June 2016 - Waiter's (+170 or bust) GRAY DAY HAS AWOKEN FROM ITS SLUMBER Forum

Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.
Post Reply

WHATS THE FUCKING CURVE

-11
21
21%
wats a curve
8
8%
-10
5
5%
-11
16
16%
-15
4
4%
-7
6
6%
JOSÉ CURVE-O
33
33%
-12
8
8%
 
Total votes: 101

User avatar
Smallville

Gold
Posts: 4825
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 11:57 am

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by Smallville » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:41 pm

pretzeltime wrote: well obviously in an ideal world a lot of people want sex in a marriage

but the point of an unsavory MFK is that you probs don't want to fuck any of them

so in this scenario a sexless marriage means one less person you have to fuck out of the 3
well then the MFK should include 3 unfuckable peeps
R. Jeeves wrote:
Smallville wrote:
R. Jeeves wrote:
amta wrote:waiters, please advise. FMK: Milo, Megyn, Ann
wait does M=sexless M or no? Im hearing conflicting reports.
that is dumb, married people have sex, how often dwindles over time but the sex still happens
dude if its sexful M then this not even a question. there's no way it isnt m - megyn, f - ann, and k - milo (at least for straight dudes and lesbians) pointless game if M=more sex
if this is the case its the same thing, who would want to fuck ann over megyn...

User avatar
R. Jeeves

Gold
Posts: 1980
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 7:54 pm

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by R. Jeeves » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:42 pm

pretzeltime wrote:why is MFK so unchill ITT
people are RUINING THE GAME

User avatar
pretzeltime

Gold
Posts: 1993
Joined: Sat May 07, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by pretzeltime » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:43 pm

R. Jeeves wrote:
pretzeltime wrote:why is MFK so unchill ITT
people are RUINING THE GAME
BUT SERIOUSLY MFK HAS NEVER GIVEN ME A HEADACHE BEFORE

guys don't overthink it, just rolllllll with it

User avatar
Smallville

Gold
Posts: 4825
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 11:57 am

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by Smallville » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:43 pm

R. Jeeves wrote: holy tits. this isnt about whether we WANT sexy marriages or not. its about putting constraints on these choices so that you actually have to think about them.
but it just changes the answer here, doesnt add any need to think... see last post

User avatar
forum_user

Silver
Posts: 844
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2015 9:40 am

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by forum_user » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:43 pm

pretzeltime wrote:why is MFK so unchill ITT
"Literally murdering milo? Yeah no biggie. Marrying Megyn Kelly without getting to fuck her?? MADNESS!"

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


User avatar
R. Jeeves

Gold
Posts: 1980
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 7:54 pm

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by R. Jeeves » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:43 pm

Smallville wrote:
pretzeltime wrote: well obviously in an ideal world a lot of people want sex in a marriage

but the point of an unsavory MFK is that you probs don't want to fuck any of them

so in this scenario a sexless marriage means one less person you have to fuck out of the 3
well then the MFK should include 3 unfuckable peeps
R. Jeeves wrote:
Smallville wrote:
R. Jeeves wrote:
amta wrote:waiters, please advise. FMK: Milo, Megyn, Ann
wait does M=sexless M or no? Im hearing conflicting reports.
that is dumb, married people have sex, how often dwindles over time but the sex still happens
dude if its sexful M then this not even a question. there's no way it isnt m - megyn, f - ann, and k - milo (at least for straight dudes and lesbians) pointless game if M=more sex
if this is the case its the same thing, who would want to fuck ann over megyn...
i thought the idea was that ann would be so unbearable to live with that it may (for some people) not even be worth getting to bone megyn kelly. Im assuming the boning is a one time deal.
Last edited by R. Jeeves on Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

wilt

Silver
Posts: 986
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 9:40 pm

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by wilt » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:44 pm

pretzeltime wrote:
well obviously in an ideal world a lot of people want sex in a marriage
but the point of an unsavory MFK is that you probs don't want to fuck any of them
so in this scenario a sexless marriage means one less person you have to fuck out of the 3
R. Jeeves wrote: holy tits. this isnt about whether we WANT sexy marriages or not. its about putting constraints on these choices so that you actually have to think about them.
sounds too complicated for me

User avatar
Smallville

Gold
Posts: 4825
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 11:57 am

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by Smallville » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:45 pm

R. Jeeves wrote:
Smallville wrote:
pretzeltime wrote: well obviously in an ideal world a lot of people want sex in a marriage

but the point of an unsavory MFK is that you probs don't want to fuck any of them

so in this scenario a sexless marriage means one less person you have to fuck out of the 3
well then the MFK should include 3 unfuckable peeps
R. Jeeves wrote:
Smallville wrote:
R. Jeeves wrote:
amta wrote:waiters, please advise. FMK: Milo, Megyn, Ann
wait does M=sexless M or no? Im hearing conflicting reports.
that is dumb, married people have sex, how often dwindles over time but the sex still happens
dude if its sexful M then this not even a question. there's no way it isnt m - megyn, f - ann, and k - milo (at least for straight dudes and lesbians) pointless game if M=more sex
if this is the case its the same thing, who would want to fuck ann over megyn...
i thought the idea was that ann would be so unbearable to live with that it wouldnt even be worth getting to bone megyn kelly. Im assuming the boning is a one time deal.
yeah maybe, but I only know who megyn kelly is which is why I said my response was based off looks only, cant say id live with one over any other if I only know 1

User avatar
pretzeltime

Gold
Posts: 1993
Joined: Sat May 07, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by pretzeltime » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:48 pm

I kinda wish there were more lady waiters ITT

No offense to the fellas, y'all are great too

Come out and play lady lurkers!!

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


User avatar
R. Jeeves

Gold
Posts: 1980
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 7:54 pm

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by R. Jeeves » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:49 pm

.
Last edited by R. Jeeves on Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
pretzeltime

Gold
Posts: 1993
Joined: Sat May 07, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by pretzeltime » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:50 pm

R. Jeeves wrote:btw what are everyone's thoughts about ann coulter on the binary scale. A bro called me low-t for saying 0.
I don't know what most of this means

Hennessy

Gold
Posts: 2516
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 2:54 pm

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by Hennessy » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:51 pm

too many straight people ITT
milo is clearly F

User avatar
Smallville

Gold
Posts: 4825
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 11:57 am

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by Smallville » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:51 pm

pretzeltime wrote:I kinda wish there were more lady waiters ITT

No offense to the fellas, y'all are great too

Come out and play lady lurkers!!
there are lady's here, dont be thrown off by tar's many are deceiving... this is not in reference to me

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


User avatar
pretzeltime

Gold
Posts: 1993
Joined: Sat May 07, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by pretzeltime » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:52 pm

HennessyVSOP wrote:too many straight people ITT
milo is clearly F
that too
Last edited by pretzeltime on Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Hennessy

Gold
Posts: 2516
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 2:54 pm

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by Hennessy » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:52 pm

R. Jeeves wrote:btw what are everyone's thoughts about ann coulter on the binary scale. A bro called me low-t for saying 0.
i mean, i try not to assign women to grades of attractiveness, even if i do hate them

User avatar
pretzeltime

Gold
Posts: 1993
Joined: Sat May 07, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by pretzeltime » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:53 pm

Smallville wrote:
pretzeltime wrote:I kinda wish there were more lady waiters ITT

No offense to the fellas, y'all are great too

Come out and play lady lurkers!!
there are lady's here, dont be thrown off by tar's many are deceiving... this is not in reference to me
Yeah I know, I've made that mistake before :P

There may be a few in here but not many.

Idk why I thought about it. I guess because we've been talking about conservative women's tits for a while

User avatar
R. Jeeves

Gold
Posts: 1980
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 7:54 pm

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by R. Jeeves » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:55 pm

HennessyVSOP wrote:
R. Jeeves wrote:btw what are everyone's thoughts about ann coulter on the binary scale. A bro called me low-t for saying 0.
i mean, i try not to assign women to grades of attractiveness, even if i do hate them
ok i thought it was appropriate because of our mfk but fine ill leave it

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

Register now!

I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...


Hennessy

Gold
Posts: 2516
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 2:54 pm

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by Hennessy » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:57 pm

R. Jeeves wrote:
HennessyVSOP wrote:
R. Jeeves wrote:btw what are everyone's thoughts about ann coulter on the binary scale. A bro called me low-t for saying 0.
i mean, i try not to assign women to grades of attractiveness, even if i do hate them
ok i thought it was appropriate because of our mfk but fine ill leave it
put it this way: i definitely wouldn't put her in the F or M category under any circumstances

User avatar
Smallville

Gold
Posts: 4825
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 11:57 am

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by Smallville » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:59 pm

pretzeltime wrote:
Smallville wrote:
pretzeltime wrote:I kinda wish there were more lady waiters ITT

No offense to the fellas, y'all are great too

Come out and play lady lurkers!!
there are lady's here, dont be thrown off by tar's many are deceiving... this is not in reference to me
Yeah I know, I've made that mistake before :P

There may be a few in here but not many.

Idk why I thought about it. I guess because we've been talking about conservative women's tits for a while
lol wasn't that a coversation between just u and 1 other (too lazy to look)
oh well, also pretty sure there are more guys on TLS in general so only natural for there to be less ladies

User avatar
pretzeltime

Gold
Posts: 1993
Joined: Sat May 07, 2016 6:57 pm

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by pretzeltime » Wed Jun 08, 2016 4:01 pm

Smallville wrote:
pretzeltime wrote:
Smallville wrote:
pretzeltime wrote:I kinda wish there were more lady waiters ITT

No offense to the fellas, y'all are great too

Come out and play lady lurkers!!
there are lady's here, dont be thrown off by tar's many are deceiving... this is not in reference to me
Yeah I know, I've made that mistake before :P

There may be a few in here but not many.

Idk why I thought about it. I guess because we've been talking about conservative women's tits for a while
lol wasn't that a coversation between just u and 1 other (too lazy to look)
oh well, also pretty sure there are more guys on TLS in general so only natural for there to be less ladies
okay, *women's tits and which women we would marry fuck or kill

User avatar
R. Jeeves

Gold
Posts: 1980
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 7:54 pm

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by R. Jeeves » Wed Jun 08, 2016 4:01 pm

wait is pretzel is the only confirmed lady waiter itt?
Last edited by R. Jeeves on Wed Jun 08, 2016 4:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.

Register now, it's still FREE!


wilt

Silver
Posts: 986
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 9:40 pm

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by wilt » Wed Jun 08, 2016 4:02 pm

R. Jeeves wrote:
Smallville wrote:
pretzeltime wrote:
Smallville wrote:
pretzeltime wrote:I kinda wish there were more lady waiters ITT

No offense to the fellas, y'all are great too

Come out and play lady lurkers!!
there are lady's here, dont be thrown off by tar's many are deceiving... this is not in reference to me
Yeah I know, I've made that mistake before :P

There may be a few in here but not many.

Idk why I thought about it. I guess because we've been talking about conservative women's tits for a while
lol wasn't that a coversation between just u and 1 other (too lazy to look)
oh well, also pretty sure there are more guys on TLS in general so only natural for there to be less ladies
yeah but so far pretzel is the ONLY confirmed lady waiter
ugh we need more female pw in here

User avatar
Smallville

Gold
Posts: 4825
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 11:57 am

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by Smallville » Wed Jun 08, 2016 4:03 pm

wilt wrote: ugh we need more female pw in here
pretzel PW'd, ur turn

wilt

Silver
Posts: 986
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 9:40 pm

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by wilt » Wed Jun 08, 2016 4:04 pm

Smallville wrote:
wilt wrote: ugh we need more female pw in here
pretzel PW'd, ur turn
i have a self tar tyvm

User avatar
Smallville

Gold
Posts: 4825
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 11:57 am

Re: June 2016 - Waiter's Thread (+170 or bust)

Post by Smallville » Wed Jun 08, 2016 4:04 pm

R. Jeeves wrote:wait is pretzel is the only confirmed lady waiter itt?
I wanna say no, I feel like I have seen some others thnx to context clues but no idea

Seriously? What are you waiting for?

Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!


Post Reply

Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”