<p>I really want to know just how bad that guy’s original posts were to get the attention of the CB. I mean, people in that calc bc 2004 thread were talking about the exam pretty specifically in regards to the exam questions, and none of them seem to have gotten in trouble. Weird that that was the only year it seems anything happened</p>
<p>LOL you’d have to be pretty stupid to get caught. even if the principal called you in and said WE KNOW IT’S YOU!! you can always just deny it. they can’t prove it’s you, it could be anyone with similar characteristics or someone pretending to be you. IP addresses prove nothing. breaking CC rules is one thing, so respect that or get booted off the boards. but don’t freak out that the office of student integrity (HAHAHAHA) will come to your house and take you away.</p>
<p>also: i call fat fat FAT bull**** on Tri_N’s story being true in the first place</p>
<p>Wasn’t this stickied at some point?</p>
<p>Mmmmmmm…necro…<em>drools</em></p>
<p>Sorry, I don’t neccessarily have something against the 48-hour rule, but I despise propaganda in any shape or form, and what we have here is blatant propaganda.
Wow…so it’s perfectly obvious to me that Tri<em>N, the famous poster, was actually moderator Trinity. First of all: Tri</em>N language style begins rather sophisticated, and then, as you follow his/her posts, turns to about the quality of a second-grader (with an idiotic claim that the CB was threatening to shut down the school), then becomes sophisticated again, obviously consistent with a devious moderator constantly changing his or her idea of how the fake identity should write. Secondly: moderator trinity continously “defends” Tri<em>N from smart suspicious posters with a strangely personal air, and talks a little too much about knowing exactly what Tri</em>N’s motivations, mistakes, and mindeset were. The “two” have the exact same agenda. “Warning” people. The entire thing was staged, moderator-warnings and all.</p>
<p>Although no one has posted on this forum for months, I thought it amusing to read the original post from way back in 2004, which does look suspiciously like a plant designed to put the fear of the gods in the kids who take AP tests. The difference between then and now, however, is the increased sophistication of tracking systems on the Internet for ANYTHING you post and the increased security systems that The College Board, ACT, and universities employ to deal with cheaters. If you are foolish enough to cheat, whether it be the good old fashioned way of copying your friend’s homework (see forum currently getting a lot of interest about the cheater’s father suing the Redwood City Schools in CA), using a fake person to take the SAT for you, or disclosing a standardized test’s questions online, you do so at your great peril. This reality should serve as a morality tale to prospective cheaters, liars, charlatans, and snake oil salesmen.</p>
<p>bumping this post.</p>
<p>Yes, good post. I am shocked to see people openly discussing answers on tests on the internet, especially a very popular college website. Saw a thread yesterday on the SAT, the WHOLE math section from May’s SAT was on there with answers and everything.</p>
<p>My father works for ETS and I will be notifying him of this conversation. You should have listened to the rules, kids.</p>
<p>You have 8 posts thisguy55. How can we, the community be certain that you and what you wrote are not a fabrication? What will you achieve by reporting something in the not too recent past?</p>
<p>Check out this recent article:</p>
<p>[Improper</a> cellphone video could invalidate AP exam at Quince Orchard high - The Washington Post](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/improper-cellphone-video-could-invalidate-ap-exam-at-quince-orchard-high/2013/05/10/3550b930-b9b1-11e2-92f3-f291801936b8_story.html]Improper”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/improper-cellphone-video-could-invalidate-ap-exam-at-quince-orchard-high/2013/05/10/3550b930-b9b1-11e2-92f3-f291801936b8_story.html)</p>