Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: 2006 US NEWS RANKING: To the idiot that posted them.  (Read 88719 times)

SCgrad

  • Guest
Re: 2006 US NEWS RANKING: To the idiot that posted them.
« Reply #30 on: April 21, 2006, 12:00:49 PM »
BUMPEDBYHARVEYBIRDMAN-ATTORNEYATLAWPWN3D

SouthSide

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1563
  • Full speed ahead.
    • View Profile
Re: 2006 US NEWS RANKING: To the idiot that posted them.
« Reply #31 on: April 21, 2006, 12:11:13 PM »
Haha. Forgot about this. A classic.


The thing that really makes it extra sweet is the irony of it all.  He is complaining about misinformation and irresponsible posting.  Its just so perfectly contradictory.

So true.
Columbia 2L.

SCgrad

  • Guest
Re: 2006 US NEWS RANKING: To the idiot that posted them.
« Reply #32 on: April 21, 2006, 12:42:12 PM »
the op still hasn't posted again.  maybe he hung himself?

krumanadi

  • Guest
Re: 2006 US NEWS RANKING: To the idiot that posted them.
« Reply #33 on: April 21, 2006, 12:51:14 PM »
the op still hasn't posted again.  maybe he hung himself?

OP logged back in to change his posting name for some reason.  I guess he was embarrassed. At least he saw the mistake he had made...;)

SCgrad

  • Guest
Re: 2006 US NEWS RANKING: To the idiot that posted them.
« Reply #34 on: April 21, 2006, 12:53:45 PM »
yeah, i thought that too.  maybe he uses the same name on different sites and didn't want it to be tainted.

redemption

  • Guest
Re: 2006 US NEWS RANKING: To the idiot that posted them.
« Reply #35 on: April 21, 2006, 01:00:43 PM »
BUMPEDBYHARVEYBIRDMAN-ATTORNEYATLAWPWN3D

 :D :D :D

I love it.

Sooner

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 481
    • View Profile
Re: 2006 US NEWS RANKING: To the idiot that posted them.
« Reply #36 on: April 21, 2006, 01:21:29 PM »
Man, I just don't see the big deal about this...what makes it "all time" and "classic"? It was a dumb mistake...so what? We all make them. Haven't we all seen others make this same basic mistake? You guys may be too absorbed in all of this. Given access to this thread 20 years from now, you all may laugh at your own responses in this thread...seeing how involved you were with this silly rankings game. The OP obviously doesn't spend as much time perusing the rankings and discussing them as others do. Dumb post, but to elevate it to classic and all-time great is to elevate the importance of knowledge of the rankings to a level I don't think is appropriate.

IMO

BTW, I don't think his search results pulled up an old thread here. I believe the only dated thing he pulled up was US NEWS' website, which did not have the updated rankings posted at the time the leaked rankings were posted. So, in order to not make his basic mistake (assuming that is his error on dates and not his posting here), he had to have knowledge of the release date of the rankings as well as knowledge that any rankings released in the current year are expressed for the following year.  
The University of Chicago
The Law School

Dunson II

  • Guest
Re: 2006 US NEWS RANKING: To the idiot that posted them.
« Reply #37 on: April 21, 2006, 01:22:22 PM »
B4FF

krumanadi

  • Guest
Re: 2006 US NEWS RANKING: To the idiot that posted them.
« Reply #38 on: April 21, 2006, 01:40:05 PM »
Man, I just don't see the big deal about this...what makes it "all time" and "classic"? It was a dumb mistake...so what? We all make them. Haven't we all seen others make this same basic mistake? You guys may be too absorbed in all of this. Given access to this thread 20 years from now, you all may laugh at your own responses in this thread...seeing how involved you were with this silly rankings game. The OP obviously doesn't spend as much time perusing the rankings and discussing them as others do. Dumb post, but to elevate it to classic and all-time great is to elevate the importance of knowledge of the rankings to a level I don't think is appropriate.

IMO

BTW, I don't think his search results pulled up an old thread here. I believe the only dated thing he pulled up was US NEWS' website, which did not have the updated rankings posted at the time the leaked rankings were posted. So, in order to not make his basic mistake (assuming that is his error on dates and not his posting here), he had to have knowledge of the release date of the rankings as well as knowledge that any rankings released in the current year are expressed for the following year.  

He did search for and find an old thread, because that is what brought him to this website in the first place.  Also, the subject of the thread is "Rankings and the idiot who posted them."

He even quotes the title of the thread he was referring to "This is the real deal, confirmed by multiple sources, including yours truly"...

Also, what makes this thread classic, is not the reference to the rankings themselves, but is best said by what Bender wrote before:

"Quote from: BENDER aka PANTHRO on April 05, 2006, 01:08:13 PM

The thing that really makes it extra sweet is the irony of it all.  He is complaining about misinformation and irresponsible posting.  Its just so perfectly contradictory."

That and it was his first (and last) post ever.

SCgrad

  • Guest
Re: 2006 US NEWS RANKING: To the idiot that posted them.
« Reply #39 on: April 21, 2006, 01:54:23 PM »
Man, I just don't see the big deal about this...what makes it "all time" and "classic"? It was a dumb mistake...so what? We all make them. Haven't we all seen others make this same basic mistake? You guys may be too absorbed in all of this. Given access to this thread 20 years from now, you all may laugh at your own responses in this thread...seeing how involved you were with this silly rankings game. The OP obviously doesn't spend as much time perusing the rankings and discussing them as others do. Dumb post, but to elevate it to classic and all-time great is to elevate the importance of knowledge of the rankings to a level I don't think is appropriate.

IMO

BTW, I don't think his search results pulled up an old thread here. I believe the only dated thing he pulled up was US NEWS' website, which did not have the updated rankings posted at the time the leaked rankings were posted. So, in order to not make his basic mistake (assuming that is his error on dates and not his posting here), he had to have knowledge of the release date of the rankings as well as knowledge that any rankings released in the current year are expressed for the following year.  

whatever n00b, grab a few more posts, you'll getit.