Libs only care about getting rid of grades/tests b/c of URMs. True?
| onyx hall scourge upon the earth | 08/12/17 | | Apoplectic Trailer Park | 08/12/17 | | painfully honest aquamarine immigrant | 08/12/17 | | Glittery Cerise Cruise Ship | 08/12/17 | | internet-worthy institution toaster | 08/12/17 | | exciting erotic plaza | 08/12/17 | | Apoplectic Trailer Park | 08/12/17 | | painfully honest aquamarine immigrant | 08/12/17 | | painfully honest aquamarine immigrant | 08/12/17 | | Chrome fiercely-loyal field | 08/12/17 | | dun bisexual coldplay fan | 08/12/17 | | Histrionic boltzmann | 08/12/17 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: August 12th, 2017 11:21 PM Author: exciting erotic plaza
80% because of URMs
10% because of girls (this manifests as favoring grades over tests rather than disfavoring both)
10% because their own test scores were bad (ditto)
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3699511&forum_id=2#33975101) |
Date: August 12th, 2017 11:39 PM Author: Chrome fiercely-loyal field
it's now en vogue to see hyp students not as “the students with the most potential” but as “the students with the most potential because they’re at hyp.” there's some truth to that because admissions has become so hyperfocused on softs but when top schools are seen less as centers of training/education and more as a credential and a rite of passage to a bourgeois lifestyle then it no longer seems “fair” to put strict empirical guidelines on admission to the club.
an especially strong feeling among hypercompetitive 120iq-mos who want to finagle their way into writing for the nyt but who have no real intellectual ability on which to distinguish themselves. they *need* the credential for the lifestyle so they whine that credential can’t be hogged by the people with “one specific kind of intelligence.”
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3699511&forum_id=2#33975255) |
Date: August 12th, 2017 11:40 PM Author: dun bisexual coldplay fan
Not only libs care about this, but everyone who sickly imagines that to hand out more of someone else's money than your neighbor manages to hand out makes you somehow meaningfully superior to him or her, who did not outdo you at playing robin hood, across an infinitesimally narrow range of available ways for anyone to spend their own time, focused inwards on himself or focused outwards on others--both equally valid, but neither alone sufficient to always rendering him the more heroic, so it's complete garbage originating in the droning liberals' sub-dominant pitch, hustling grievances on behalf of another man, its arrogated spokesperson in chief, who eats first always or perishes for the unmerited altruism, as though martyrdom were the prize to one seeking first their personal safety and comfort. And what do you do when something comes along and punches you in the eye, do you think, "What is happening to me?" or do you act with justified ruthless efficiency when fearful for your own life? I like Heisenberg who reportedly skied steep slopes fast so he could feel close to death, using the experience of nearness to wake himself up to the beauty of life, so they have reported; I can tell you, I did not know my top gear was so tall and useless without abundant natural stamina, until I fought back death's invite one day, a whole bunch of gibberish, as even I can see though.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3699511&forum_id=2#33975270) |
|
|