What is so special about UVA, W&M, VT!?!??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:W&M is older than several Ivys - founded in 1693, I think.

UVa says founded 1819, but I think classes did not start that year.

VT is much newer, created explicitly to be the land-grant university.

UVA was built by enslaved people. What about W&M (possibly) and VT (maybe too new?)

Harvard sits atop stolen land.

Harvard and all of the ivies were built by enslaved people. Please read the Wikipedia article on U.S. Colleges and Universities and Skavery. It provides a list of colleges.

False. Not Cornell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

UVA was built by enslaved people. What about W&M (possibly) and VT (maybe too new?)

Look up 'Lemon Project' for W&M. They are not shying away from their past.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A degree from UVA is Ivy-league because UVA is one of the original Public Ivies.

Public Ivies offer the same standard of education as the Ivies, in a public school environment and at a public school cost. These schools are more than just non-Ivies — they're some of the best schools you can attend in the world today.

Just search "best public universities in USA" and you'll find UVA.

Ivy is an athletic league.

There are no public “Ivies.” There are no little “Ivies.” Use of these terms is a symptom of insecurity.

+1
Louder for the twits in the back. People are laughing behind their backs when they hear them refer to their kids' school as "Public Ivies, Little Ivies," etc.

Public Ivy has been a term used by college counselors since 1985. See Wikipedia. Get a grip and stop heckling ; you look like idiots.

+1. While I wouldn’t go around just saying “my kid goes to a public Ivy,” people who mock the term sound ignorant. It’s been common in the college world for decades.

And it’s been ridiculed the entire time. [b]

I personally love when people capitalize it like it’s a real thing.

. Only by you. No one else cares. It’s been a term in use since 1985 abd has its own wiki page. Go find some other aspect of UzvA to try and tear down. Sorry you are envious.

I went to an ivy and you think I’m envious of public ivies or little or plus?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A degree from UVA is Ivy-league because UVA is one of the original Public Ivies.

Public Ivies offer the same standard of education as the Ivies, in a public school environment and at a public school cost. These schools are more than just non-Ivies — they're some of the best schools you can attend in the world today.

Just search "best public universities in USA" and you'll find UVA.

Ivy is an athletic league.

There are no public “Ivies.” There are no little “Ivies.” Use of these terms is a symptom of insecurity.

+1
Louder for the twits in the back. People are laughing behind their backs when they hear them refer to their kids' school as "Public Ivies, Little Ivies," etc.

Public Ivy has been a term used by college counselors since 1985. See Wikipedia. Get a grip and stop heckling ; you look like idiots.

+1. While I wouldn’t go around just saying “my kid goes to a public Ivy,” people who mock the term sound ignorant. It’s been common in the college world for decades.

And it’s been ridiculed the entire time. [b]

I personally love when people capitalize it like it’s a real thing.

. Only by you. No one else cares. It’s been a term in use since 1985 abd has its own wiki page. Go find some other aspect of UzvA to try and tear down. Sorry you are envious.

I went to an ivy and you think I’m envious of public ivies or little or plus?

No, but I think you live in the past.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Entire country is on stolen land.

Not manhattan, we bought it for seashells!

Even Manhattan. The Native Americans thought it was more or less a lease and the land would be returned.

nobody committed to a specific date for that, so....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:W&M is older than several Ivys - founded in 1693, I think.

UVa says founded 1819, but I think classes did not start that year.

VT is much newer, created explicitly to be the land-grant university.

UVA was built by enslaved people. What about W&M (possibly) and VT (maybe too new?)

YES, William & Mary, too. Vt wasn’t established until 1872. However, other schools were built by enslaved people: Brown, Columbia, Barnard, Dartmouth, Barnard, U Penn, Hamilton, Harvard, Harvard Law, Johns Hopkins and Princeton, Rutgers, Furman and Yale. All of these case studies can be found in the wiki article “Slavery at American Colleges and Universities”. Stanford studies also discuss slavery at Oberlin, Emory, and Alabama

What wasn't built that way in that time period? Factories, schools, houses, ports, roads, bridges, military installations? What's the point being made? That slavery existed? What a news flash.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:W&M is older than several Ivys - founded in 1693, I think.

UVa says founded 1819, but I think classes did not start that year.

VT is much newer, created explicitly to be the land-grant university.

UVA was built by enslaved people. What about W&M (possibly) and VT (maybe too new?)

YES, William & Mary, too. Vt wasn’t established until 1872. However, other schools were built by enslaved people: Brown, Columbia, Barnard, Dartmouth, Barnard, U Penn, Hamilton, Harvard, Harvard Law, Johns Hopkins and Princeton, Rutgers, Furman and Yale. All of these case studies can be found in the wiki article “Slavery at American Colleges and Universities”. Stanford studies also discuss slavery at Oberlin, Emory, and Alabama

What wasn't built that way in that time period? Factories, schools, houses, ports, roads, bridges, military installations? What's the point being made? That slavery existed? What a news flash.

+2 The DCUM self-righteous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Entire country is on stolen land.

Not manhattan, we bought it for seashells!

Even Manhattan. The Native Americans thought it was more or less a lease and the land would be returned.

Always get it in writing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:W&M is older than several Ivys - founded in 1693, I think.

UVa says founded 1819, but I think classes did not start that year.

VT is much newer, created explicitly to be the land-grant university.

UVA was built by enslaved people. What about W&M (possibly) and VT (maybe too new?)

YES, William & Mary, too. Vt wasn’t established until 1872. However, other schools were built by enslaved people: Brown, Columbia, Barnard, Dartmouth, Barnard, U Penn, Hamilton, Harvard, Harvard Law, Johns Hopkins and Princeton, Rutgers, Furman and Yale. All of these case studies can be found in the wiki article “Slavery at American Colleges and Universities”. Stanford studies also discuss slavery at Oberlin, Emory, and Alabama

What wasn't built that way in that time period? Factories, schools, houses, ports, roads, bridges, military installations? What's the point being made? That slavery existed? What a news flash.

+1 some people just HAVE to have something to whine about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Entire country is on stolen land.

Not manhattan, we bought it for seashells!

Even Manhattan. The Native Americans thought it was more or less a lease and the land would be returned.

BS.

I am going to need to speak with a Native American Canarsee Tribe chief in 1626 before believing your self-serving and twisted narrative. Can you arrange that?

NYC was purchased fairly. End of story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A degree from UVA is Ivy-league because UVA is one of the original Public Ivies.

Public Ivies offer the same standard of education as the Ivies, in a public school environment and at a public school cost. These schools are more than just non-Ivies — they're some of the best schools you can attend in the world today.

Just search "best public universities in USA" and you'll find UVA.

Ivy is an athletic league.

There are no public “Ivies.” There are no little “Ivies.” Use of these terms is a symptom of insecurity.

+1
Louder for the twits in the back. People are laughing behind their backs when they hear them refer to their kids' school as "Public Ivies, Little Ivies," etc.

Public Ivy has been a term used by college counselors since 1985. See Wikipedia. Get a grip and stop heckling ; you look like idiots.

+1. While I wouldn’t go around just saying “my kid goes to a public Ivy,” people who mock the term sound ignorant. It’s been common in the college world for decades.

And it’s been ridiculed the entire time. [b]

I personally love when people capitalize it like it’s a real thing.

. Only by you. No one else cares. It’s been a term in use since 1985 abd has its own wiki page. Go find some other aspect of UzvA to try and tear down. Sorry you are envious.

I went to an ivy and you think I’m envious of public ivies or little or plus?

No, but I think you live in the past.
DP

Lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA, VT and W&M represent 50% of the schools south of the Mason-Dixon Line and east of the Mississippi worth attending.

What out of UNC, Wake, W&L, Emory, Georgetown, JHU, Duke, Davidson, USNA, Georgia Tech, Florida, etc. are not worth attending?

Bolded are 2 out of the 3. Inadvertently left USNA out, so not quite 50%. So one still not accounted for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:W&M is older than several Ivys - founded in 1693, I think.

UVa says founded 1819, but I think classes did not start that year.

VT is much newer, created explicitly to be the land-grant university.

UVA was built by enslaved people. What about W&M (possibly) and VT (maybe too new?)

Harvard sits atop stolen land.

Harvard and all of the ivies were built by enslaved people. Please read the Wikipedia article on U.S. Colleges and Universities and Skavery. It provides a list of colleges.

False. Not Cornell.

That’s because Cornell wasn’t built until 1865 when abolition was taking hold

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A degree from UVA is Ivy-league because UVA is one of the original Public Ivies.

Public Ivies offer the same standard of education as the Ivies, in a public school environment and at a public school cost. These schools are more than just non-Ivies — they're some of the best schools you can attend in the world today.

Just search "best public universities in USA" and you'll find UVA.

Ivy is an athletic league.

There are no public “Ivies.” There are no little “Ivies.” Use of these terms is a symptom of insecurity.

+1
Louder for the twits in the back. People are laughing behind their backs when they hear them refer to their kids' school as "Public Ivies, Little Ivies," etc.

Public Ivy has been a term used by college counselors since 1985. See Wikipedia. Get a grip and stop heckling ; you look like idiots.

+1. While I wouldn’t go around just saying “my kid goes to a public Ivy,” people who mock the term sound ignorant. It’s been common in the college world for decades.

And it’s been ridiculed the entire time. [b]

I personally love when people capitalize it like it’s a real thing.

. Only by you. No one else cares. It’s been a term in use since 1985 abd has its own wiki page. Go find some other aspect of UzvA to try and tear down. Sorry you are envious.

I went to an ivy and you think I’m envious of public ivies or little or plus?

No, but I think you live in the past.
DP

I'm sorry you didn't get in and that this is still so hard for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Entire country is on stolen land.

Not manhattan, we bought it for seashells!

Even Manhattan. The Native Americans thought it was more or less a lease and the land would be returned.

nobody committed to a specific date for that, so....

I am sure there were no potential understandings (language, cultural, "legal") between natives and Europeans in the early 1600s.