Jerilynn Lemon

Lets break this down to easy-to-understand ways. A lottery consists of three basic rules (requirements): 1) Chance 2) Consideration 3) Prize. In your first line, you showed both chance and prize. In the third line, you showed consideration. By definition, lotteries (some but not all) are illegal. Some think of lotteries in the same way as gambling. In fact, the way you described, the procedure would violate LL own ToS. To use Publishers Clearing House as an example, some people are convinced a purchase is required to win a prize. That is consideration. They have since included the well worn phrase "No purchase required" to get around the consideration possibilities. If LL wants to give a random member 10,000L$ for giggles and grins, so be it as long as there is no chance of consideration.

FINALLY! I can use this one! *beams proudly*

From what I have heard on YouTube vids, most voice comes out distorted and sounding like the person is literally eating the mic. They have no conception to how to place the mic for clarity. Plus they tend to talk over each other, it is rather annoying. I agree, text is superior.

The End

Try writing it in normal fashion (Upper/lower case), but use the editor to bolden and italicize what you are trying to convey. Also, lose the ' in the years (50's, 60's, 70's...) DJ Happy Binder at Greased Lightning! 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s Classic Rock and Oldies. Delete the final 50s, 60s, 70s 80s and 90s. That's redundant. This is just a shot in the dark. I have never seen a subject line being kicked back with the reasoning they are telling you. Good luck, I hope this helps.

Talking jive.

Ranch Dressing

I'm leaving

This thread has been more constructive than what I imagined it could have turned into. Kudos to all for remaining civil. I took a peek at the petition and ran a few names through SL search. The few that I looked at came back as not registered or showed no financial info on their profiles. ONE came back as having banking info, which got me thinking that a good number (looking at a ratio of 5-1; hardly representative, I grant you) of those who signed the petition probably don't even utilize SL for business or pleasure. Perhaps they signed it so they can say "I signed it". Another point I wish to make is locally, if anyone wants a referendum included in an up coming election (county, city or state), a certain number of signatories must show up on said petition. An added plus is these signatories must be registered to vote. This way the signatures can be verified. Anonymous petitions can't be verified. By itself a reason I don't pay much attention to any petition coming from change.org. With that said, thanks mods for not locking the thread. It has been a civil discussion, but just the same, I bring out kittens!

That's an easy one. Just post 465 more times here. 500 posts is the magic number.

Money laundering

Controlled Burn

It doesn't speak for me either. I distrust anonymous petitions. If the OP had the balls to sign their name to the bottom (instead writing "Your Residents"), I'd reconsider. But since they signed in earlier today into this forum and posted just the petition, that loses a lot of credibility to me.

First Post A riff on discussion groups where someone invariably writes "first post", never mind the subject...hello?...is this thing on?

He was very good, opposite Russell Crowe in LA Confidential (a movie I can watch over and over). "Rollo Tamasi". If one saw the movie, one would get the reference. (ETA: The more I think about it, the more I think Rollo Tamasi would make a great name for an avi. Thank me later) Angry Guy

Wolf Pack

Rat Pack

Jagger Moves

Carlos Santana