Conquer Club

I really do think both of these accounts are under the same user!,

I ask Conquer Club to Deeply Investigate this matter. Thank you.

I think you need to fill out the form first.

yeah, fill out the form, at the top of the forum, inside the sticky...

and umm...what kind of evidence do you have?

they play doubles together.
thats the only time they've played together (i just did some research)

SolidWolf comes through again.! This guy really should be a mod, like he says.! He just be bustin multis right AND left.! Wow.! This guy is like, great.! or something.!

john1099 wrote:they play doubles together.
thats the only time they've played together (i just did some research)

i found one game where they were on opposite teams in doubles...

SolidWolf34 wrote:I really do think both of these accounts are under the same user!.

You must be sick.

Bump!!

You didn't fill out the form yet.

AK_iceman wrote:You didn't fill out the form yet.

what form.? i don't see anything

We alreayd all know Solidwolf is a dildo... Why is this even important...

Oh... yeah... I'ts NOT!

Anarkistsdream wrote:We alreayd all know Solidwolf is a dildo... Why is this even important...

Oh... yeah... I'ts NOT!

shut the hell up man. why don't u come say it to my face.. all you know what to do is cut squid and take them to bed with you.. so WATCH IT

SolidWolf34 wrote:

Anarkistsdream wrote:We alreayd all know Solidwolf is a dildo... Why is this even important...

Oh... yeah... I'ts NOT!

shut the hell up man. why don't u come say it to my face.. all you know what to do is cut squid and take them to bed with you.. so WATCH IT

Why don't I come say that to your face....? Was that a question? If so, use a question mark...

And PM me your address, I'll make sure you get something nice in the mail.

Anarkistsdream wrote:

SolidWolf34 wrote:

Anarkistsdream wrote:We alreayd all know Solidwolf is a dildo... Why is this even important...

Oh... yeah... I'ts NOT!

shut the hell up man. why don't u come say it to my face.. all you know what to do is cut squid and take them to bed with you.. so WATCH IT

Why don't I come say that to your face....? Was that a question? If so, use a question mark...

And PM me your address, I'll make sure you get something nice in the mail.

Shut the hell up!! You have been reported to my Local Police Office, I will make sure something is done about what you just said!!

SolidWolf34 wrote:

Anarkistsdream wrote:

SolidWolf34 wrote:

Anarkistsdream wrote:We alreayd all know Solidwolf is a dildo... Why is this even important...

Oh... yeah... I'ts NOT!

shut the hell up man. why don't u come say it to my face.. all you know what to do is cut squid and take them to bed with you.. so WATCH IT

Why don't I come say that to your face....? Was that a question? If so, use a question mark...

And PM me your address, I'll make sure you get something nice in the mail.

Shut the hell up!! You have been reported to my Local Police Office, I will make sure something is done about what you just said!!

AHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!

I'm posting this ALL OVER THIS SITE!!!

hahahahahaha

This is hilarious. Solid wolf is probably some 7 year old kid who thinks he knows all the mods and all the policemen in the world

Iliad wrote:This is hilarious. Solid wolf is probably some 7 year old kid who thinks he knows all the mods and all the policemen in the world

Only cause his daddy touches him at night...

Anarkistsdream wrote:

Iliad wrote:This is hilarious. Solid wolf is probably some 7 year old kid who thinks he knows all the mods and all the policemen in the world

Only cause his daddy touches him at night...

[u]Unexplained Rulings Threaten Rule of Law[/u]

In 1972-73, with the stated rationale being the pressing caseload in the federal court of appeals, the Board of the Federal Judicial Center moved to make it permissible to not publish opinions that were routine or had no significant precedential value. At that time, all court rulings always had an opinion written with it explaining the law as it applied to the decision made by the court and detailing the reasons upon which the judgment was based.

The new rule that limited what was published did not discuss eliminating the opinion that went with a ruling. It simply said that written opinions would not be published or assumed to be cited as precedent in the future.

But quickly, once rulings were not published, a much more insidious practice emerged - a practice which has the potential to completely undermine the rule of law and the liberty and justice it protects in America. The practice is that of the issuance by federal appeals courts of unpublished rulings that DO NOT STATE THE LEGAL RATIONALE FOR THEIR DECISION. These types of rulings with no reasoning are called nonopinions. Those nonopinions that are unpublished (the vast majority) are called unpublished nonopinions or unexplained decisions. Depending on the circuit, a nonopinion is called affirmance without opinion, summary order, summary disposition, summary opinion, unpublished order, disposition without opinion, abbreviated disposition, summary affirmance, judgment opinion, or simply, an order. Some states call the practice per curiam affirmance.

[/i]

...............................

Uhmmmm.....

Okay.

I like SolidWolf, he's a funny guy...even though he may not realize it

Anarkistsdream wrote:...............................

Uhmmmm.....

Okay.

I second that motion.

What, exactly, does that large paragraph have to do with anything?

Solidwolf, let me ask you a quick question. What do you think your local police department will do?

SolidWolf34 wrote:[u]Unexplained Rulings Threaten Rule of Law[/u]

In 1972-73, with the stated rationale being the pressing caseload in the federal court of appeals, the Board of the Federal Judicial Center moved to make it permissible to not publish opinions that were routine or had no significant precedential value. At that time, all court rulings always had an opinion written with it explaining the law as it applied to the decision made by the court and detailing the reasons upon which the judgment was based.

The new rule that limited what was published did not discuss eliminating the opinion that went with a ruling. It simply said that written opinions would not be published or assumed to be cited as precedent in the future.

But quickly, once rulings were not published, a much more insidious practice emerged - a practice which has the potential to completely undermine the rule of law and the liberty and justice it protects in America. The practice is that of the issuance by federal appeals courts of unpublished rulings that DO NOT STATE THE LEGAL RATIONALE FOR THEIR DECISION. These types of rulings with no reasoning are called nonopinions. Those nonopinions that are unpublished (the vast majority) are called unpublished nonopinions or unexplained decisions. Depending on the circuit, a nonopinion is called affirmance without opinion, summary order, summary disposition, summary opinion, unpublished order, disposition without opinion, abbreviated disposition, summary affirmance, judgment opinion, or simply, an order. Some states call the practice per curiam affirmance.

[/i]

Translation: The fact that Supreme Court Justices can write opinions in Court decisions that have nothing to do with the case at hand or any law is bad.

Relevance: Who the f*ck knows?