Another Black Eye for Penn

[Anonymous]

When she's done mooching off the gullible professors she'll call mom and weasel her way back onto mom's payroll and back into mom's will. Hopefully her mother leaves all of her estate to charity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking of simple questions, I missed the answer to this: was the contemporaneous journal a handwritten thing that is just now being discussed in mass media, or was it an electronic journal with timestamp that can be traced back?

Thanks in advance.

PS: Don't think she is a demon. Do have a question about this evidence being presented.

Please read the New Yorker article linked on the first post.

Please read the article yourself.

It says she "wrote" in it, but of course people "write" in electronic blogs as well, or smartphone apps, or any other kind of electronic device used for journalling.

Care to actually answer the question?

LOL. You actually read it and still aren’t sure?

For real?

I read and then re-read it, just for you. You apparently didn't read, or you can't read.

Cite it. Put up or shut up.

First fcking paragraph, dipsh1t.

Ahhhh ... so you really are basing this on a single handwritten text that just magically appeared? That first reference to a "notebook from sophomore year high school is EXACTLY THE SAME text she was writing all this in throughout, later referred to as a "journal?"

That's it? Just the one book?

Bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see how it works out for you.

[Anonymous]

Daily Beast

It’s Way Too Easy for Privileged Kids to Fake Being Working Class

Being a first-generation, low-income student has been an eye-opening experience—not least in finding out how many of my FGLI peers are actually children of privilege.

Students flaunting supposed traumas and hardships is an all too popular trend in today’s cutthroat world of academic admissions.

In January of 2022, Mackenzie Fierceton, accepted Rhodes scholar and student at the University of Pennsylvania, threw away her acceptance to the prestigious scholarship and possibly even her master’s degree following questions about her status as a self-proclaimed first-generation, low-income student. Investigations concluded that Fierceton—whose grandfather was a college graduate, had attended a private high school while being raised in an upper-middle-class household by her radiologist mother—had been “blatantly dishonest” in her applications to both Penn and the Rhodes Scholarship.

Fierceton was not the first, and won’t be the last, student to latch on to this complex identity—what’s anomalous is that she had her claims investigated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.epilepsy.com/learn/diagnosis/eeg/what-if-its-normal

“ A normal EEG does not mean that you did not have a seizure. Approximately one-half of all EEGs done for patients with seizures are interpreted as normal. Even someone who has seizures every week can have a normal EEG test. This is because the EEG only shows brain activity during the time of the test. If you aren't having a seizure at that time, there may not be any unusual brain waves for the test to record. ”

Right. But if there is never any EEG change (background OR during the "seizure-like activity") or any malformation on imaging, you can't just fake your way into a diagnosis. No matter how much you may want to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking of simple questions, I missed the answer to this: was the contemporaneous journal a handwritten thing that is just now being discussed in mass media, or was it an electronic journal with timestamp that can be traced back?

Thanks in advance.

PS: Don't think she is a demon. Do have a question about this evidence being presented.

Please read the New Yorker article linked on the first post.

Please read the article yourself.

It says she "wrote" in it, but of course people "write" in electronic blogs as well, or smartphone apps, or any other kind of electronic device used for journalling.

Care to actually answer the question?

LOL. You actually read it and still aren’t sure?

For real?

I read and then re-read it, just for you. You apparently didn't read, or you can't read.

Cite it. Put up or shut up.

First fcking paragraph, dipsh1t.

Ahhhh ... so you really are basing this on a single handwritten text that just magically appeared? That first reference to a "notebook from sophomore year high school is EXACTLY THE SAME text she was writing all this in throughout, later referred to as a "journal?"

That's it? Just the one book?

Bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see how it works out for you.

I’m not basing anything on the diary.

You asked whether it was a paper or electronic diary. Don’t get mad at me because you’re too stupid to miss that detail in the very first paragraph.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.epilepsy.com/learn/diagnosis/eeg/what-if-its-normal

“ A normal EEG does not mean that you did not have a seizure. Approximately one-half of all EEGs done for patients with seizures are interpreted as normal. Even someone who has seizures every week can have a normal EEG test. This is because the EEG only shows brain activity during the time of the test. If you aren't having a seizure at that time, there may not be any unusual brain waves for the test to record. ”

Right. But if there is never any EEG change (background OR during the "seizure-like activity") or any malformation on imaging, you can't just fake your way into a diagnosis. No matter how much you may want to.

You don’t need abnormal EEG/MRI for formal diagnosis. Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Daily Beast

It’s Way Too Easy for Privileged Kids to Fake Being Working Class

Being a first-generation, low-income student has been an eye-opening experience—not least in finding out how many of my FGLI peers are actually children of privilege.

Students flaunting supposed traumas and hardships is an all too popular trend in today’s cutthroat world of academic admissions.

In January of 2022, Mackenzie Fierceton, accepted Rhodes scholar and student at the University of Pennsylvania, threw away her acceptance to the prestigious scholarship and possibly even her master’s degree following questions about her status as a self-proclaimed first-generation, low-income student. Investigations concluded that Fierceton—whose grandfather was a college graduate, had attended a private high school while being raised in an upper-middle-class household by her radiologist mother—had been “blatantly dishonest” in her applications to both Penn and the Rhodes Scholarship.

Fierceton was not the first, and won’t be the last, student to latch on to this complex identity—what’s anomalous is that she had her claims investigated.

I witnessed the same scamming over 20 years. Sounds turbocharged these days. Everyone's a victim and the rich kids know how to play all the angles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.epilepsy.com/learn/diagnosis/eeg/what-if-its-normal

“ A normal EEG does not mean that you did not have a seizure. Approximately one-half of all EEGs done for patients with seizures are interpreted as normal. Even someone who has seizures every week can have a normal EEG test. This is because the EEG only shows brain activity during the time of the test. If you aren't having a seizure at that time, there may not be any unusual brain waves for the test to record. ”

Right. But if there is never any EEG change (background OR during the "seizure-like activity") or any malformation on imaging, you can't just fake your way into a diagnosis. No matter how much you may want to.

You don’t need abnormal EEG/MRI for formal diagnosis. Period.

But has a neurologist actually diagnosed her with epilepsy? If not, what is her actual diagnosis?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking of simple questions, I missed the answer to this: was the contemporaneous journal a handwritten thing that is just now being discussed in mass media, or was it an electronic journal with timestamp that can be traced back?

Thanks in advance.

PS: Don't think she is a demon. Do have a question about this evidence being presented.

Please read the New Yorker article linked on the first post.

Please read the article yourself.

It says she "wrote" in it, but of course people "write" in electronic blogs as well, or smartphone apps, or any other kind of electronic device used for journalling.

Care to actually answer the question?

LOL. You actually read it and still aren’t sure?

For real?

I read and then re-read it, just for you. You apparently didn't read, or you can't read.

Cite it. Put up or shut up.

First fcking paragraph, dipsh1t.

Ahhhh ... so you really are basing this on a single handwritten text that just magically appeared? That first reference to a "notebook from sophomore year high school is EXACTLY THE SAME text she was writing all this in throughout, later referred to as a "journal?"

That's it? Just the one book?

Bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see how it works out for you.

I’m not basing anything on the diary.

You asked whether it was a paper or electronic diary. Don’t get mad at me because you’re too stupid to miss that detail in the very first paragraph.

DP. Why wouldn’t you just say “it’s paper” if you knew the answer? Why the obfuscation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking of simple questions, I missed the answer to this: was the contemporaneous journal a handwritten thing that is just now being discussed in mass media, or was it an electronic journal with timestamp that can be traced back?

Thanks in advance.

PS: Don't think she is a demon. Do have a question about this evidence being presented.

Please read the New Yorker article linked on the first post.

Please read the article yourself.

It says she "wrote" in it, but of course people "write" in electronic blogs as well, or smartphone apps, or any other kind of electronic device used for journalling.

Care to actually answer the question?

quoteBefore you unleash a snotty attitude learn to read. It’s in the opening sentences of the article that you coesrly didn’t read. “ After she finished, she loosened the screws of a vent panel on the wall outside her closet and slipped the notebook behind it.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.epilepsy.com/learn/diagnosis/eeg/what-if-its-normal

“ A normal EEG does not mean that you did not have a seizure. Approximately one-half of all EEGs done for patients with seizures are interpreted as normal. Even someone who has seizures every week can have a normal EEG test. This is because the EEG only shows brain activity during the time of the test. If you aren't having a seizure at that time, there may not be any unusual brain waves for the test to record. ”

Right. But if there is never any EEG change (background OR during the "seizure-like activity") or any malformation on imaging, you can't just fake your way into a diagnosis. No matter how much you may want to.

You don’t need abnormal EEG/MRI for formal diagnosis. Period.

But has a neurologist actually diagnosed her with epilepsy? If not, what is her actual diagnosis?

I have no idea. My entire point was that epilepsy may not be immediately diagnosed.

So “seizure-like episodes” could be the diagnosis from ER. An actual diagnosis may come later from a neurologist. None of us here have her medical records so why immediately assume she’s “faking” it without having facts? Oh right. We know why.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm absolutely sickened by this thread and hope it's just one person with an axe to grind hate posting against this woman.

Sometimes reading DCUM makes me lose faith in people. No kindness here, just venom.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking of simple questions, I missed the answer to this: was the contemporaneous journal a handwritten thing that is just now being discussed in mass media, or was it an electronic journal with timestamp that can be traced back?

Thanks in advance.

PS: Don't think she is a demon. Do have a question about this evidence being presented.

Please read the New Yorker article linked on the first post.

Please read the article yourself.

It says she "wrote" in it, but of course people "write" in electronic blogs as well, or smartphone apps, or any other kind of electronic device used for journalling.

Care to actually answer the question?

LOL. You actually read it and still aren’t sure?

For real?

I read and then re-read it, just for you. You apparently didn't read, or you can't read.

Cite it. Put up or shut up.

First fcking paragraph, dipsh1t.

Ahhhh ... so you really are basing this on a single handwritten text that just magically appeared? That first reference to a "notebook from sophomore year high school is EXACTLY THE SAME text she was writing all this in throughout, later referred to as a "journal?"

That's it? Just the one book?

Bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see how it works out for you.

I’m not basing anything on the diary.

You asked whether it was a paper or electronic diary. Don’t get mad at me because you’re too stupid to miss that detail in the very first paragraph.

DP. Why wouldn’t you just say “it’s paper” if you knew the answer? Why the obfuscation?

Why comment on a thread if you haven’t actually read the article?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking of simple questions, I missed the answer to this: was the contemporaneous journal a handwritten thing that is just now being discussed in mass media, or was it an electronic journal with timestamp that can be traced back?

Thanks in advance.

PS: Don't think she is a demon. Do have a question about this evidence being presented.

Please read the New Yorker article linked on the first post.

Please read the article yourself.

It says she "wrote" in it, but of course people "write" in electronic blogs as well, or smartphone apps, or any other kind of electronic device used for journalling.

Care to actually answer the question?

LOL. You actually read it and still aren’t sure?

For real?

I read and then re-read it, just for you. You apparently didn't read, or you can't read.

Cite it. Put up or shut up.

First fcking paragraph, dipsh1t.

Ahhhh ... so you really are basing this on a single handwritten text that just magically appeared? That first reference to a "notebook from sophomore year high school is EXACTLY THE SAME text she was writing all this in throughout, later referred to as a "journal?"

That's it? Just the one book?

Bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see how it works out for you.

I’m not basing anything on the diary.

You asked whether it was a paper or electronic diary. Don’t get mad at me because you’re too stupid to miss that detail in the very first paragraph.

+1 We need a basic reading test before posters are allowed to post here. I love how the PP gets her panties in a twist over the inability to read a few sentences. It’s not like the answer was halfway through the article.