Anonymous wrote:I'll be the millionth person to say Northeastern.

I'm paying for a not-that-selective SLAC (Bard, Hampshire, Hobart and William Smith, St Lawrence) before I'm paying out of state tuition to essentially any public school--maaaybe an exception for Berkeley or Michigan.

Clemson, Auburn, Sewanee.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NYU. Not ok to withhold diplomas over war crime outrage.

That was not why it was withheld. It was withheld bc:
1. Kid submitted a script for the speech along with others who did the same.
2. Kid was gifted the oppty to speak at graduation based on a script he was supposed to follow.
3. Kid knew all along he was going to speak what he wanted to.
4. He stole the oppty from someone else who followed the rules and submitted their scripts and would have otherwise gotten the oppty to talk but for his lie.
5. He chose to speak his views not on a street corner where people can listen or not, but to a captive audience who had no choice but to listen
5a. The venue he spoke at was a celebratory event of people who worked years to finish an expensive edication endeavor. This was not the place to politicize it.
6. Your view is that he said what you believe in, so you think it’s appropriate. That is not what makes it appropriate.
7. Very likely he signed something that said he would say what the script says.

What he did was gross…and I would feel this way regardless what position he took:

Pro life
Pro choice
Israel
Palestine

Etc. the exact polarizing message isn’t the determining factor as to whether he was right or wrong.

You’re missing the point. The school shouldn’t have disallowed that commentary in the first place, leading to his covert attempt to save civilian lives. He showed courage taking a risk. Withholding a diploma for calling out war crimes is shameful. Cutting the mic at some point is the limit of what should’ve happened. History will be on the student’s side. I feel sorry for the other students because of the admin reaction, not the speaker.

He should be in jail.

You just demonstrated his courage. He will always be a target of extremists like you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USC—overpriced school for rich kids who could hack the ivies and in a very dangerous area.

Good academics at USC these days. But neighborhood is still dangerous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Emory, because I am still irate about an article I read, discussing how they'd admitted a poor, relatively high performing first gen kid from Texas and proceeded to ruin her life.

Harvard, because for decades institutionally they did not care about the education of their undergraduates, and now the undergraduates don't care either, spending all their spare time trying to network with each other.

Howard, which is ineptly run and coasting off a reputation that has been unjustified since at least desegregation, and also sounds too much like "Harvard" for my tastes.

Duke, which has never done any soul searching about how it tried to ruin the lives of its own lacrosse players.

NYU, which is wildly overpriced and full of people who think NYU is a good idea.

Columbia, which even before the latest round of protests was famous for raking in a ton of cash by running scam master's degrees on the gullible.

What would you like Duke to have done. There were lots of lawsuits and the kids got paid and that also likely limits what Duke can say or do. That is a really dumb reason to dislike a school. As are most of your reasons for other schools. Please tell us where you went so we can dislike it for no good reason. If you even went to college.

Well, at the start, the faculty and students could have not gone insane. After that, the admin could've tried to dial down the outrage. And when things started to become even more obvious than they were at the start, they could've backpedaled faster. And in the end, any of the particularly rabid could've shown some sort of sign that they had learned a lesson, or at least been quietly put out to pasture for having caused Duke to have such a black eye. Nope.

Holy revisionist history. And holy long-held grudge about something that had nothing to do with you. There were plenty of people at Duke that did not handle this perfectly. But this is way, way overboard.

Good riddance. Duke doesn't want morons like you anyway.

Anonymous wrote:Emory, because I am still irate about an article I read, discussing how they'd admitted a poor, relatively high performing first gen kid from Texas and proceeded to ruin her life.

Harvard, because for decades institutionally they did not care about the education of their undergraduates, and now the undergraduates don't care either, spending all their spare time trying to network with each other.

Howard, which is ineptly run and coasting off a reputation that has been unjustified since at least desegregation, and also sounds too much like "Harvard" for my tastes.

Duke, which has never done any soul searching about how it tried to ruin the lives of its own lacrosse players.

NYU, which is wildly overpriced and full of people who think NYU is a good idea.

Columbia, which even before the latest round of protests was famous for raking in a ton of cash by running scam master's degrees on the gullible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NYU. Not ok to withhold diplomas over war crime outrage.

That was not why it was withheld. It was withheld bc:
1. Kid submitted a script for the speech along with others who did the same.
2. Kid was gifted the oppty to speak at graduation based on a script he was supposed to follow.
3. Kid knew all along he was going to speak what he wanted to.
4. He stole the oppty from someone else who followed the rules and submitted their scripts and would have otherwise gotten the oppty to talk but for his lie.
5. He chose to speak his views not on a street corner where people can listen or not, but to a captive audience who had no choice but to listen
5a. The venue he spoke at was a celebratory event of people who worked years to finish an expensive edication endeavor. This was not the place to politicize it.
6. Your view is that he said what you believe in, so you think it’s appropriate. That is not what makes it appropriate.
7. Very likely he signed something that said he would say what the script says.

What he did was gross…and I would feel this way regardless what position he took:

Pro life
Pro choice
Israel
Palestine

Etc. the exact polarizing message isn’t the determining factor as to whether he was right or wrong.

You’re missing the point. The school shouldn’t have disallowed that commentary in the first place, leading to his covert attempt to save civilian lives. He showed courage taking a risk. Withholding a diploma for calling out war crimes is shameful. Cutting the mic at some point is the limit of what should’ve happened. History will be on the student’s side. I feel sorry for the other students because of the admin reaction, not the speaker.

He should be in jail.

Anonymous wrote:Would you prefer your kid not attend- even if offered a spot - and why?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NYU. Not ok to withhold diplomas over war crime outrage.

That was not why it was withheld. It was withheld bc:
1. Kid submitted a script for the speech along with others who did the same.
2. Kid was gifted the oppty to speak at graduation based on a script he was supposed to follow.
3. Kid knew all along he was going to speak what he wanted to.
4. He stole the oppty from someone else who followed the rules and submitted their scripts and would have otherwise gotten the oppty to talk but for his lie.
5. He chose to speak his views not on a street corner where people can listen or not, but to a captive audience who had no choice but to listen
5a. The venue he spoke at was a celebratory event of people who worked years to finish an expensive edication endeavor. This was not the place to politicize it.
6. Your view is that he said what you believe in, so you think it’s appropriate. That is not what makes it appropriate.
7. Very likely he signed something that said he would say what the script says.

What he did was gross…and I would feel this way regardless what position he took:

Pro life
Pro choice
Israel
Palestine

Etc. the exact polarizing message isn’t the determining factor as to whether he was right or wrong.

You’re missing the point. The school shouldn’t have disallowed that commentary in the first place, leading to his covert attempt to save civilian lives. He showed courage taking a risk. Withholding a diploma for calling out war crimes is shameful. Cutting the mic at some point is the limit of what should’ve happened. History will be on the student’s side. I feel sorry for the other students because of the admin reaction, not the speaker.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NESCAC schools with the exception of Williams and Amherst. Also BU, BC, and Northeastern good schools but not worth $90k a year nothing special about them.

Average cost of attendance after aid for Boston College and most of the NESCAC schools is much less than $90k.

Not if you are full pay like us. Near 400k after tax dollars is nothing to sneeze about. And, yes, we saved.