Page 1 of 2
Duke v GULC
Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2011 8:56 pm
by StickyIcky
Some concerns:
1) Any elements of stoner culture (hence my username)
2) Is Durham an actual place to live?
3) Attractiveness/DTFness of females
If you are morally repulsed by my concerns, that's fine, just ignore this thread. If you'd like to help, I'd really appreciate it.
Thanks.
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2011 8:58 pm
by socraticmethodman
lmao, I can't wait to see where this goes.
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:00 pm
by FuManChusco
In regards to #2, no you cannot live there. They actually section off Durham and it has 0 residents. you have to live in a neighboring town and commute. it's some odd law from the 1800's. I've never really understood it.
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:02 pm
by Moral_Midgetry
StickyIcky wrote:Some concerns:
1) Any elements of stoner culture (hence my username)
2) Is Durham an actual place to live?
3) Attractiveness/DTFness of females
If you are morally repulsed by my concerns, that's fine, just ignore this thread. If you'd like to help, I'd really appreciate it.
Thanks.
1) Minimal to non-existant at both.
2/3) No, live in Chapel Hill.
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:04 pm
by fatduck
1) Any elements of stoner culture (hence my username)
i'd give duke a slight edge in quality of weed, but if you're into any harder drugs i think D.C. wins hands-down for obvious reasons.
2) Is Durham an actual place to live?
it's good for chillin' like a villain, maxin' relaxin'. i think you'll be fine.
3) Attractiveness/DTFness of females
this is a tough one. by my calculations, about 80% of white people in D.C. are women. with more to choose from, you're bound to find more attractive targets. then again, at duke you don't have to worry if they're DTF or not. that was a rape joke, in case you missed it (since you're probably stoned).
If you are morally repulsed by my concerns, that's fine, just ignore this thread. If you'd like to help, I'd really appreciate it.
no worries bro, you seem like a real straight shooter, and i appreciate that.
Thanks.
pleasure was all mine.
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:08 pm
by thecilent
Very thorough, fatduck.
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:29 pm
by StickyIcky
fatduck wrote:
1) Any elements of stoner culture (hence my username)
i'd give duke a slight edge in quality of weed, but if you're into any harder drugs i think D.C. wins hands-down for obvious reasons.
2) Is Durham an actual place to live?
it's good for chillin' like a villain, maxin' relaxin'. i think you'll be fine.
3) Attractiveness/DTFness of females
this is a tough one. by my calculations, about 80% of white people in D.C. are women. with more to choose from, you're bound to find more attractive targets. then again, at duke you don't have to worry if they're DTF or not. that was a rape joke, in case you missed it (since you're probably stoned).
If you are morally repulsed by my concerns, that's fine, just ignore this thread. If you'd like to help, I'd really appreciate it.
no worries bro, you seem like a real straight shooter, and i appreciate that.
Thanks.
pleasure was all mine.
Immensely helpful, thanks so much. Seriously appreciated.
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:10 pm
by StickyIcky
bumpity?
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:17 pm
by Nogameisfair
There are plenty of DTF in DC, the transient nature of the city makes casual sexual interaction fairly normal. The problem is in the attractiveness area. I don't know much about Durham, but I think almost any place would have a higher percentage or attractive women. I'll be heading to NYC asap.
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:23 pm
by emmbar53
StickyIcky wrote:Some concerns:
1) Any elements of stoner culture (hence my username)
2) Is Durham an actual place to live?
3) Attractiveness/DTFness of females
If you are morally repulsed by my concerns, that's fine, just ignore this thread. If you'd like to help, I'd really appreciate it.
Thanks.
This thread is relevant to my interests. I have related questions to add to your list:
4) Where is the street price of crack cheaper? Durham or Washington D.C.? (Quality is not an issue, as I will be focusing more on quantity.)
5) Which city is most friendly to necrophiliacs?
6) Is time travel legal in North Carolina?
Once I get answers to these questions, I will be able to make an informed decision on which law school to attend.
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:25 pm
by edgarfigaro
Live in Carrboro with the dirty hippies instead of Durham and you'll be fine. Coeds at UNC are both fairly attractive and super desperate.
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:29 pm
by fatduck
emmbar53 wrote:StickyIcky wrote:Some concerns:
1) Any elements of stoner culture (hence my username)
2) Is Durham an actual place to live?
3) Attractiveness/DTFness of females
If you are morally repulsed by my concerns, that's fine, just ignore this thread. If you'd like to help, I'd really appreciate it.
Thanks.
This thread is relevant to my interests. I have related questions to add to your list:
4) Where is the street price of crack cheaper? Durham or Washington D.C.? (Quality is not an issue, as I will be focusing more on quantity.)
5) Which city is most friendly to necrophiliacs?
6) Is time travel legal in North Carolina?
Once I get answers to these questions, I will be able to make an informed decision on which law school to attend.
4.) D.C. by a mile
5.) probably Durham. while D.C. has more graves per capita, it also has some of the most prestigious (Arlington), and they are heavily guarded
6.) yes, but the law was only passed a couple years ago, so if you're going further back than that you'll be fine
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:37 pm
by Alex-Trof
emmbar53 wrote:StickyIcky wrote:Some concerns:
1) Any elements of stoner culture (hence my username)
2) Is Durham an actual place to live?
3) Attractiveness/DTFness of females
If you are morally repulsed by my concerns, that's fine, just ignore this thread. If you'd like to help, I'd really appreciate it.
Thanks.
This thread is relevant to my interests. I have related questions to add to your list:
4) Where is the street price of crack cheaper? Durham or Washington D.C.? (Quality is not an issue, as I will be focusing more on quantity.)
5) Which city is most friendly to necrophiliacs?
6) Is time travel legal in North Carolina?
Once I get answers to these questions, I will be able to make an informed decision on which law school to attend.
To some people quality of life (which may include weed, women, and what not) is relevant when picking a place to spend 3 years. There is no need to pass judgments.
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:45 pm
by barry
1) dont know
2) dont know but Chapel Hill is supposed to be baller
3) all my UNC friends say girls at UNC are desperate due to girl guy ratio 2:1 (flaunting a duke law pedigree could prolly get mad ass in durham/chapel hill as well) or something and DC women have reputation for being ugly
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:21 pm
by StickyIcky
Alex-Trof wrote:To some people quality of life (which may include weed, women, and what not) is relevant when picking a place to spend 3 years. There is no need to pass judgments.
+1
Thanks all for the advice everyone.
To all the
haters, maybe it will relax you to know I plan on going into public interest and want to work hard at the school I choose and get good grades.
However, I won't be ashamed that some of my passionate interests include weed and sex. I'm honestly freaked out at some of the things "normal" people enjoy (hiking and bar hopping come to mind), but I'd never pass judgment. To each her own.
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:55 pm
by protein
Duke girls' looks are notorious within North Carolina
Take that how you will
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:58 pm
by socraticmethodman
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 10:04 pm
by Moral_Midgetry
protein wrote:Duke girls' looks are notorious within North Carolina
Take that how you will
Duke's females are a collection of the ugliest smart chicks from Jersey.
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 10:16 pm
by Magnolia
1. The only things to do in NC are drink and get high.
2. Yes, but I'd recommend joining a gang if you want to outlive your lease.
3. The response about the 2:1 ratio at UNC and chicks being desperate is absolutely credited. If you're looking to stay closer to home, I'd recommend hitting up Duke UG frat parties. Rohypnol is a standard drink ingredient for them.
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 10:21 pm
by Moral_Midgetry
Magnolia wrote:3. The response about the 2:1 ratio at UNC and chicks being desperate is absolutely credited.
NYT can verify:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/07/fashion/07campus.html
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 10:31 pm
by Magnolia
My conservative friends who went there got slutty. My slutty friends who went there got even sluttier. UNC spreads legs.
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 12:21 am
by emmbar53
Alex-Trof wrote:emmbar53 wrote:StickyIcky wrote:Some concerns:
1) Any elements of stoner culture (hence my username)
2) Is Durham an actual place to live?
3) Attractiveness/DTFness of females
If you are morally repulsed by my concerns, that's fine, just ignore this thread. If you'd like to help, I'd really appreciate it.
Thanks.
This thread is relevant to my interests. I have related questions to add to your list:
4) Where is the street price of crack cheaper? Durham or Washington D.C.? (Quality is not an issue, as I will be focusing more on quantity.)
5) Which city is most friendly to necrophiliacs?
6) Is time travel legal in North Carolina?
Once I get answers to these questions, I will be able to make an informed decision on which law school to attend.
To some people quality of life (which may include weed, women, and what not) is relevant when picking a place to spend 3 years. There is no need to pass judgments.
Yea, it's great for a future lawyer to routinely buy weed. Breaking the law is a surefire way to pass the bar.
Please don't give legitimacy to this guy's concerns. Expected lifestyle is one thing. Hoping to illegally buy drugs is another.
And there are fuckable people wherever you go, so that issue is irrelevant.
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 12:28 am
by beachbum
StickyIcky, I am being absolutely sincere when I say that I hope you choose Duke.
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 12:52 am
by StickyIcky
emmbar53 wrote:
Yea, it's great for a future lawyer to routinely buy weed. Breaking the law is a surefire way to pass the bar.
Please don't give legitimacy to this guy's concerns. Expected lifestyle is one thing. Hoping to illegally buy drugs is another.
your theory of legal positivism is
so persuasive. i like how you just say that illegal = bad/don't do it, and leave it at that.
pretty brilliant analysis if you ask me. thanks mr. mackey.
Re: Duke v GULC
Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:00 am
by emmbar53
StickyIcky wrote:emmbar53 wrote:
Yea, it's great for a future lawyer to routinely buy weed. Breaking the law is a surefire way to pass the bar.
Please don't give legitimacy to this guy's concerns. Expected lifestyle is one thing. Hoping to illegally buy drugs is another.
your theory of legal positivism is
so persuasive. i like how you just say that illegal = bad/don't do it, and leave it at that.
pretty brilliant analysis if you ask me. thanks mr. mackey.
Ha, I didn't say that illegal = bad. I believe weed should be legalized.
What I said was
performing illegal action=bad way to start legal career.
Not making any sort of moral condemnation. Just saying that, practically speaking, it's a bad decision.