Changes in LACs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Midd boosters are very defensive but can not explain away current problems at the school. Hiring a new President is a start. As others have pointed out Midd has dropped to tie for 19th in US News, application decline and budget deficit not signs of a hot school like Duke or Vandy. More comparable to fine school like Colgate.

It’ you again pretending to be someone else because you’re not getting traction as usual. Someone at 10:08 put a fork in your finances claim so you need to pivot. Others haven’t pointed anything out about app drops because they are tiny and still up massively over the last 5 years. The budget deficit is tiny relative to the endowment and could be closed by simply reducing international financial aid to the same level as Williams. You’ll try over enrollment next but people in previous posts have shown the numbers that it happened all in one year and they are now graduated. You’ll then move on to “they are adding people to cover the deficit but the reality is that their new dorm is 50 beds bigger than the one it replaced and they have been very open about adding 50-75 additional students because they have now have the room and this number is nor larger than typical because with more kids going abroad each year the on campus population will remain stable.

Keep on trying little tool.

Please stop, pro-Midd troll. On behalf of Midd, stop saying it increased enrollment only one year; stop saying they have added only 50; and stop saying that they have no financial issues. These are lies. You sound unhinged, particularly when all of this is common knowledge for anyone who knows Midd. If you really want to be pro-Midd, say something positive about the school so the focus is not on denial.

Constantly repeating your lies will not make them true. People constantly point you to the actual data sources such as

https://www.middlebury.edu/assessment-institutional-research/institutional-data/middlebury-college

showing the actual enrollment over the past 10 years (and the one year of over enrollment) and highlighting that going to between 2600 and 2650 is an increase of 30-70 or so students which is happening coincident with a new dorm opening this year yet you persist. We point out that Middlebury has a AA bond rating yet you blather about non-existent ‘financial problems’. We correct you with fact yet you continue to lie.

You mean the non-existent financial problems the school’s own leadership has admitted to?

This has been pointed out to you in multiple threads by about a dozen different posters, and yet here you still are.

Misdirection and gaslighting, another swing and a miss.

Yes, it’s misdirection and gaslighting when the school’s top leadership publishes open letters on its website about problems with its structural deficit that they specifically note are unique among NESCAC schools and not just related to the Institute. Yep. Sure thing.

Denialism bordering on insanity right here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Midd boosters are very defensive but can not explain away current problems at the school. Hiring a new President is a start. As others have pointed out Midd has dropped to tie for 19th in US News, application decline and budget deficit not signs of a hot school like Duke or Vandy. More comparable to fine school like Colgate.

It’ you again pretending to be someone else because you’re not getting traction as usual. Someone at 10:08 put a fork in your finances claim so you need to pivot. Others haven’t pointed anything out about app drops because they are tiny and still up massively over the last 5 years. The budget deficit is tiny relative to the endowment and could be closed by simply reducing international financial aid to the same level as Williams. You’ll try over enrollment next but people in previous posts have shown the numbers that it happened all in one year and they are now graduated. You’ll then move on to “they are adding people to cover the deficit but the reality is that their new dorm is 50 beds bigger than the one it replaced and they have been very open about adding 50-75 additional students because they have now have the room and this number is nor larger than typical because with more kids going abroad each year the on campus population will remain stable.

Keep on trying little tool.

Please stop, pro-Midd troll. On behalf of Midd, stop saying it increased enrollment only one year; stop saying they have added only 50; and stop saying that they have no financial issues. These are lies. You sound unhinged, particularly when all of this is common knowledge for anyone who knows Midd. If you really want to be pro-Midd, say something positive about the school so the focus is not on denial.

Constantly repeating your lies will not make them true. People constantly point you to the actual data sources such as

https://www.middlebury.edu/assessment-institutional-research/institutional-data/middlebury-college

showing the actual enrollment over the past 10 years (and the one year of over enrollment) and highlighting that going to between 2600 and 2650 is an increase of 30-70 or so students which is happening coincident with a new dorm opening this year yet you persist. We point out that Middlebury has a AA bond rating yet you blather about non-existent ‘financial problems’. We correct you with fact yet you continue to lie.

You mean the non-existent financial problems the school’s own leadership has admitted to?

This has been pointed out to you in multiple threads by about a dozen different posters, and yet here you still are.

Misdirection and gaslighting, another swing and a miss.

Yes, it’s misdirection and gaslighting when the school’s top leadership publishes open letters on its website about problems with its structural deficit that they specifically note are unique among NESCAC schools and not just related to the Institute. Yep. Sure thing.

Denialism bordering on insanity right here.

Can you both do us a favor and take your Middlebury argument elsewhere? I’d say start another thread, but there are already multiple ones out there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Midd boosters are very defensive but can not explain away current problems at the school. Hiring a new President is a start. As others have pointed out Midd has dropped to tie for 19th in US News, application decline and budget deficit not signs of a hot school like Duke or Vandy. More comparable to fine school like Colgate.

It’ you again pretending to be someone else because you’re not getting traction as usual. Someone at 10:08 put a fork in your finances claim so you need to pivot. Others haven’t pointed anything out about app drops because they are tiny and still up massively over the last 5 years. The budget deficit is tiny relative to the endowment and could be closed by simply reducing international financial aid to the same level as Williams. You’ll try over enrollment next but people in previous posts have shown the numbers that it happened all in one year and they are now graduated. You’ll then move on to “they are adding people to cover the deficit but the reality is that their new dorm is 50 beds bigger than the one it replaced and they have been very open about adding 50-75 additional students because they have now have the room and this number is nor larger than typical because with more kids going abroad each year the on campus population will remain stable.

Keep on trying little tool.

Please stop, pro-Midd troll. On behalf of Midd, stop saying it increased enrollment only one year; stop saying they have added only 50; and stop saying that they have no financial issues. These are lies. You sound unhinged, particularly when all of this is common knowledge for anyone who knows Midd. If you really want to be pro-Midd, say something positive about the school so the focus is not on denial.

Constantly repeating your lies will not make them true. People constantly point you to the actual data sources such as

https://www.middlebury.edu/assessment-institutional-research/institutional-data/middlebury-college

showing the actual enrollment over the past 10 years (and the one year of over enrollment) and highlighting that going to between 2600 and 2650 is an increase of 30-70 or so students which is happening coincident with a new dorm opening this year yet you persist. We point out that Middlebury has a AA bond rating yet you blather about non-existent ‘financial problems’. We correct you with fact yet you continue to lie.

You mean the non-existent financial problems the school’s own leadership has admitted to?

This has been pointed out to you in multiple threads by about a dozen different posters, and yet here you still are.

Misdirection and gaslighting, another swing and a miss.

Yes, it’s misdirection and gaslighting when the school’s top leadership publishes open letters on its website about problems with its structural deficit that they specifically note are unique among NESCAC schools and not just related to the Institute. Yep. Sure thing.

Denialism bordering on insanity right here.

Can you both do us a favor and take your Middlebury argument elsewhere? I’d say start another thread, but there are already multiple ones out there.

I mean, it’s relevant given that the whole premise of the thread is that LACs could gain in popularity as they aren’t facing the research cuts and endowment taxes that universities are. But if a school is still retrenching to address an ongoing structural deficit, it won’t benefit in the same way. Just because there is one persistent poster in denial about that doesn’t change the reality. (And I’m not the only one posting about it here, for the record. I joined this discussion late.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Midd boosters are very defensive but can not explain away current problems at the school. Hiring a new President is a start. As others have pointed out Midd has dropped to tie for 19th in US News, application decline and budget deficit not signs of a hot school like Duke or Vandy. More comparable to fine school like Colgate.

It’ you again pretending to be someone else because you’re not getting traction as usual. Someone at 10:08 put a fork in your finances claim so you need to pivot. Others haven’t pointed anything out about app drops because they are tiny and still up massively over the last 5 years. The budget deficit is tiny relative to the endowment and could be closed by simply reducing international financial aid to the same level as Williams. You’ll try over enrollment next but people in previous posts have shown the numbers that it happened all in one year and they are now graduated. You’ll then move on to “they are adding people to cover the deficit but the reality is that their new dorm is 50 beds bigger than the one it replaced and they have been very open about adding 50-75 additional students because they have now have the room and this number is nor larger than typical because with more kids going abroad each year the on campus population will remain stable.

Keep on trying little tool.

Please stop, pro-Midd troll. On behalf of Midd, stop saying it increased enrollment only one year; stop saying they have added only 50; and stop saying that they have no financial issues. These are lies. You sound unhinged, particularly when all of this is common knowledge for anyone who knows Midd. If you really want to be pro-Midd, say something positive about the school so the focus is not on denial.

Constantly repeating your lies will not make them true. People constantly point you to the actual data sources such as

https://www.middlebury.edu/assessment-institutional-research/institutional-data/middlebury-college

showing the actual enrollment over the past 10 years (and the one year of over enrollment) and highlighting that going to between 2600 and 2650 is an increase of 30-70 or so students which is happening coincident with a new dorm opening this year yet you persist. We point out that Middlebury has a AA bond rating yet you blather about non-existent ‘financial problems’. We correct you with fact yet you continue to lie.

You mean the non-existent financial problems the school’s own leadership has admitted to?

This has been pointed out to you in multiple threads by about a dozen different posters, and yet here you still are.

Misdirection and gaslighting, another swing and a miss.

Yes, it’s misdirection and gaslighting when the school’s top leadership publishes open letters on its website about problems with its structural deficit that they specifically note are unique among NESCAC schools and not just related to the Institute. Yep. Sure thing.

Denialism bordering on insanity right here.

Can you both do us a favor and take your Middlebury argument elsewhere? I’d say start another thread, but there are already multiple ones out there.

I mean, it’s relevant given that the whole premise of the thread is that LACs could gain in popularity as they aren’t facing the research cuts and endowment taxes that universities are. But if a school is still retrenching to address an ongoing structural deficit, it won’t benefit in the same way. Just because there is one persistent poster in denial about that doesn’t change the reality. (And I’m not the only one posting about it here, for the record. I joined this discussion late.)

Thou doeth protest too much…..the gaslighting continues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Midd boosters are very defensive but can not explain away current problems at the school. Hiring a new President is a start. As others have pointed out Midd has dropped to tie for 19th in US News, application decline and budget deficit not signs of a hot school like Duke or Vandy. More comparable to fine school like Colgate.

It’ you again pretending to be someone else because you’re not getting traction as usual. Someone at 10:08 put a fork in your finances claim so you need to pivot. Others haven’t pointed anything out about app drops because they are tiny and still up massively over the last 5 years. The budget deficit is tiny relative to the endowment and could be closed by simply reducing international financial aid to the same level as Williams. You’ll try over enrollment next but people in previous posts have shown the numbers that it happened all in one year and they are now graduated. You’ll then move on to “they are adding people to cover the deficit but the reality is that their new dorm is 50 beds bigger than the one it replaced and they have been very open about adding 50-75 additional students because they have now have the room and this number is nor larger than typical because with more kids going abroad each year the on campus population will remain stable.

Keep on trying little tool.

Please stop, pro-Midd troll. On behalf of Midd, stop saying it increased enrollment only one year; stop saying they have added only 50; and stop saying that they have no financial issues. These are lies. You sound unhinged, particularly when all of this is common knowledge for anyone who knows Midd. If you really want to be pro-Midd, say something positive about the school so the focus is not on denial.

Constantly repeating your lies will not make them true. People constantly point you to the actual data sources such as

https://www.middlebury.edu/assessment-institutional-research/institutional-data/middlebury-college

showing the actual enrollment over the past 10 years (and the one year of over enrollment) and highlighting that going to between 2600 and 2650 is an increase of 30-70 or so students which is happening coincident with a new dorm opening this year yet you persist. We point out that Middlebury has a AA bond rating yet you blather about non-existent ‘financial problems’. We correct you with fact yet you continue to lie.

You mean the non-existent financial problems the school’s own leadership has admitted to?

This has been pointed out to you in multiple threads by about a dozen different posters, and yet here you still are.

Misdirection and gaslighting, another swing and a miss.

Yes, it’s misdirection and gaslighting when the school’s top leadership publishes open letters on its website about problems with its structural deficit that they specifically note are unique among NESCAC schools and not just related to the Institute. Yep. Sure thing.

Denialism bordering on insanity right here.

Can you both do us a favor and take your Middlebury argument elsewhere? I’d say start another thread, but there are already multiple ones out there.

What you don’t understand is that there are several posters trying to make the Midd troll go away. Instead you are positing this as a rational argument between two people, legitimizing the troll. You yourself acknowledge that the problem is recurring, so either take a stand yourself — or stay out of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Midd boosters are very defensive but can not explain away current problems at the school. Hiring a new President is a start. As others have pointed out Midd has dropped to tie for 19th in US News, application decline and budget deficit not signs of a hot school like Duke or Vandy. More comparable to fine school like Colgate.

It’ you again pretending to be someone else because you’re not getting traction as usual. Someone at 10:08 put a fork in your finances claim so you need to pivot. Others haven’t pointed anything out about app drops because they are tiny and still up massively over the last 5 years. The budget deficit is tiny relative to the endowment and could be closed by simply reducing international financial aid to the same level as Williams. You’ll try over enrollment next but people in previous posts have shown the numbers that it happened all in one year and they are now graduated. You’ll then move on to “they are adding people to cover the deficit but the reality is that their new dorm is 50 beds bigger than the one it replaced and they have been very open about adding 50-75 additional students because they have now have the room and this number is nor larger than typical because with more kids going abroad each year the on campus population will remain stable.

Keep on trying little tool.

Please stop, pro-Midd troll. On behalf of Midd, stop saying it increased enrollment only one year; stop saying they have added only 50; and stop saying that they have no financial issues. These are lies. You sound unhinged, particularly when all of this is common knowledge for anyone who knows Midd. If you really want to be pro-Midd, say something positive about the school so the focus is not on denial.

Constantly repeating your lies will not make them true. People constantly point you to the actual data sources such as

https://www.middlebury.edu/assessment-institutional-research/institutional-data/middlebury-college

showing the actual enrollment over the past 10 years (and the one year of over enrollment) and highlighting that going to between 2600 and 2650 is an increase of 30-70 or so students which is happening coincident with a new dorm opening this year yet you persist. We point out that Middlebury has a AA bond rating yet you blather about non-existent ‘financial problems’. We correct you with fact yet you continue to lie.

You mean the non-existent financial problems the school’s own leadership has admitted to?

This has been pointed out to you in multiple threads by about a dozen different posters, and yet here you still are.

Misdirection and gaslighting, another swing and a miss.

Yes, it’s misdirection and gaslighting when the school’s top leadership publishes open letters on its website about problems with its structural deficit that they specifically note are unique among NESCAC schools and not just related to the Institute. Yep. Sure thing.

Denialism bordering on insanity right here.

Can you both do us a favor and take your Middlebury argument elsewhere? I’d say start another thread, but there are already multiple ones out there.

What you don’t understand is that there are several posters trying to make the Midd troll go away. Instead you are positing this as a rational argument between two people, legitimizing the troll. You yourself acknowledge that the problem is recurring, so either take a stand yourself — or stay out of it.

What I see is bickering between one or more boosters and one or more trolls.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Midd boosters are very defensive but can not explain away current problems at the school. Hiring a new President is a start. As others have pointed out Midd has dropped to tie for 19th in US News, application decline and budget deficit not signs of a hot school like Duke or Vandy. More comparable to fine school like Colgate.

It’ you again pretending to be someone else because you’re not getting traction as usual. Someone at 10:08 put a fork in your finances claim so you need to pivot. Others haven’t pointed anything out about app drops because they are tiny and still up massively over the last 5 years. The budget deficit is tiny relative to the endowment and could be closed by simply reducing international financial aid to the same level as Williams. You’ll try over enrollment next but people in previous posts have shown the numbers that it happened all in one year and they are now graduated. You’ll then move on to “they are adding people to cover the deficit but the reality is that their new dorm is 50 beds bigger than the one it replaced and they have been very open about adding 50-75 additional students because they have now have the room and this number is nor larger than typical because with more kids going abroad each year the on campus population will remain stable.

Keep on trying little tool.

Please stop, pro-Midd troll. On behalf of Midd, stop saying it increased enrollment only one year; stop saying they have added only 50; and stop saying that they have no financial issues. These are lies. You sound unhinged, particularly when all of this is common knowledge for anyone who knows Midd. If you really want to be pro-Midd, say something positive about the school so the focus is not on denial.

Constantly repeating your lies will not make them true. People constantly point you to the actual data sources such as

https://www.middlebury.edu/assessment-institutional-research/institutional-data/middlebury-college

showing the actual enrollment over the past 10 years (and the one year of over enrollment) and highlighting that going to between 2600 and 2650 is an increase of 30-70 or so students which is happening coincident with a new dorm opening this year yet you persist. We point out that Middlebury has a AA bond rating yet you blather about non-existent ‘financial problems’. We correct you with fact yet you continue to lie.

You mean the non-existent financial problems the school’s own leadership has admitted to?

This has been pointed out to you in multiple threads by about a dozen different posters, and yet here you still are.

Misdirection and gaslighting, another swing and a miss.

Yes, it’s misdirection and gaslighting when the school’s top leadership publishes open letters on its website about problems with its structural deficit that they specifically note are unique among NESCAC schools and not just related to the Institute. Yep. Sure thing.

Denialism bordering on insanity right here.

Can you both do us a favor and take your Middlebury argument elsewhere? I’d say start another thread, but there are already multiple ones out there.

I mean, it’s relevant given that the whole premise of the thread is that LACs could gain in popularity as they aren’t facing the research cuts and endowment taxes that universities are. But if a school is still retrenching to address an ongoing structural deficit, it won’t benefit in the same way. Just because there is one persistent poster in denial about that doesn’t change the reality. (And I’m not the only one posting about it here, for the record. I joined this discussion late.)

It would be one thing if new information was being added to the conversation, but it's not. It's one person/group saying again and again that Middlebury is in financial trouble and purposefully over-enrolling, and another person/group saying that's not the case. You've all provided your arguments and data. Let people decide for themselves and get on with it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Midd boosters are very defensive but can not explain away current problems at the school. Hiring a new President is a start. As others have pointed out Midd has dropped to tie for 19th in US News, application decline and budget deficit not signs of a hot school like Duke or Vandy. More comparable to fine school like Colgate.

It’ you again pretending to be someone else because you’re not getting traction as usual. Someone at 10:08 put a fork in your finances claim so you need to pivot. Others haven’t pointed anything out about app drops because they are tiny and still up massively over the last 5 years. The budget deficit is tiny relative to the endowment and could be closed by simply reducing international financial aid to the same level as Williams. You’ll try over enrollment next but people in previous posts have shown the numbers that it happened all in one year and they are now graduated. You’ll then move on to “they are adding people to cover the deficit but the reality is that their new dorm is 50 beds bigger than the one it replaced and they have been very open about adding 50-75 additional students because they have now have the room and this number is nor larger than typical because with more kids going abroad each year the on campus population will remain stable.

Keep on trying little tool.

Please stop, pro-Midd troll. On behalf of Midd, stop saying it increased enrollment only one year; stop saying they have added only 50; and stop saying that they have no financial issues. These are lies. You sound unhinged, particularly when all of this is common knowledge for anyone who knows Midd. If you really want to be pro-Midd, say something positive about the school so the focus is not on denial.

Constantly repeating your lies will not make them true. People constantly point you to the actual data sources such as

https://www.middlebury.edu/assessment-institutional-research/institutional-data/middlebury-college

showing the actual enrollment over the past 10 years (and the one year of over enrollment) and highlighting that going to between 2600 and 2650 is an increase of 30-70 or so students which is happening coincident with a new dorm opening this year yet you persist. We point out that Middlebury has a AA bond rating yet you blather about non-existent ‘financial problems’. We correct you with fact yet you continue to lie.

You mean the non-existent financial problems the school’s own leadership has admitted to?

This has been pointed out to you in multiple threads by about a dozen different posters, and yet here you still are.

Misdirection and gaslighting, another swing and a miss.

Yes, it’s misdirection and gaslighting when the school’s top leadership publishes open letters on its website about problems with its structural deficit that they specifically note are unique among NESCAC schools and not just related to the Institute. Yep. Sure thing.

Denialism bordering on insanity right here.

Can you both do us a favor and take your Middlebury argument elsewhere? I’d say start another thread, but there are already multiple ones out there.

What you don’t understand is that there are several posters trying to make the Midd troll go away. Instead you are positing this as a rational argument between two people, legitimizing the troll. You yourself acknowledge that the problem is recurring, so either take a stand yourself — or stay out of it.

What I see is bickering between one or more boosters and one or more trolls.

What you see is multiple posters (not boosters) trying to keep a single Troll in check. As others have mentioned this isn't anything new, it's happened before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Midd boosters are very defensive but can not explain away current problems at the school. Hiring a new President is a start. As others have pointed out Midd has dropped to tie for 19th in US News, application decline and budget deficit not signs of a hot school like Duke or Vandy. More comparable to fine school like Colgate.

It’ you again pretending to be someone else because you’re not getting traction as usual. Someone at 10:08 put a fork in your finances claim so you need to pivot. Others haven’t pointed anything out about app drops because they are tiny and still up massively over the last 5 years. The budget deficit is tiny relative to the endowment and could be closed by simply reducing international financial aid to the same level as Williams. You’ll try over enrollment next but people in previous posts have shown the numbers that it happened all in one year and they are now graduated. You’ll then move on to “they are adding people to cover the deficit but the reality is that their new dorm is 50 beds bigger than the one it replaced and they have been very open about adding 50-75 additional students because they have now have the room and this number is nor larger than typical because with more kids going abroad each year the on campus population will remain stable.

Keep on trying little tool.

Please stop, pro-Midd troll. On behalf of Midd, stop saying it increased enrollment only one year; stop saying they have added only 50; and stop saying that they have no financial issues. These are lies. You sound unhinged, particularly when all of this is common knowledge for anyone who knows Midd. If you really want to be pro-Midd, say something positive about the school so the focus is not on denial.

Constantly repeating your lies will not make them true. People constantly point you to the actual data sources such as

https://www.middlebury.edu/assessment-institutional-research/institutional-data/middlebury-college

showing the actual enrollment over the past 10 years (and the one year of over enrollment) and highlighting that going to between 2600 and 2650 is an increase of 30-70 or so students which is happening coincident with a new dorm opening this year yet you persist. We point out that Middlebury has a AA bond rating yet you blather about non-existent ‘financial problems’. We correct you with fact yet you continue to lie.

You mean the non-existent financial problems the school’s own leadership has admitted to?

This has been pointed out to you in multiple threads by about a dozen different posters, and yet here you still are.

Misdirection and gaslighting, another swing and a miss.

Yes, it’s misdirection and gaslighting when the school’s top leadership publishes open letters on its website about problems with its structural deficit that they specifically note are unique among NESCAC schools and not just related to the Institute. Yep. Sure thing.

Denialism bordering on insanity right here.

Can you both do us a favor and take your Middlebury argument elsewhere? I’d say start another thread, but there are already multiple ones out there.

What you don’t understand is that there are several posters trying to make the Midd troll go away. Instead you are positing this as a rational argument between two people, legitimizing the troll. You yourself acknowledge that the problem is recurring, so either take a stand yourself — or stay out of it.

What I see is bickering between one or more boosters and one or more trolls.

What I see is a milquetoast wanting to appear noble by not taking a stand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Midd boosters are very defensive but can not explain away current problems at the school. Hiring a new President is a start. As others have pointed out Midd has dropped to tie for 19th in US News, application decline and budget deficit not signs of a hot school like Duke or Vandy. More comparable to fine school like Colgate.

It’ you again pretending to be someone else because you’re not getting traction as usual. Someone at 10:08 put a fork in your finances claim so you need to pivot. Others haven’t pointed anything out about app drops because they are tiny and still up massively over the last 5 years. The budget deficit is tiny relative to the endowment and could be closed by simply reducing international financial aid to the same level as Williams. You’ll try over enrollment next but people in previous posts have shown the numbers that it happened all in one year and they are now graduated. You’ll then move on to “they are adding people to cover the deficit but the reality is that their new dorm is 50 beds bigger than the one it replaced and they have been very open about adding 50-75 additional students because they have now have the room and this number is nor larger than typical because with more kids going abroad each year the on campus population will remain stable.

Keep on trying little tool.

Please stop, pro-Midd troll. On behalf of Midd, stop saying it increased enrollment only one year; stop saying they have added only 50; and stop saying that they have no financial issues. These are lies. You sound unhinged, particularly when all of this is common knowledge for anyone who knows Midd. If you really want to be pro-Midd, say something positive about the school so the focus is not on denial.

Constantly repeating your lies will not make them true. People constantly point you to the actual data sources such as

https://www.middlebury.edu/assessment-institutional-research/institutional-data/middlebury-college

showing the actual enrollment over the past 10 years (and the one year of over enrollment) and highlighting that going to between 2600 and 2650 is an increase of 30-70 or so students which is happening coincident with a new dorm opening this year yet you persist. We point out that Middlebury has a AA bond rating yet you blather about non-existent ‘financial problems’. We correct you with fact yet you continue to lie.

You mean the non-existent financial problems the school’s own leadership has admitted to?

This has been pointed out to you in multiple threads by about a dozen different posters, and yet here you still are.

Misdirection and gaslighting, another swing and a miss.

Yes, it’s misdirection and gaslighting when the school’s top leadership publishes open letters on its website about problems with its structural deficit that they specifically note are unique among NESCAC schools and not just related to the Institute. Yep. Sure thing.

Denialism bordering on insanity right here.

Can you both do us a favor and take your Middlebury argument elsewhere? I’d say start another thread, but there are already multiple ones out there.

I mean, it’s relevant given that the whole premise of the thread is that LACs could gain in popularity as they aren’t facing the research cuts and endowment taxes that universities are. But if a school is still retrenching to address an ongoing structural deficit, it won’t benefit in the same way. Just because there is one persistent poster in denial about that doesn’t change the reality. (And I’m not the only one posting about it here, for the record. I joined this discussion late.)

It would be one thing if new information was being added to the conversation, but it's not. It's one person/group saying again and again that Middlebury is in financial trouble and purposefully over-enrolling, and another person/group saying that's not the case. You've all provided your arguments and data. Let people decide for themselves and get on with it!

Maybe you should take your own advice and find another thread. No one asked you to be the thread police, especially for an issue that is germane to the original post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:and penn state has an even bigger alumni group than all of them! but the correlation between size of alumni group and the quality of the help is meaningless. The only other SLAC - other than Williams and Amherst - with an alumni group that actually gets kids jobs, is the much maligned (on this site) W&L. Swarthmore kids don’t typically enjoy their 4 years, and happy to cut ties from what I’ve seen. Swarthmore is a tough 4 years and academics arguably the best and most intense of all save UChicago, but that doesn’t necessarily lead to a fun 4 years

The academics is hard but totally manageable (my kid had high rigor classes in HS, and had no problems adjusting tvo Swat). Allows for activities/campus jobs and time to do fun stuff too. The learning environment is stimulating, the facilities and campus top-notch, professors are by and large very good. My kid is having a wonderful experience at Swarthmore.

of course there are exceptions like your kid, but williams is much more fun than swarthmore

I have a kid at Swat. It’s not really for the play hard crowd. She has fun on her own terms, but not the kind of fun DH and I had.

Can you explain more? I just took my rising junior through Swat, Haverford, Penn, Wesleyan, and BC. He loved Swat; the campus is beautiful, the tour guide was quirky and really compelling about why it is such a great place to be. In what ways is it intense? Fwiw my kid is intense in some ways; his default setting is trying his absolute hardest whether at sports or school or whatever. (I have another kid who is preternaturally chill, it's just their personalities!) Both of my kids are very social, neither one drinks or vapes or whatever. I keep hearing the intense thing about Swat and I don't know whether I should be encouraging my kid there or shooing him away.

Fwiw he also had very positive impressions of Wesleyan and Penn. Haverford was a miss, BC was a maybe but probably too rahrah.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Midd boosters are very defensive but can not explain away current problems at the school. Hiring a new President is a start. As others have pointed out Midd has dropped to tie for 19th in US News, application decline and budget deficit not signs of a hot school like Duke or Vandy. More comparable to fine school like Colgate.

It’ you again pretending to be someone else because you’re not getting traction as usual. Someone at 10:08 put a fork in your finances claim so you need to pivot. Others haven’t pointed anything out about app drops because they are tiny and still up massively over the last 5 years. The budget deficit is tiny relative to the endowment and could be closed by simply reducing international financial aid to the same level as Williams. You’ll try over enrollment next but people in previous posts have shown the numbers that it happened all in one year and they are now graduated. You’ll then move on to “they are adding people to cover the deficit but the reality is that their new dorm is 50 beds bigger than the one it replaced and they have been very open about adding 50-75 additional students because they have now have the room and this number is nor larger than typical because with more kids going abroad each year the on campus population will remain stable.

Keep on trying little tool.

Please stop, pro-Midd troll. On behalf of Midd, stop saying it increased enrollment only one year; stop saying they have added only 50; and stop saying that they have no financial issues. These are lies. You sound unhinged, particularly when all of this is common knowledge for anyone who knows Midd. If you really want to be pro-Midd, say something positive about the school so the focus is not on denial.

Constantly repeating your lies will not make them true. People constantly point you to the actual data sources such as

https://www.middlebury.edu/assessment-institutional-research/institutional-data/middlebury-college

showing the actual enrollment over the past 10 years (and the one year of over enrollment) and highlighting that going to between 2600 and 2650 is an increase of 30-70 or so students which is happening coincident with a new dorm opening this year yet you persist. We point out that Middlebury has a AA bond rating yet you blather about non-existent ‘financial problems’. We correct you with fact yet you continue to lie.

You mean the non-existent financial problems the school’s own leadership has admitted to?

This has been pointed out to you in multiple threads by about a dozen different posters, and yet here you still are.

Misdirection and gaslighting, another swing and a miss.

Yes, it’s misdirection and gaslighting when the school’s top leadership publishes open letters on its website about problems with its structural deficit that they specifically note are unique among NESCAC schools and not just related to the Institute. Yep. Sure thing.

Denialism bordering on insanity right here.

Can you both do us a favor and take your Middlebury argument elsewhere? I’d say start another thread, but there are already multiple ones out there.

I mean, it’s relevant given that the whole premise of the thread is that LACs could gain in popularity as they aren’t facing the research cuts and endowment taxes that universities are. But if a school is still retrenching to address an ongoing structural deficit, it won’t benefit in the same way. Just because there is one persistent poster in denial about that doesn’t change the reality. (And I’m not the only one posting about it here, for the record. I joined this discussion late.)

It would be one thing if new information was being added to the conversation, but it's not. It's one person/group saying again and again that Middlebury is in financial trouble and purposefully over-enrolling, and another person/group saying that's not the case. You've all provided your arguments and data. Let people decide for themselves and get on with it!

Maybe you should take your own advice and find another thread. No one asked you to be the thread police, especially for an issue that is germane to the original post.

Yap…yap…yap

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:and penn state has an even bigger alumni group than all of them! but the correlation between size of alumni group and the quality of the help is meaningless. The only other SLAC - other than Williams and Amherst - with an alumni group that actually gets kids jobs, is the much maligned (on this site) W&L. Swarthmore kids don’t typically enjoy their 4 years, and happy to cut ties from what I’ve seen. Swarthmore is a tough 4 years and academics arguably the best and most intense of all save UChicago, but that doesn’t necessarily lead to a fun 4 years

The academics is hard but totally manageable (my kid had high rigor classes in HS, and had no problems adjusting tvo Swat). Allows for activities/campus jobs and time to do fun stuff too. The learning environment is stimulating, the facilities and campus top-notch, professors are by and large very good. My kid is having a wonderful experience at Swarthmore.

of course there are exceptions like your kid, but williams is much more fun than swarthmore

I have a kid at Swat. It’s not really for the play hard crowd. She has fun on her own terms, but not the kind of fun DH and I had.

Can you explain more? I just took my rising junior through Swat, Haverford, Penn, Wesleyan, and BC. He loved Swat; the campus is beautiful, the tour guide was quirky and really compelling about why it is such a great place to be. In what ways is it intense? Fwiw my kid is intense in some ways; his default setting is trying his absolute hardest whether at sports or school or whatever. (I have another kid who is preternaturally chill, it's just their personalities!) Both of my kids are very social, neither one drinks or vapes or whatever. I keep hearing the intense thing about Swat and I don't know whether I should be encouraging my kid there or shooing him away.

Fwiw he also had very positive impressions of Wesleyan and Penn. Haverford was a miss, BC was a maybe but probably too rahrah.

Your kid might be a fit. The course rigor is high but I get the sense that the kids are pretty collaborative with each other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:and penn state has an even bigger alumni group than all of them! but the correlation between size of alumni group and the quality of the help is meaningless. The only other SLAC - other than Williams and Amherst - with an alumni group that actually gets kids jobs, is the much maligned (on this site) W&L. Swarthmore kids don’t typically enjoy their 4 years, and happy to cut ties from what I’ve seen. Swarthmore is a tough 4 years and academics arguably the best and most intense of all save UChicago, but that doesn’t necessarily lead to a fun 4 years

The academics is hard but totally manageable (my kid had high rigor classes in HS, and had no problems adjusting tvo Swat). Allows for activities/campus jobs and time to do fun stuff too. The learning environment is stimulating, the facilities and campus top-notch, professors are by and large very good. My kid is having a wonderful experience at Swarthmore.

of course there are exceptions like your kid, but williams is much more fun than swarthmore

I have a kid at Swat. It’s not really for the play hard crowd. She has fun on her own terms, but not the kind of fun DH and I had.

Can you explain more? I just took my rising junior through Swat, Haverford, Penn, Wesleyan, and BC. He loved Swat; the campus is beautiful, the tour guide was quirky and really compelling about why it is such a great place to be. In what ways is it intense? Fwiw my kid is intense in some ways; his default setting is trying his absolute hardest whether at sports or school or whatever. (I have another kid who is preternaturally chill, it's just their personalities!) Both of my kids are very social, neither one drinks or vapes or whatever. I keep hearing the intense thing about Swat and I don't know whether I should be encouraging my kid there or shooing him away.

Fwiw he also had very positive impressions of Wesleyan and Penn. Haverford was a miss, BC was a maybe but probably too rahrah.

Not PP, but I’m the other Swat parent who’s posted before. My kid’s personality is kind of in between your two, social, sporty, makes friends easily but also works hard during the week, balancing academics and activities. Super focused and really really good at time management. Friday and Saturday, there are usually parties at Swat or Haverford, or they just chill in the dorms.

Students are passionate and serious about what they are doing, and that creates a driven environment. Some of the doom-and-gloom folks here can’t believe you can work hard and have fun. But you can, and my kid is, happy, engaged, learning, growing. I really couldn’t ask for more.

[Anonymous]

the venn diagram overlap of kids who would be happy at both swarthmore and wesleyan includes zero kids