The most prestigious college admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Pensive got pwned by Joe
Poast new message in this thread
Date: May 13th, 2005 11:18 AM Author: Cowardly Field but what else is new right?
http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=180638&mc=110&forum_id=1#2769451 |
 |
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:53 PM Author: Deranged Ape That is a very subjective way of seeing it. Pensive houtdoes Joe, other than the fact of small disparities which he has asserted being mistaken, yet they keep pressing the issue beating the dead horse. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775358) |
Date: May 13th, 2005 12:24 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Not really, but if you want to dedicate a thread to thinking that, go ahead.
I don't see what Joe gets out of his senseless personal attacks. This aspect of his personality degrades the prestige of the otherwise pristine Rhodes Scholarship for everyone who has it. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 12:35 PM Author: silver telephone He wants to put off the day you surpass him.
That, and he doesn't want his pwnage of this board questioned. But he, unlike you, wouldn't dare venture onto the Law Board where the big boys dwell. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 12:38 PM Author: odious gay corner pisswyrm The law Board is a cesspool. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2773416) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 12:46 PM Author: Vengeful Twinkling Uncleanness the "big boys" get a little smaller every day (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2773459) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 7:12 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Was Joe ever that big? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2776337) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 7:13 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha She's referring to the law board posters. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2776348) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 7:21 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn 2 points to you for not getting one of mine! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2776406) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:27 PM Author: Cowardly Field The law board is less intimidating when your realize most of the ppl there majored in bullshit like IR or poli sci from some TTT ugrad. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774122) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:29 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon It's their time to shine; let them be. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774139) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:33 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Sure, they're clever over on the law board. I do post there sometimes (more during football season). But they're also pretty self-obsessed. A lot of discussion time is devoted to junk about the interactions of the posters themselves. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774167) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:36 PM Author: Cowardly Field For a second I saw that post as by JaneHoya (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774187) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:37 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha JaneHoya = Binary Star
jane hoya = binarystar
I think... |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:38 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon Correct. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774209) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:54 PM Author: Deranged Ape How did you fall this low? By the use of that moniker, you've tarnished the impressions I had of you. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775366) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 8:07 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon She started it! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2776911) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:39 PM Author: Vengeful Twinkling Uncleanness wouldn't it make more sense to say
Binary Star = JaneHoya jane hoya = binarystar
because this confused me a lot the first time someone posted it. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:44 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Perhaps it would. Well, now it's on the thread both ways. :-) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774266) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:37 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn If they went to TTT undergrad schools, then how did they get into top law programs? If they were able to get into top law programs, they easily could have gotten into top undergraduate programs.
Also, at my college (which may not be representative) IR is a rigorous major. One of the toughest profs in the whole college (now visiting at Middlebury, I believe) was in the IR department. He assigned 6 7-page papers (1.5 spaced) per term and is probably the only arts/humanities/SS prof to give Ds and Fs for completed work. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:39 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon "they easily could have gotten into top undergraduate programs."
That's a very big and probably unfounded assumption. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:40 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn No. Undergraduate admissions are easy compared to law, and especially medical and graduate, admissions. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774227) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:41 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon They are not "easy;" they just look for different things. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774235) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:47 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn What different things?
1. Taking difficult courses. 2. High school GPA.
These are analogous to undergraduate GPA in LS admissions.
3. SATs.
A standardized test, analogous to the LSAT.
4. Letters of recommendation. (Which matter for about 3%).
LS also has LORs, no big difference there.
5. Notable accomplishments (of which even most HYP admits don't have any; this isn't a criticism since only exceptional 18-year-olds do.)
As above, few HS students have truly notable accomplishments, so this factor isn't enough (except for certain individuals) to be considered as a major admissions factor.
6. Resume-padding, soft-batch garbage like "Assistant Treasurer of the Dogshit-Clean-Up Club".
Puh-lease. The fact that LS and GS admissions don't consider factors like that reflects well upon them in comparison to UG admissions. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:53 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike High school GPA doesn't matter, what matters is class rank and, if no rank is reported, the quality of the school. Law schools care very little, if at all, about class rank or courseload or any of that stuff. Similarly, they don't care much about LORs, whereas LORs are a lot more important for college. Similarly, notable accomplishments matter extremely little for law, unless the accomplishment is a Pulitzer Prize or something insane like that. And, of course, ECs are virtually meaningless in law admissions while they are critical in college admissions.
Not to mention that the LSAT matters *far* more for law admissions than the SAT matters for college admissions.
In other words, there are virtually no similarities between them. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:56 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon "These are analogous to undergraduate GPA in LS admissions. "
No they are not. LS adcoms do not care about your courseload.
"A standardized test, analogous to the LSAT. "
LSAT is given much more weight than SATs are.
"LS also has LORs, no big difference there. "
Except UG adcoms care more about the LORs.
And UC adcoms care way more about your ECs than LS adcoms do. I don't think the way LS does things is necessarily "better."
And the soft-batch shit is usually impressive for HS standards, even if they're not all IMO gold medalists. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:15 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Resume-padding "accomplishments" aren't impressive; a lot of those kids did the minimum work to be able to list it (10 hours for most community service clubs; 50 for officers). Also, many HS clubs create unnecessary sinecure positions just to boost people's ECs. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774496) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:16 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon Getting a 3.5+ as a sociology major isn't that impressive either. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774503) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:16 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn 3.5 won't place you in the top law schools. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774509) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:17 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon Having an officer position or two will not get you into top UGs. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774518) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:17 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike A 3.5 with a 170+ LSAT will get you into top schools with merit money.
EDIT: Even a 3.4 or 3.3 could get you merit money. It'll definitely get you into a top 14. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:19 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Sure it will, if you can get a good enough LSAT. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774538) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:23 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike To put this in context, every top 14 except for HYS and Berkeley has a 25th percentile GPA that's 3.5 or lower. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774571) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:17 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike You might not find them impressive, but undergrad adcomms do. In contrast, law schools don't give a fuck, whether the accomplishment is impressive or not (with the exception of truly earth shattering accomplishments, like a Rhodes Scholarship) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774516) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:39 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Didn't you get the memo? Pensive is personally downgrading the Rhodes as of yesterday.
Admissions committees the world over have taken note of this directive, which was issued from a college senior in rural Minnesota on May 12, 2005. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:41 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn It didn't go down very much. One person can't tarnish the prestige of an accolade that much, unless he's George W. Bush or something. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774732) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:44 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Shouldn't Bill Clinton, the life-of-the-party womanizer who gets all the girls, including in inappropriate ways, really be your target? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774751) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:49 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Bush is worse. He's all that and less intelligent. Of course, he didn't get an RS to tarnish it; he just brought down Yale and HBS by a fair measure.
Why would Clinton tarnish the Rhodes Scholarship? His behavior was certainly not admirable, but he didn't make unwarranted personal attacks against other people on the Internet. (Though I must say: you've been very good today at sticking to the issues, which I appreciate.) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:52 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha What?
By all accounts Bush has always been a very faithful husband. You are obsessed with male-female relations, and Clinton fits EXACTLY your profile of the guy you hate. Bush doesn't.
"Why would Clinton tarnish the Rhodes Scholarship? His behavior was certainly not admirable, but he didn't make unwarranted personal attacks against other people on the Internet."
That gets the award for Most Petty Sounding Post of the Day, I think. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:57 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn [Edited slightly.]
If Clinton were a college student I knew, acted like a jerk, and succeeded with women because of it, I'd probably have a very negative opinion of him. I don't know Clinton personally; what I know about his personal life is heavily spun by the media and hence I don't trust it as I would if I actually know him.
I actually agree that Bush's sexual behavior, post-marriage, has been by all accounts I've read admirable. (His behavior in college is another story altogether.) However, starting an oil war that leaves 100,000 dead is one of those things that seems to trump being a good husband. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:58 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha "If Clinton were a student at Carleton, acted like a jerk, and succeeded with women because of it, I'd probably have a very negative opinion of him."
So the fact that he's done this for his entire life at various places NOT happening to be Carleton doesn't bother you a bit? Very odd. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:03 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn He had an extramarital affair. This is in no way admirable behavior. I wouldn't accept it from myself and I would condemn such behavior in others around me.
In a President, however, my standards are different. I don't have any decent knowledge of Clinton's personal life because everything I've heard about it has been spun like the press. What I do know is that he was a decent President, and that's the metrestick by which I judge him. Clinton > Bush as President, that's what matters. Probably Bush > Clinton in terms of how he conducts his marital life, but we don't elect a moral role model, we elect a President. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:06 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha But in college, Clinton was the man you love to hate--the popular guy who comes on to the ladies in lewd ways and succeeds, wanting only sex, not love. And he hasn't changed a bit since then.
Just pointing this out.
Maybe one of those "bottom feeders," I think you called them, at Carleton, might end up being a President whose policies you greatly admire, like Clinton's? Just a thought. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:14 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn I would support Rush Limbaugh against those people. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775041) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:18 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Of course, because it's all personal.
Just thought I might provide a new perspective on this. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 6:18 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn I think you win this one. The reason I don't have a visceral dislike for Clinton is because his personal life and mine are completely disjoint. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2776045) |
|
Date: July 15th, 2006 11:27 PM Author: saffron boistinker pervert This just goes to show how petty and retarded you are, pensive. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#6221550) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:41 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha "Undergraduate admissions are easy compared to law, and especially medical and graduate, admissions."
It's not so much that they're "easy" as that they look for completely different things. Law schools want a good GPA and an LSAT. That's IT. Virtually NOTHING ELSE matters.
Not so for undergrad.
I think you could make a strong case, actually, for law school admissions being a lot easier. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:42 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon If not easier, at least more predictable. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774242) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:45 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Exactly, and more straightforward. You know precisely what you have to do to get into law school. Meanwhile, you'll knock yourself silly in high school trying to get into Harvard. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774277) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:56 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn "I think you could make a strong case, actually, for law school admissions being a lot easier."
Read above, where I broke down UG admissions rather cleanly.
Most of UG admissions is based on grades, class rank, and SAT scores. Which is no different from LS admissions being based on GPA + LSAT.
One difference, which is notable, is that UG admissions care a lot more about course selection: AP vs. honors vs. mid-level. Which hits on the allegation that some law students took soft-batch courses to pad their GPAs. However, that's the only notable difference between UG and LS which is actually useful. And as for GS, they care a lot about course selections, ostensibly. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:09 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha "Read above, where I broke down UG admissions rather cleanly."
Not in the opinion of every poster below you, you didn't!
Just because you say something doesn't make it so, you know. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:24 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike "Most of UG admissions is based on grades, class rank, and SAT scores."
Except that this isn't true. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:39 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha "If they went to TTT undergrad schools, then how did they get into top law programs?"
Because "getting into a top law program" consists of achieving a high GPA in ANY major (so, easier is better) and then doing well on a standardized test. It doesn't matter a bit what undergrad you went to, and not very much how your recs are, and even less what your extracurriculars are. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:41 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn That aspect is unfortunate, but don't they correct for grade-inflation? My understanding is that Carleton graduates get about a +0.3 GPA bump because of the lack of grade-inflation. I would assume they could also factor in quality of the school (in that, despite Harvard's grade-inflation, the fact remains that it still draws top-quality students and this should be considered). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774239) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:42 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha "My understanding is that Carleton graduates get about a +0.3 GPA bump because of the lack of grade-inflation."
No.
Post this on the law board and watch it get clubbed down like a baby seal. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:11 PM Author: Adulterous national Not true, Joe. A 3.6 from MIT is always ranked higher than a 4.0 from Chico St. Law adcoms assign a co-efficient based on the UG school that they multiple to your GPA. They add this number to your LSAT score for an index. The difference b/w a 3.8 from UW and from UT may be negligent but an avergae student at Williams will always be regarded higher than a great student from Umass. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774473) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:21 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha I think the consensus of the law board is that that's wrong. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774560) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:25 PM Author: Adulterous national No that's untrue. It's known that adcoms assign an UG co-efficient. UVA's law school mentioned it on their admissions website. Penn also weighs those factors. That makes law school even more number based. Note, the co-efficient isn't related to majors or difficulty of classes, rather the ranking given to your undergrad by the law school adcoms. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774584) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:27 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Can you post this on the law board and see what they think of it?
What I know on this subject is basically only what I've repeatedly read over there... and it's NOT what you're saying here. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:32 PM Author: Adulterous national I won't post it there, but these are facts you can research. This week I finished LS at arguably the most "prestigious" school. There were people from say Claremont with 4.0 and Princeton with 3.7 But nobody is there with under a 3.8 (excluding AA) from a non top 25 undergrad. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774640) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:35 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Why not post it there and let THEM refute you? I'm not going to take the time, on this thread, to argue that down, particularly since LS admissions aren't my area of expertise at all, but I KNOW that the people who I consider to be the "experts" on this subject (over on the Law Board side) definitely disagree with you, and that's good enough for me, so you're not going to convince me unless you can convince them, sorry. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774669) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:37 PM Author: Adulterous national Very few people on that board attend my school in actuality. Not many more actually know a thing about admissions. Those that do would agree with me. Look at UVA's website, which is arguably a very good law school. It tells you about the co-efficients. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774694) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:41 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha You're arguing with the wrong person here. Try GTO or something.
My argument on this consists almost entirely of "appeal to authorities" so I suggest you take it up with them. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:43 PM Author: Adulterous national You made the point. I'm disputing it. Provide evidence other than "people on the law board agree with me." I post there, and I disagree. I'm telling you that you can visit UVA's website or use google and find your answers.
LS admissions are very number-based, but part of that numer includes an UG quality co-efficient. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:42 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike So you're saying Anna Ivey, former dean of admissions of Chicago Law, is lying? Even though everything else she says in her book matches up with common law board lore? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774738) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:44 PM Author: Adulterous national I don't know what she says, but I know what UVA's website says and I know what Gary Clinton (dean of student affairs at Penn LS) said. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774752) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:48 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Let's see what these guys say:
http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181196&forum_id=2#2774774
Moving the discussion of this issue where it really belongs, hopefully! |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:59 PM Author: Adulterous national Not that it matters, b/c I don't generally give that board much weight, but they do seem to agree with me. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774911) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:50 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike From Anna Ivey's book:
"They don't distinguish between a 3.5 in Interior Design from Chico State and a 3.5 from Astrophysics from Caltech" (p.21)
Gary Clinton isn't the dean of admissions and doesn't make admissions decisions, so I don't know why you're citing him as an authority here. As for the UVA website, from the same page in the book:
"You'll never hear an admissions officer tell you that you don't stand a chance, or that you shouldn't apply.... They'll tell you that even if your numbers stink, you can basically still write your way into law school.... The numbers matter much more than admissions officers let on. Applicants sugarcoat themselves in their applications -- that's the nature of the beast -- but don't forget that law schools sugarcoat the application process, too."
Look, I'm not saying that some people with 3.6s from MIT aren't admitted to Harvard -- it's just that that is definitely NOT the norm. For every guy like that they take they probably ding at least ten others. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:56 PM Author: Adulterous national http://www.law.virginia.edu/home2002/html/prospectives/jdapp.htm#apps
read on that page where it discusses strength of UG school as part of your index score.
some would say pwn3d here. but i'm too classy a guy. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:03 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike "Applicants are sorted in the first instance by LSAT scores, undergraduate grades, and a numerical index that takes account of the success in law school of students from the same undergraduate institution."
That doesn't support your statement at all. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:06 PM Author: Adulterous national Also, it says they look at strength of the UG school if you click on FAQ and look at "what admissions looks for". (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774971) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:08 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike How does that prove that 4.00 at Chico State = 3.6 at MIT? Or even that 3.7 at Chico State = 3.6 at MIT?
No one is claiming that strength of UG school isn't used as a tiebreaker. What people are disputing is your ridiculous claims about large GPA boosts for MIT/Caltech/etc. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:12 PM Author: Adulterous national I've seen some forumlas used. Don't worry about it. The law board concurs with me and I've presented proof showing the weighing. I don't have proof to show the exact weight, but seeing you previously said they weren't weighed at all (which is disproved) you ought to just agree with me so that you can become correct on this issue. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775026) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:16 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike You didn't prove anything. Just because they're sorted by undergrad doesn't mean that undergrad is treated as anything other than a tiebreaker, ie. admit a 3.5/170 from MIT over a 3.5/170 from Chico State, but 3.6/170 from Chico trumps both 3.5/170 from Chico and 3.5/170 from MIT.
You still haven't explained to me why Anna Ivey, who actually *was* dean of admissions at a prestigious law school, would lie in her book about something like this. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:18 PM Author: Adulterous national To get people to apply there. Opposite reason UC routinely rejects people who easily get into HYS. In the former case, they want money, and in the latter, they want to protect their yield %. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775074) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:24 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Anna Ivey isn't a dean of admissions anymore, she has absolutely no incentive to lie to increase applications. And fyi, she did address yield protection as well.
Of course, UVA and other schools *do* have that incentive -- hence why they're not going to tell someone with a 3.5 from MIT that they are at a disadvantage relative to someone with a 3.6 from Chico. She says as much in the book -- schools aren't going to give the real deal on admissions to applicants on their websites. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:28 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike That's not true. I'd recommend that you read Anna Ivey's new book, she addresses this subject directly. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774614) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:42 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon No, they don't really correct for grade inflation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774248) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:43 PM Author: Cowardly Field lack of grade inflation?
3.35 avg is a lack of grade inflation at Carleton? |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:49 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn People work their asses off here. The average Carleton student spends about 25 hours per week on homework. I doubt it's the same at HYP, especially not at the 3.35 level, which takes a lot less. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774310) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:50 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon What do you base your "doubt" on? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774316) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:51 PM Author: Cowardly Field "I doubt it's the same at HYP, especially not at the 3.35 level, which takes a lot less."
Riiiight |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:52 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn The hard part of HYP is getting in. Most students and alumni from those schools will say as much.
(However, some of their science courses are tough, no question.) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:55 PM Author: Cowardly Field You know this from your extensive experience at HYP?
The hardest part is getting in simply because admissions guidelines are somewhat vague. But to conclude from that statement that getting good grades is easy is foolish.
|
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:57 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn "Most students and alumni from those schools will say as much."
I know my shit, and the reputation of the Ivies for grade-inflation is nationally known. It's not a secret. Read Privilege, by Ross Douthat. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:59 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon So basically, you think LACs have high average GPA because they're filled with hard working students, whereas HYP has a high average GPA because of grade inflation? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774389) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:03 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn LACs don't have the same high average GPAs as HYP.
And yes, LAC students work a lot harder, at least on the arts/humanities side. Reading assignments at LACs are longer, and the grading is much tougher. It's harder to bullshit your way to an A when your professor is a teaching prof., grading 20 papers, than when she's a busy research professor, grading 150 of them. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:04 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon And I am sure you know this based on experience. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774424) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:25 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha "LACs don't have the same high average GPAs as HYP."
Sure they do. Look at my link below. Carleton: 3.35. Harvard: 3.39. Real big difference there. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:28 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Yeah, I got pwned on that one. Let's give it a rest. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774616) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:00 PM Author: Deranged Ape It is all relatives. If you take a look at the science degree seekers in those LACs, you will see a GPA deflation just like in other tech/geek schools. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775405) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:01 PM Author: Cowardly Field Why don't you read some statistics?
HYP students ARE smarter than Carleton students, and would receive comparable grades at Carleton.
Carleton students w/ over 700 SAT in math = ~50% "" 700 SAT in verbal = ~50%
HYP students w/ 700 SAT in math = ~75% "" w/ 700 SAT in verbal = ~ 75%
Ergo, avg. at carleton = at BEST bottom quartile at HYP
thx for playing though. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:08 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha "I know my shit..."
Did you mean to say "What I know is shit"? |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:57 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon Another (more arrogant) explanation may be that your average HYP student is smarter than your average Carleton student. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774370) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:58 PM Author: Cowardly Field this is the credited response (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774378) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:00 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn If you were to compare laterally (e.g. 50th percentile against 50th percentile; or the same with 75th) you might find that to be true: HYP are a lot more selective on account of supply and demand. Most coastal kids have never heard of Carleton, aren't enthusiastic about coming to the Midwest, and that softens the demand side of the equation considerably. I won't argue with you there.
A 90th-percentile Carleton kid would pwn a 50th-percentile HYP, any day of the week. I'd say 75%C against 50%HYP is probably an even match. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:02 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon Sure.
You make it sound like I stated otherwise.
use a toothbrush was right--you do tend to pull out bullshit statistics out of your ass. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:07 PM Author: Deranged Ape So does every other poster who uses numbers. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775462) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:03 PM Author: Cowardly Field "A 90th-percentile Carleton kid would pwn a 50th-percentile HYP, any day of the week. I'd say 75%C against 50%HYP is an even match. "
How does that prove HYP grade inflation? In fact, it proves the opposite.
|
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:10 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn I'm almost positive that the 75th percentile Carleton GPA is lower than the 50th percentile HYP GPA.
The only subjects at HYP with tough grading curves are the sciences. There might be sporadic, renegade profs. who still give B-s or Cs in the humanities, but they're rare and wouldn't get tenure; at Carleton, there are actually a fair number of them. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:12 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Carleton's 75th percentile GPA is less than a 3.3/3.4? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774476) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:19 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn The median is below 3.25 since less than half of all students get cum laude honors (about 40% do) but I believe the mean is around 3.3. It's not a normal distribution. Dean's List (90th percentile) is around 3.75-3.80.
I'd guess that the 75th percentile is around 3.45. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:31 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike See Joe's links below. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774633) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:42 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Mean != Median for most non-normal distributions. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774733) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:43 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike I have a master's in stats, I know the difference between a mean and a median.
Your evidence for this not being a normal distribution is... what exactly? |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:47 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Carleton's median GPA is less than 3.35 because fewer than 50% in each class get cum laude, which is set at 3.25. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774780) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:02 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha No offense or anything, but since the last three or four random stats you've made up have been false, can you support that with a link, please? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774936) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:03 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Which "random stats" have been proven false?
I got owned on the claim that HYP (or at least H) GPAs were significantly higher than Carleton GPAs, in mean figures. Only on that was I refuted. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:07 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha OK. So, since you were wrong on the MEAN GPA, I'd now like you to back up your claim on the MEDIAN GPA somehow.
Seems pretty reasonable. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:18 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Where did I claim anything about the mean GPA?
Also, where am I supposed to get a GPA-distribution table? I don't think Carleton wants that information to be public, since they discourage obsessing over GPAs and class ranks.
I know that: Summa cum laude (3.90) is given to about 1% of students each year, Dean's List (top 10%) is normally around 3.78. Phi Beta Kappa (top 15%) is about 3.65. About a quarter of all students get magna, which is 3.5, and less than half get cum laude, which is 3.25. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:22 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Get a graduation program or something. I don't know. But I think it's pretty clear you're not going to be believed here without some sort of proof, now. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775102) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:24 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn My life is over if Joe Caltech doesn't believe me. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775112) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:30 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Let's take a poll:
Anyone else out there believe pensive? Anyone? Beuller? |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:33 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn People won't respond to you for this reason: they're afraid that you'll dig up ancient, dubious trash ("outside sources" in the other thread) or out-of-context stuff from other threads, and use it as a basis for personal attacks. Most collegeboarders are afraid of you, your big bad Rhodes Scholarship and your loud mouth. I'm not. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775189) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:34 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha "Most collegeboarders are afraid of you, your big bad Rhodes Scholarship and your loud mouth. I'm not."
Somehow I doubt this. You're coming a little unhinged, here.
(Also, you do realize that I posted for about 7 years BEFORE the Rhodes, right? That's just in the last 6 months.) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:38 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Yeah, I cried myself to sleep last night because big bad Joe is so frightening. :(
My God, can't you accept responsibility for *anything*? You were proven wrong multiple times in this thread by multiple people, yet all you do is make up excuse after excuse. This one is just pathetic ("You guys don't REALLY think I'm wrong, you're just scared of Big Bad Joe being mean to you over the internet!") |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:38 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Raarraraarrrr!! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775236) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:05 PM Author: Deranged Ape Subject: I Yes I do.
|
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:12 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon Since you are almost positive with that statistic, it must be true. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774479) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:13 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Bring up some fuckin' tables and I'll consider myself pwned. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774483) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:14 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Harvard's median GPA isn't a big secret. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774491) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:16 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn If Harvard's median GPA is 3.4, then it's probably because they have a greater proportion of people majoring in the sciences. A B+ in a humanities class is considered akin to a C- over there, and a C+ is, de facto, failing. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774505) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:17 PM Author: Cowardly Field "If Harvard's median GPA is 3.4, then it's probably because they have a greater proportion of people majoring in the sciences. A B+ in a humanities class is considered akin to a C- over there, and a C+ is, de facto, failing."
It just gets better and better! |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:27 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn I'm just saying what everybody knows. "Gentleman's B+" instead of "Gentleman's C", and "C is the new F".
Whereas no one argues that HYP sciences grade on a tough curve; I know some brilliant people who have gotten Bs and Cs in those classes. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:26 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Just can't admit that you've been owned, can you? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774597) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:35 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn I just admitted that I got owned on the comparison of mean GPAs of the two schools. I can't argue against hard facts.
I maintain that, in the arts and humanities subjects (where grade inflation is predominant) there is much less of it at Carleton. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:38 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike And your proof of this is... what exactly? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774700) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:44 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Imagine this: people who go to rural LACs have friends at HYP, and have the capacity to follow educational issues such as grade inflation. Some of them even read periodicals like The Atlantic and Utne. I know this surprises you to no end. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774755) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:50 PM Author: silver telephone If that's implying that YOU have FRIENDS... then, yes, it does surprise me to no end! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774807) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:51 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn If the anonymous account says I have no friends, it must be true.
Try saying it to my face, in person, whore. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:08 PM Author: silver telephone At least I'm not a "whore" anymore, eh, you edit monkey? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774988) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:06 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike So once again, what's your proof? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774972) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:23 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Read Privilege, by Ross Douthat. He talks about the "ironic" grading at Harvard at length. My friends at HYP have told me (and several, in different circles) that an A- or B+ (sometimes even an A) in an arts/humanities/SS class doesn't mean much. At Carleton it does; you just don't hear "I bullshitted this 7-page paper in 2 hours, and got an A", except around a few teachers with softbatch reputations. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775110) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:26 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Ever consider that the 7 page A paper written in 2 hours by the HYP student was better than the 7 page B paper written by a Carleton student in 2 weeks? Perhaps because the average students at HYP are smarter and more efficient with their time than the average Carleton students? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775132) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:29 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn No, because you're bullshitting.
I've cross-compared The Crimson's writers with Carleton's best writers. The quality levels seem to be about the same. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:31 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha And I'm sure we'll all just defer to your judgment on this one.
You've "cross-compared" school newspapers? This is getting pathetic, man, give it up. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:36 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Not school newspapers, precisely. I'd say that The Crimson is probably slightly better than our school newspaper. I'm comparing THC to people in creative writing classes I've taken. While this may seem like an unfair comparison (the best against the exposed) I justify it as follows: because of the career opportunities that follow from THC, one would only suspect that it should represent Harvard's best writers.
Anyway, even if we take it at face value, the difference between Harvard writing (Crimson) and Carleton writing (Carletonian) is pretty miniscule, especially considering that H is three times as large. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:37 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha I can't believe a MATH MAJOR believes that, let alone came up with it. That's about the most non-rigorous analysis I've seen. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775227) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:40 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn A math major believes what? That Harvard is three times the size of Carleton? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775244) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:42 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha No. Every single other thing in the post. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775277) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:47 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn The other claim is that The Harvard Crimson ought to represent Harvard's best writers because of the career opportunities that result from it; the Atlantic, for example, recruits from THC. One would think that this should make it pretty competitive to get into. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775311) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:49 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha That sounds very good, but I really don't think an extrapolation like that is enough to hang your hat on in this.
Isn't WRITING quality a rather squishy and dubious proposition to evaluate anyway? Particularly when all of the evaluation is being carried out by one math major at one of the schools in question?
I think there are some serious weaknesses in your methodology, to say the least. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:53 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Maybe. I concede that I haven't been to Harvard, don't know for sure that there aren't better writers not on the THC, and therefore my claim that it "should" represent the best writing is speculative. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775357) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:57 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha You should also concede that you are not the ultimate arbiter of writing quality. That's the most glaring error in the post in the first place. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775379) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:59 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn There is no "ultimate arbiter" of writing quality, but I can tell when one writing sample is signifcantly superior, inferior, or approximately equal to another. Harvard's best writers, if we use THC as our basis, are approximately equal to Carleton's best writers. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775397) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:00 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha ...in your opinion. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775401) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:01 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Yes, because the Great Writing Guru is in Cancun right now, on sabbatical.
Look, I'm a published writer. I can tell good writing from bad. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:02 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Ah, the resume-game! Here we go again.
How arrogant can you possibly get? |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:07 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Do you really need to ask that question? :) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775463) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:21 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Yes. I'm honestly curious. I've never met someone so unwilling to realize when he's wrong (except probably for NYCFan, but he is a true special case). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775547) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 6:21 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Counterexample: I declared quite openly that I was wrong with my implicit assertion that there was a significant difference between Carleton and Harvard GPAs, when confronted with facts that suggested otherwise.
Maybe you should admit that you're wrong about me. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 6:25 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha "implicit" assertion, eh?
Too many qualifiers in there for me to make sense of that. I've yet to see you admit you're wrong on any larger, non-qualified overaching issue.
Can you explain some more about the prestigious-yet-unknown writing anthology? |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 6:51 PM Author: irradiated cocky fat ankles halford One thing you're forgetting is that the Harvard crimson is basically open to any shmo who completes the comp (training) process. This may not be true with the newspaper at Carleton. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2776215) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 7:33 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn This defeats my speculation that it "should" represent Harvard's best writers. I admit I am wrong once again. Joe, are you keeping tally? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2776533) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:03 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Umm, you do realize that Joe published an actual book, right? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775433) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:05 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn On what? That alone doesn't impress me; there are lots of TTT books out there. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775448) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:07 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Where, pray tell, are you published? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775459) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:10 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Several college publications (college newspaper, political publications, literary magazines).
The Games Journal, an online periodical about boardgaming and game design. Ambition, my card game, is also published various places online.
The Scholastic Writing Anthology of the best work, nationwide. (National Gold Key) Three pieces out of thousands were selected from my division for publication. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:13 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike School newspapers and an "online periodical about boardgaming?" You're joking, right?
Oh, as for Joe:
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=Ra52fCzzWA&isbn=0761119884&itm=3 |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:15 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn It's an SAT book. I'm frankly, not very impressed. I haven't read Joe's, but many of the SAT and GRE books are quite TTT; several I threw out because I knew I could do better. The test-prep industry is flooded, some of the books are great (and Joe's might be) and many are not. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775511) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:17 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Yeah, because getting published in your school newspaper or an "online gaming periodical" is far more prestigious than publishing an actual book that sold so well that there were three printings.
Suuuuure. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:20 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Hey, if we're counting school newspapers, put me down for that too. I had a column in the Caltech paper for awhile, and wrote other articles besides.
Oh wait, actually, I forgot this, I actually have written a number of articles for my local "real" newspaper (if college newspapers count, this should too, right?). Some of them were picked up by the AP wire and showed up in other papers, even.
I have to say I've yet to crack the elite "online gaming periodical" world. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:28 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Admittedly, the only highly prestigious publication I've earned was in the Scholastic Anthology (which, by the way, was judged by a panel of professional writers). The others I included to establish that I'm not some kind of "one-hit wonder" who never accomplished anything after 18.
The entry-bar for college publications and online gaming journals is, indeed, lower than that for publishing a book, which is far lower than that for getting into the Scholastic Anthology. I haven't published a book yet, haven't written one, but I definitely could... and not through some TTT vanity press, either. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:30 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Workman Publishing isn't a "TTT vanity press"--HTH.
Also, neither is the Herald-Palladium, the "real" newspaper I wrote quite a bit for while on breaks from college. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:33 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn (Normally I think of myself as being the one who's too defensive.)
I wasn't calling Workman a vanity press; I know nothing about it. I was merely qualifying that, not only could I publish a book if I wanted to, I could do so through a reasonably reputable publisher, since nowadays it's not that hard to get "published" via vanity presses. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:36 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike No one was considering vanity presses until you brought it up. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775678) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:36 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha "I was merely qualifying that, not only could I publish a book if I wanted to, I could do so through a reasonably reputable publisher..."
I invite you to do so, then, if you'd like to continue to tout your writing resume in disputes and have any credibility (arguing by resume, as I've told you several times before, is a TTT way to argue anyway). |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:48 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn I haven't had time yet.
Anyway, you probably are way more knowledgeable about SAT Prep than I am. I concede that I couldn't, at present, write the book you've already written.
My Scholastic Anthology * publication is still more prestigious. If you'd published a decent novel or poetry volume, you'd have me beaten hands-down.
[* Originally "Anthology"; idiot typo.] |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 6:20 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha "My Scholastic Analogy [sic] publication is still more prestigious."
Oh really? I guess they sure are good about keeping that a secret, then! Googling "Scholastic Anthology" brings up 24 hits, NONE of which appear to be about your thing. Googling "Scholastic Writing Anthology" brings up ZERO hits.
Nice try. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 6:30 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn If it's not in Google, it can't be true.
Scholastic Writing competition, 2000. Entries were submitted in December 1999. Regional judging (central PA) was in February 2000; Gold (top ~1%) and Silver Key (~3%) winners were forwarded to Washington, DC, for the national competition. I found out that spring (May? I don't quite remember) that I got a Gold Award, of which I believe 15 were given, nationwide, in my division. This was somewhat surprising since I only went from a local Silver to a national Gold, which is uncommon. (Twice.) The ceremony was on Saturday, June 17, 2000 in the KENNEDY CENTER (ah! I'm turning into you with the OBNOXIOUS capitalization!) Mine was one of THREE (it feels SO good to use all caps!) entries nationwide selected for publication in the anthology. Not only that, but if any copies of the 2000 anthology are still for sale, I will buy you one. Otherwise, I will gladly send you a photocopy when I get home this summer. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 6:36 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Wait, so this was a high school thing? Hehe.
It's one thing in a high school writing anthology. Get over it, man. You know, I never, ever pull out that "I'm a published writer" shit you started. You know why? Because it makes the person who does sound like an arrogant asshole. And if it turns out to be based upon some anthology, a college newspaper, and of course "online gaming periodicals," then it makes that person sound like a self-inflating bastard, too.
Do you try that shit on girls? God, I hope not--but every bone in my body is saying "Yes, yes he does."
Strange that you mention June 17, 2000. I was at the Kennedy Center for an awards program myself that week in June 2000. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 6:51 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn 1. You're a Rhodes Scholar. You're obviously a very accomplished individual-- I won't deny that. You went to CalTech. This means that you're going to have connections. Your 100,000+ copies probably has more to do with your promotional support (which follows from connections) than with the quality of the book. I know how the publishing industry works. With enough promotional support, one could easily push 500,000 copies of drivel before anyone figured out that it wasn't any good. Which is not to call your SAT-prep book "drivel" since I've never read it. I'm merely unimpressed by your six-digit sales figure because I know how easy it is to manufacture a TTT bestseller.
2. Secondly, while I acknowledge that I couldn't write your book, with two or three years of consulting in the field, I certainly could. With decent promotional support, it would probably sell about as well. Now, I'm not going to waste 3 years of my life helping rich kids get into college, that's just me. (I'm not saying you did waste your life by founding a test-prep company; we just have different values.) If I take three years out of my life for a book, it'll have to be something more like a novel.
3. Yes, Scholastic Writing was a high school competition. If that made any point whatsoever, we would have to throw everyone's HS accomplishments out the window. Having known some IMO-invitees (I was not one, but attended the MOP program in 1999, which invites the IMO team + top-16 nonsenior finishers on USAMO) and Intel winners, I can tell you that these are very promising individuals and I expect every one to make great contributions to mathematics. You do make a valid point that high-school and undergraduate accolades indicate precocity more than actual accomplishment. I'll readily admit that, neither in math nor in writing have I achieved anything on the world scale, yet. My single world-scale is in game-design (a field you seem to consider inherently TTT, and I won't waste time trying to convince you otherwise). It's a still semiobscure but well-respected card game at which your grandkids will pwn you.
4. Pop-quiz: If I inserted just one comma into item #2, at a certain place, it would give one sentence a completely different, and distinctively snobby tone. Which sentence and where, Mr. Bookwriter? |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 7:04 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha 1) The book came BEFORE the test-prep company. There were no "connections" involved, either.
2) It took on the order of months, not years.
3) I have not devoted "years of my life" to PrepMe. Hello, I was in college and doing many other things as well. I maintain it's a more worthwhile pursuit than making up words to submit to urbandictionary.com and then trying with all your might to force them into the cultural lexicon.
4) Nobody plays your game. I heard it couldn't even get a Wikipedia entry. I LOVE card games, and I'd never even heard of it. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 7:11 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn 1. I believe the first sentence. As for the second, I still suspect that you're pretty damn lifted on this one, it's just my hunch.
2. I wouldn't spend months of my life to write an SAT-prep book, unless I were desperate.
3. Oh my, there must be something wrong with me! I use urbandictionary.com, for the same purpose as everyone else there!
4. Wikipedia: that was related to my socialist political views (which made me some serious enemies on WP) not the notability or quality of the game. It was actually ME who requested the deletion of the Ambition article (May 2004) after it was repeatedly vandalized. About 1000 to 3000 people play Ambition, worldwide and in ten countries. That's a far cry from it being "established", but it certainly refutes the "nobody" part of your claim. Oh, and a well-known Japanese magazine (Nikoli) cold-called (okay, emailed) me for permission to publish it in the winter of 2004.
5. Have you solved my riddle? Does your SAT prep course involve the diagramming of sentences? |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 7:13 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha My theory on this is that you have TWO possibilities in mind, so that whichever I answer you can say, "no, that's not it."
See the other thread, I answered there.
I'm not an English teacher. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 7:20 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn YHL on that one. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2776401) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:33 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike What vanity press? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775648) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:36 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Yeah, and EVERYONE knows that acing social science research papers involves the same skills as writing about how many people attended the Sonic Youth concert, or writing about your spring break in Cancun. After all, professors don't give a shit about using citations to support your argument, all they care about is style! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775215) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:33 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Wow, real rigorous and revolutionary research you did there! Write it up and get it published and maybe you can have it count as your dissertation! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775191) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:37 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn I'm a math major. Sorry. Try again next time. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775218) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:41 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Hence why it's laughable that you're even making this kind of ridiculous comparision and calling it "proof." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775261) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:42 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Precisely. "I justify this as follows: [bullshit]" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775283) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:52 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike With that kind of reasoning is it any wonder why he doesn't get good grades on social science papers? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775352) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:54 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Actually, I did. Except for one, I got a B+ or better on every paper I put significant time into, and several As. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775364) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:57 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike You don't need to put in significant time to consistently get As on social science research papers. It's not about the time you put in, it's about the quality of the research. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775376) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:00 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn I didn't say that I didn't get a few As on papers I didn't put large amounts of time into. I said that I got good grades on everything I *did* put significant time into. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775402) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:02 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Oh, so you've gotten As on papers you didn't put large amounts of time into, even at "grade deflated" Carleton?
So why do you find it hard to believe that some HYP students can consistently get As on papers that they only spent a few hours on, without it being grade inflation? |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:04 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Because grade-inflation is very local. Some professors at Carleton (/any college) grade-inflate, others grade-deflate. Also, I'm pretty good at what I do. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775436) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:08 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike If you're very good at writing social science research papers you shouldn't have to put in significant amounts of time to get As, whether you go to Harvard or Carleton. You're clearly doing something wrong. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775468) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:11 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Read some posts above, I already adressed that and I'm done with this topic. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775481) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:16 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Yet another topic you want to drop after getting owned. Figures.
Have you *ever* admitted that you're wrong about something in your entire life? |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:18 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Certainly, I have. I even did so in this thread, on the comparison of mean GPAs.
I don't want to drop this topic because I got "owned". I want to drop it because it's stupid and we're finished with it. Fact: I have gotten As on research papers in the social sciences. You're done. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:20 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Hopefully for those papers you actually backed up your claims with evidence, unlike this thread. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775533) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:14 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon I'm just calling your bullshit. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774493) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:16 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Subject: Consider yourself pnwed, then. "fuckin' tables" (as you put it):
Unless you're willing to argue that 25% of the student body somehow squeezes itself into that tiny 0.04 GPA gap. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:18 PM Author: Cowardly Field This is the part where the crowd chants "OOOHHHHHH" a la 8 mile. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774531) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:25 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Then I'll now agree that you have refuted claims of general grade inflation at Harvard as opposed to Carleton. However, I maintain (and I've talked to several people familiar with both systems) that the liberal arts subjects grade significantly harder at Carleton, in that professors in those subjects actually give Bs for decent work, and Cs for completed work. The absence of grade inflation probably suggests that more HYP students take the more difficult majors. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774586) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:30 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Is there a reason you can't just admit that you were proven wrong? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774630) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:39 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn I admitted that I was proven wrong regarding inflation of *mean* GPAs. However, grade inflation is predominantly observed in the arts and humanities subjects, not in the sciences. If more HYP students major in the sciences (which I would expect) then it would explain the absence of a GPA disparity. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774704) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:03 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon Do you actually know the ratio of science to non-science majors at Carleton? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774945) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:04 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn I don't. I know that it's considered to be high for an LAC, but low by University standards. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774954) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:06 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon Ok, so basically your speculation is based on hearsay? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774969) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:09 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike So in other words, you have no proof for your ridiculous claims. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774999) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:14 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Just like you "knew" there wasn't any grade inflation at Carleton, right? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775038) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:20 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn There's probably a little, but not much. For the most part, people at Carleton work really hard. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775092) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:23 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha As they do at other schools as well.
It looks as if Carleton's grades have gone up right along with all the other schools'. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:28 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn To your credit, I'd believe that people at CalTech (add also: MIT, Chicago, Harvey Mudd) work as hard, if not harder, as students at Carleton. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775143) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:34 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Very charitable of you.
I've never thought of Carleton as particularly more rigorous than any of the other top 10 (or whatever) LACs. Your assertion would be that it is? |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:39 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn I know little about the other LACs. It's probably less rigorous than Swarthmore, equal to Amherst, Williams, Reed, and somewhat more rigorous than a few of the others. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775237) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:27 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike And you know that Harvard students don't work really hard... how exactly? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775137) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:30 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn In math and the sciences, I know that they *do* work hard.
I'm sure that many people in other majors do work hard. It's much easier to slack at those places though. That may result more from the size of the school than average rigor of the classes; it's easier to slack and pick easy graders when there are more courses to choose from. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:42 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Or -- get this -- they're able to slack and still get good grades because they're *smart*? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775280) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:43 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn No one would argue that HYP students aren't smart. No one would argue that Carleton students aren't smart. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775290) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:46 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha And very few people who aren't Carleton trolls would argue that HYP students aren't smartER than Carleton students, is the obvious addedum to that. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775306) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:49 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Like I said, if you compare laterally-- for example, at the medians-- that's probably true. HYP have more applicants and can be more selective. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775321) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:50 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha I think if you compare laterally at any level, that's true. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775338) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:52 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Selectivity has nothing to do with it, it's about who ultimately enrolls.
Funny though that you don't mention class sizes -- particularly Harvard's. Harvard's class is significantly larger than Carleton, and yet it is *still* able to attract a student body that is on average smarter. One can only imagine how big the gap would be if Harvard had a class size as small as Carleton's! |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:57 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn I mentioned class sizes above.
Selectivity is based on supply and demand, not just class size (which is supply-side). There is much more demand for Harvard (northeastern location, international reputation, large research university) than for Carleton (midwestern, small LAC), no question about that. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:00 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike By that logic, fourth tier CUNY Law is more selective than some top 14s because it has a lower acceptance rate, and thus more "in demand." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775408) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:03 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn You also can't use acceptance rates as indicators of "demand". There people applying to t14s are a different set of people than those who apply to CUNY Law. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775429) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:14 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Okay, so what exactly is the point you're trying to make here? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775500) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:46 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn My point was that selectivity is based on supply and demand, not just supply.
If we're going to hold this market analogy, consider that, in economics "demand" isn't just a function of how many people want to buy widgets, but also how much they're willing to pay for them. A top-dollar buyer contributes more to the demand curve than an average buyer, by his increased willingness to pay.
The admissions "market" is somewhat different. Some notion of "student quality" (mostly static at time-of-application, dynamic before as people can work harder in order to strive for their top schools) would be analogous to willingness-to-pay; the lower bound for what the college accepts would be analogous to "price", how hard it is to get in.
CUNY may have as more applications than some T14s, but if the applicants are weaker, then there's less "demand" in this market. Demand, therefore, doesn't necessarily have to do with acceptance rate.
There is more demand for a northeastern research university with an international reputation for all-around excellence, than for a midwestern LAC with a national reputation for great teaching (#1). Hence, Harvard gets many more apps than Carleton (higher demand) and can be more selective. No one, not even an ardent Carleton troll, would argue against this. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:48 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike You yourself said that the average HYP student is smarter than the average Carleton student. In fact, you said the 50th percentile HYP student is equivalent to the 75th percentile Carleton student.
Therefore, it shouldn't be a big surprise that the average HYP student can write an A paper in less time than the average Carleton student. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:52 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Agreed. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775345) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:52 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn I said that, then realized that putting 75%C at 50%HYP was being way to generous to Harvard and revised the estimate in a later post to 65-70%.
That's about half a standard deviation, which is not meaningful enough to make the difference between 2 hours on an A paper vs. 2 weeks on a B paper, unless the B means significantly much more than an A.
Especially since getting good grades on academic papers is more a function of willingness to put time into them, than it is of intelligence, anyway. (Of course, both are factors.) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:55 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike "Especially since getting good grades on academic papers is more a function of willingness to put time into them, than it is of intelligence, anyway. (Of course, both are factors.)"
Sounds like someone who has never gotten an A on a social science research paper. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:06 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn This would be wrong. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775455) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:45 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Even at Caltech I did know some people who seemed to get by and even excel on not nearly as much work (in terms of time) as others. Some people are just fortunate like that.
And yes, I'd expect more of them to be at Harvard than Carleton. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:30 PM Author: Aromatic Public Bath Damn, Joe, you just took him down. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774631) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:37 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha NYCFan hasn't offered any good opportunities for pwnage lately, so I guess it was building up.
Thank you, though. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:08 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike "A 90th-percentile Carleton kid would pwn a 50th-percentile HYP, any day of the week. I'd say 75%C against 50%HYP is probably an even match."
Umm, doesn't that prove that HYP grades are not inflated, but are due to a stronger student body? If 75%C = 50%HYP, shouldn't it be expected that 50%HYP will get higher grades than 50%C simply because they are smarter (assuming there are no forced curves and the grade you earn is the grade you deserve)? |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:09 PM Author: Cowardly Field This is exactly my point, and why I made a thread called "pensive pwns himself on the subject of grade inflation" w/ a link. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774460) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:12 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn A 75/50 parity is not that big a difference in student quality. Furthermore, on revision, I think 75 is too high. Try 65 to 70, which is only half a standard dev. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774480) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:06 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Check out these threads (there are many, many more) for some more info about this. Law school is ENTIRELY a numbers game:
http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=134115&mc=36&forum_id=2#2095044
http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=161078&forum_id=2#2496635 |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:40 PM Author: Vengeful Twinkling Uncleanness your undergrad school doesn't have that much of an effect on law school admissions. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774228) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:33 PM Author: Aromatic Public Bath Not true. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774647) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:36 PM Author: Cowardly Field I think there is a bug in the system, I'm going to change my name to DISH2, and you guys tell me if my posts on this thread change to DISH2 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774192) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:37 PM Author: Cowardly Field now when I look at my own posts, they are by DISH2, what do you guys see? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774202) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:38 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon When you change your name, your name changes in all your posts. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774205) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:38 PM Author: Cowardly Field :( (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774217) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:38 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha It's not a bug. It keeps people from being able to just change names at will so much. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774208) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:38 PM Author: Cowardly Field but that was a fun part of the old system (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774215) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:40 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha I dunno. I kind of like it. I have my old original name (simply "Joe") registered and I may switch back at some point in time. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774231) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 2:42 PM Author: Vengeful Twinkling Uncleanness agreed (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774246) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:06 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike Just make another login if you want a "real" second name. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774439) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:07 PM Author: Cowardly Field But it's harder to switch rapidly.
You can't have a quick conversation with yourself! |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:08 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon You can try with having two browsers open, if you really want to. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774448) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:12 PM Author: Cowardly Field good thinking! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774481) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 3:19 PM Author: Cowardly Field Another link where pensive gets pwned by Joe (in this very thread!):
http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&mc=80&forum_id=1#2774513 |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:00 PM Author: odious gay corner pisswyrm wtf (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2774913) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:07 PM Author: orchid school cafeteria Two of the brightest posters on the college board waste vast amounts of time attacking each other online.
This is like trying to make sense out of nonsense. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:10 PM Author: odious gay corner pisswyrm It's an ego thing egged on by bystanders. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775008) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:13 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha This is 3-on-1 at least, the way I read it. Can't give me all the credit.
I think GTO and Binary Star might actually have made more posts than me.
And then DISH is throwing in his two cents, too. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:41 PM Author: orchid school cafeteria The posts need to be color-coded by team; there are way too many of them.
Also I think that the team-picker captain made an error because a 4 vs. 1 battle isn't very sporting, I would make up a ridiculous alias and start flaming but I can't work in the energy. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:47 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha I guess that's the problem with pick-your-own-side battles. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775313) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:51 PM Author: orchid school cafeteria Yep, I've always thought that the "Army of One" motto was completely bullshit. I don't want to be an "Army of One"-- I want to join an army of millions back by a platoon of Navy SEALS and an astonishing array of heavy artillery units! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775343) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:53 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Yeah. Well, pensive's getting pounded like Afghanistan against the Marine Corps, I guess. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775355) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 4:58 PM Author: Deranged Ape I would like to remark that by saying "two of", you are actually being to generous with him who is just another banal poster. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775390) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:13 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn No, while I'm not impressed with his posts, Joe is a very bright and accomplished individual. Having Googled him, I'll give him that. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775489) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:14 PM Author: Deranged Ape I am not denying his accomplishments, however his posts are not particularily bright. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775498) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:16 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn To be fair to him, the writing quality of my posts is definitely not what I would expect in an essay for publication, either. My average XO post probably takes 30 seconds. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775518) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:23 PM Author: Deranged Ape So do the posts of most posters, with a few exceptions such as jav's extensive life sorties or the quick griffen's copy/pasted statements. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775561) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 5:32 PM Author: odious gay corner pisswyrm jav types very fast. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2775641) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 7:30 PM Author: Cowardly Field This thread has exceeded my most ambitious expectations. Good work all around everybody. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2776501) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 7:31 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha I'm going out for the evening, so I will see you guys later.
Thanks for the confirmation of pwnage. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 7:34 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Thanks for giving me the chance to make this thread's title hilariously ironic.
I must go, too. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 7:45 PM Author: hyperventilating dilemma alpha Riiiight. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2776690) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 7:47 PM Author: Cowardly Field Cut him a little slack, he is pretty much the reason why this thread is brilliant. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2776712) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 7:54 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn To be fair, while I destroyed Joe in wit and repartee, I do believe I lost more than I won in the grade-inflation debate that started this thread. I'd say that one resolved 30/70, not in my favor. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2776786) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 9:22 PM Author: Diverse Hairless Preventive Strike And what 30% would that be? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2777737) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 8:00 PM Author: silver telephone it's true. rarely does someone allow themselves to be completely owned so thoroughly. it's a treat when it happens! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2776844) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 7:48 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn The reason I shouldn't be posting this is because, even though you have other, more important things be doing (as do I) tonight, you are absolutely addicted to having the last word. Feel free to leave another throwaway "Riiiight" in response to this message, and I'll let you have it. That'll make my point better than I can. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2776729) |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 8:02 PM Author: silver telephone hey mike, how about i do it for him and just tell you you're a really sketchy douchebag? how well does that make your point?
creep. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 9:20 PM Author: charismatic pale business firm azn Ladies and gentleman, I am a "really sketchy douchebag". Straight from the source.
I'm not a fan of Joe's OBNOXIOUS capitalization and the smug, douchebaggy tone it gives his writing every time he uses it, but at least he knows how to use the shift key. HTH |
|
Date: May 13th, 2005 9:22 PM Author: flirting trust fund tanning salon Notice the ? in his post. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#2777739) |
|
Date: May 14th, 2005 6:20 PM Author: silver telephone What Is Ambition?
Ambition is an American card game derivative of "Hearts." Players need to work for different goals depending on their cards and also keep an eye on the other players so they don't end up getting most points (using chips or other visible tokens to count points during hands is probably mandatory). Ambition is all the rage at Carleton College. |
|
Date: July 15th, 2006 12:02 PM Author: navy headpube bump for good times (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=181066&forum_id=1#6217186) |