Organization look solid?


Yeah, that's the point. I can understand it the way it is and apply it. Just wondering if anyone else thought it was intuitive and at least reasonably easy to use/see.Grizz wrote:If you can understand it and apply the material then yes it's solid. It's not an end in itself.
How about 5 pesos?kahechsof wrote:Mine was much better. I'll sell it to you for $500
--ImageRemoved--Oglethorpe wrote:I don't see any FORKS!
dealjoncrooshal wrote:How about 5 pesos?kahechsof wrote:Mine was much better. I'll sell it to you for $500
My Nigerian royal representative will be sending you the money shortly!kahechsof wrote:dealjoncrooshal wrote:How about 5 pesos?kahechsof wrote:Mine was much better. I'll sell it to you for $500
Grizz wrote:If you can understand it and apply the material then yes it's solid. It's not an end in itself.
That's the way my outline is set up. This is just a rule block to use for a midterm. A shortened form of the outline. For the record, I do need to cite case names.leobowski wrote:You can ask your prof about whether you need to cite casenames/ statutes. Sometimes they don't care at all and you can leave that stuff off of there. And to me at least, all of the paragraphs are a bit odd. I would personally break it down more, for example:
Point 1
-subpoint
-subpoint
-subpoint
Point 2
general rule
---explanation of general rule
---limit of rule
exception to rule
policy behind rule
Point 3
-test
---factors
---example
---process of test
------step 1
------step 2
---definition of weird term
---misc.
Stuff like that. Than again, grizz has a point. If your format works, do it.
MrPapagiorgio wrote:Grizz wrote:If you can understand it and apply the material then yes it's solid. It's not an end in itself.
joncrooshal wrote: Yeah, that's the point. I can understand it the way it is and apply it. Just wondering if anyone else thought it was intuitive and at least reasonably easy to use/see.