you? Dying to know where you stand? Come have your palms read by your fellow posters!
User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18406
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby bk1 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:48 pm

NDPhil wrote:
What gave you the impression that I don't understand it?


Oh, I don't know...misspelling the phrase initially set me off. Then you're lack of coherent argument as to what the problem with the term is. Maybe you should spend less time telling people who have better numbers than you which schools they won't get into and more time reading law books. Good luck!


QFirony

User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby paratactical » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:48 pm

NDPhil wrote:
Man, you are just hell bent on being a jerk, aren't you?


Aw, you can make fun of people with graphic art but your feelings get hurt when someone points out that you're not very clever? I know, put me on one your lists that you make for people who hurt your feelings.


Yeah, I'm totally butthurt that you don't like me.

NDPhil wrote:
It wasn't in the econ or the philosophy class I took.


That could explain why you can't put together a coherent argument--you were doing graphic design during those classes!


Yes, memes clearly require graphic design practice.

User avatar
NDPhil
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 6:30 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby NDPhil » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:50 pm

Yes, memes clearly require graphic design practice.


Great rebuttal. But...where's the graphic???

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby romothesavior » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:51 pm

paratactical wrote:Yes, memes clearly require graphic design practice.


--ImageRemoved--
Last edited by romothesavior on Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby paratactical » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:52 pm

romothesavior wrote:
paratactical wrote:Yes, memes clearly require graphic design practice.


--ImageRemoved--


:lol:
Last edited by paratactical on Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
NDPhil
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 6:30 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby NDPhil » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:52 pm

QFirony


This only works when there's irony, my friend. Have you done your Google search yet?

User avatar
NDPhil
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 6:30 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby NDPhil » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:54 pm

paratactical wrote:
romothesavior wrote:
paratactical wrote:Yes, memes clearly require graphic design practice.


--ImageRemoved--


:lol:


Brilliant! You've clearly given the more persuasive argument!

User avatar
beachbum
Posts: 2766
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 9:35 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby beachbum » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:54 pm

NDPhil wrote:
It's not like getting a high GPA or LSAT requires enjoying outside philosophical reading all that much.


Then you confirm the suspicion that high GPA's and LSAT's really don't say much about intelligence.


You're right, knowledge of a single Latin term completely overshadows the quantitative value of a 170+ LSAT and a 3.5+ GPA. Yup, seems legit to me.

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby d34d9823 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:55 pm

Dude, what the hell? We were having a pointless but amusing argument about douchiness, so you decided to ruin it by illustrating the concept?

User avatar
NDPhil
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 6:30 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby NDPhil » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:55 pm

You're right, knowledge of a single Latin term completely overshadows the quantitative value of a 170+ LSAT and a 3.5+ GPA. Yup, seems legit to me.


Yes! That clearly follows from what I said! You are a tribute to legal thinking.

User avatar
paratactical
Posts: 5961
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 1:06 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby paratactical » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:55 pm

d34dluk3 wrote:Dude, what the hell? We were having a pointless but amusing argument about douchiness, so you decided to ruin it by illustrating the concept?


Dude, we're clearly too dumb for him. He's getting a PhD.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18406
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby bk1 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:56 pm

NDPhil wrote:
QFirony


This only works when there's irony, my friend. Have you done your Google search yet?


Thanks for the suggestion!

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=your+vs+you're
Last edited by bk1 on Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18406
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby bk1 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:56 pm

d34dluk3 wrote:Dude, what the hell? We were having a pointless but amusing argument about douchiness, so you decided to ruin it by illustrating the concept?


He's helping the visual learners out there.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby romothesavior » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:56 pm

I think it is hilarious that anyone would use one's knowledge of Latin terminology as a proxy for ANYTHING, much less intelligence. Hell, most lawyers don't even use Latin all that often.

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby d34d9823 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:58 pm

romothesavior wrote:I think it is hilarious that anyone would use one's knowledge of Latin terminology as a proxy for ANYTHING, much less intelligence. Hell, most lawyers don't even use Latin all that often.

An appropriate place for this: Rome, ~250 BC.

User avatar
beachbum
Posts: 2766
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 9:35 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby beachbum » Fri Sep 17, 2010 4:59 pm

NDPhil wrote:
You're right, knowledge of a single Latin term completely overshadows the quantitative value of a 170+ LSAT and a 3.5+ GPA. Yup, seems legit to me.


Yes! That clearly follows from what I said! You are a tribute to legal thinking.


Have you read your argument? Yes, it does follow from what you said. :)

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby Grizz » Fri Sep 17, 2010 5:00 pm

NDPhil wrote:
You're right, knowledge of a single Latin term completely overshadows the quantitative value of a 170+ LSAT and a 3.5+ GPA. Yup, seems legit to me.


Yes! That clearly follows from what I said! You are a tribute to legal thinking.


--ImageRemoved--

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: 3.48/180

Postby d34d9823 » Fri Sep 17, 2010 5:02 pm

--ImageRemoved--




Return to “What are my chances?”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests