<p>
[quote]
errors are not reflective of any lacking ability or intellegent. ad coms, therefore, should not care and do not care
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So you are an adcom? Wait, you are not, so you do not know.</p>
<p>
[quote]
lawyers: because the meaning isnt obvious, not relevent
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You need to peruse a Law Review text, and then respond.</p>
<p>To be frank, I did not think the letter was particularly well drafted, but the contention that "sending that letter should be fatal" is arrestingly absurd. Not only was samusas final assessment fallacious, but it was mean and uncalled for. Clearly, matm1 is anxious about his decision, and I can assure you samusa that your commentary has done nothing to allay his anxiety. You advise him to learn
[quote]
"how to use the word "reservations."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think you should learn to ACT with more reservation.</p>
<p>Was samusa hoisted by his own petard? I do think so.</p>
<p>matm,</p>
<p>i think thats a great idea. i sent them a similar letter after midterms telling them that i had a 4.0 so far this semester. </p>
<p>i really hope you get in man. you seem like you really really want to go.</p>
<p>cmon, your arguments are really going downhill</p>
<p>adcom: if that argument works we can both stop talking about it</p>
<p>lawyer: what does that mean? Lawyers argue for a different meaning or interpretation, the fact that they are able to do this shows that the meaning was not as obvious or straightfoward as it needed to be.</p>
<p>
[quote]
adcom: if that argument works we can both stop talking about it
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No. The adcom's pay special attention to grammar; proper grammar exudes professionalism and care.</p>
<p>
[quote]
awyer: what does that mean? Lawyers argue for a different meaning or interpretation, the fact that they are able to do this shows that the meaning was not as obvious or straightfoward as it needed to be.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Law is not always about intepretation. Read a law review piece, and then you will understand. Grammar is integral to every piece, multi-purposeful or not.</p>
<p>Guys chill out. Just exchange Screen names so you all can argue.</p>
<p>gt2, I am really glad to know that you did something similar. At least I know now that it will at least not hurt me. Thank you for your kind words!</p>
<p>matm1, good luck :)</p>
<p>nspeds,</p>
<p>I went to your website, nice flash but jesus christ do you use a lot of footnotes</p>
<p>_42,</p>
<p>Footnotes are the philosopher's guns.</p>
<p>I guess, I havent noticed many things ive read using them extensively</p>
<p>your use kindof stuck me as such (no offense):</p>
<p>Armenttem the fourth* argued that nilism is extententialism reborn as a ultilitarian theory. I disagee as ....</p>
<hr>
<p>*Armentem the fourth was born 1724. He entered the local university in 1740, and studied the philosophy of Leibniz and Christian Wolff under Martin Knutsen, a follower of Wolff. He also studied the new mathematics of Sir Isaac Newton and, in 1746, wrote a paper on measurement, reflecting Leibniz's influence. In 1755, he became a private lecturer at the University, and while there published "Inquiry into the Distinctness of the Principles of Natural Theology and Morals", where he examined the problem of having a logical system of philosophy that connected with the world of natural philosophy, a concern typical of the period. In this paper, he proposed what later become known as the Armentem-Laplace theory of planetary formation, wherein the planets formed from rotating protoplanetary disks of gas. Armentem was also the first recorded scholar to postulate (as is true) that some of the faint nebulae one can see with a small telescope (or in one case, with the naked eye) were external galaxies or, as he called them, island universes. Armentem 's prescient remarks on island universes......</p>
<p>Guys,</p>
<p>You all are great. I look forward to meeting ALL of you at Gtown. You all are in my prayers (yes i am praying to get admitted).</p>
<p>~Matt</p>
<p>Thanks matm1. If I were not agnostic, you would be in my prayers as well:D.</p>
<p>_42,
No offense taken, I write the way I write:)</p>
<p>so another discussion thread eh.</p>
<p>I think nspeds wins the award for most-frequent-use-of-the-semicolon.</p>
<p>Also, spelling != grammar.</p>
<p>igarvey,</p>
<p>I knew someday, someone would spot my semicolon addiction; however, I have no intention of relinquishing my habit:P</p>
<p>Excerpts from Lynne Truss, Eats, Shoots and Leaves</p>
<p>A woman, without her man, is nothing.
A woman: without her, man is nothing.</p>
<pre><code>Dear Jack,
I want a man who knows what love is all about. You are generous, kind, thoughtful. People who are not like you admit to being useless and inferior. You have ruined me for other men. I yearn for you. I have no feelings whatsoever when were apart. I can be forever happy will you let me be yours?
Jill
Dear Jack,
I want a man who knows what love is. All about you are generous, kind, thoughtful people, who are not like you. Admit to being useless and inferior. You have ruined me. For other men I yearn! For you I have no feelings whatsoever. When were apart I can be forever happy. Will you let me be?
Yours,
Jill
</code></pre>
<p><a href="http://eatsshootsandleaves.com/excerpt.html%5B/url%5D">http://eatsshootsandleaves.com/excerpt.html</a></p>
<p>What a ridiculous thread. Some of you need serious help.</p>
<p>The suggestion of fatality was clearly a joke. The rest of my post stands. Your little letter's writing is prim. The only voice that comes through is that of someone who cannot use modifiers and who is trying too hard.</p>
<p>Also I find the responses which are so PRIGGISH that they've become TURGID humorous. </p>
<p>I look forward to the responses to this post, one obviously inspired out of spite for your GPA! Woe is me!</p>
<p>PS I have a 4.0 as well <3</p>
<p>"Also I find the responses which are so PRIGGISH that they've become TURGID humorous."</p>
<p>:) Somebody got a "word of the day" calander for Christmas!</p>
<p>why so much competition?</p>