Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't rely on racial quota.

Seek better solution.

Do you understand what a quota is and that having one has never been legal? What evidence do you have for a quota?

Take a look at the breakdown by race from year to year. If race were a plus factor for diversity, different races would be seeing their numbers fluctuate wildly. Instead each race stays within a pretty narrow range, as if American Indians have only a certain amount of diversity compared to blacks.

That’s one way to look at it. Another is to recognize that with genuine economic and educational barriers only a small percentage of students in URM groups will meet the range of whatever the baseline standards are. These are likely to be students from high ranking high schools and/or Prep programs, plus a few surprises,, Beyond that, You have to look at the acceptance rate. Not every URM student who gets in accepts the offer, for a variety of reasons, including deciding to attend a school that seems like a better fit. So the URM students who apply in the first place tend to be from a narrow range in the first place — relative to the larger population of URM students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't rely on racial quota.

Seek better solution.

Do you understand what a quota is and that having one has never been legal? What evidence do you have for a quota?

Take a look at the breakdown by race from year to year. If race were a plus factor for diversity, different races would be seeing their numbers fluctuate wildly. Instead each race stays within a pretty narrow range, as if American Indians have only a certain amount of diversity compared to blacks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't rely on racial quota.

Seek better solution.

Do you understand what a quota is and that having one has never been legal? What evidence do you have for a quota?

Who cares about my evidence.
The Supreme Court of the United States will tell you soon.

Anonymous wrote:Don't rely on racial quota.

Seek better solution.

Do you understand what a quota is and that having one has never been legal? What evidence do you have for a quota?

If you want to be a CEO, a state school is the number 2 producer.

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2018/06/19/the-no-2-school-for-graduating-ceos-is-penn-state-not-harvard-or-mit.html

Don't rely on racial quota.

Seek better solution.

Anonymous wrote:

Poor little bunny. Don’t be a Blum stooge.

This is what people said about voting for Youngkin, that he was just using Asians.
Yet Youngkin eliminated VMPI and kept accelerated math opportunities.
If top scoring Asians won't be discriminated against because of Blum's actions, that is not being a stooge.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but, if you want to increase the number of certain race at competitive colleges, only way is to make them care more about education, put more efforts, and work harder.

Sorry that's the realtiy, and it should be the way.

If you have to work that hard are you really that smart?

I am smart enough to know that working hard gives me better odds of success then relying on good fortune. I suspect you think you are smarter than that. Or maybe- just maybe, you believe you are entitled to success - lack of hard work notwithstanding

Elite schools are not looking for a hard worker. That is great I’m sure your boss is happy you work hard. Elite school want leaders, innovators, actors, athletes, musicians.

Congrats you are a wiz at studying, your state school will probably give you a scholarship so you’ll stay local and work hard for them until you die of a heart attack.

This is the most pathetic feet-licking by an obviously middle-income do-nothing.

Top schools don't care about athletes or musicians, it's simply an easy way in for wealthy full-pay applicants with low scores. They want "innovators" as in entrepreneurs, which doesn't mean much other than comes from wealth, has wealthy parental networks and can afford to screw around while their entrepreneurship fails. And of course they want leaders, it's 6,000 leaders leading themselves and no one else.

Poor little bunny. Don’t be a Blum stooge.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but, if you want to increase the number of certain race at competitive colleges, only way is to make them care more about education, put more efforts, and work harder.

Sorry that's the realtiy, and it should be the way.

If you have to work that hard are you really that smart?

I am smart enough to know that working hard gives me better odds of success then relying on good fortune. I suspect you think you are smarter than that. Or maybe- just maybe, you believe you are entitled to success - lack of hard work notwithstanding

Elite schools are not looking for a hard worker. That is great I’m sure your boss is happy you work hard. Elite school want leaders, innovators, actors, athletes, musicians.

Congrats you are a wiz at studying, your state school will probably give you a scholarship so you’ll stay local and work hard for them until you die of a heart attack.

This is the most pathetic feet-licking by an obviously middle-income do-nothing.

Top schools don't care about athletes or musicians, it's simply an easy way in for wealthy full-pay applicants with low scores. They want "innovators" as in entrepreneurs, which doesn't mean much other than comes from wealth, has wealthy parental networks and can afford to screw around while their entrepreneurship fails. And of course they want leaders, it's 6,000 leaders leading themselves and no one else.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but, if you want to increase the number of certain race at competitive colleges, only way is to make them care more about education, put more efforts, and work harder.

Sorry that's the realtiy, and it should be the way.

If you have to work that hard are you really that smart?

I am smart enough to know that working hard gives me better odds of success then relying on good fortune. I suspect you think you are smarter than that. Or maybe- just maybe, you believe you are entitled to success - lack of hard work notwithstanding

Nobody is impressed by the hardest worker bee.

That is totally fine. Nobody is trying to impress you.

Harvard wasn't impressed either, but go on.

Let us connect next spring to see if the Supreme Court is impressed. That is all that matters Honey

Anonymous wrote:
You have no answers. Admissions is race blind.

Asians are being used by White Supremacists as an imaginary group being discriminated against. White prep school kids face the same competition as Asians students… but why highlight Asians, it’s political.

What is your evidence for this?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:these colleges want kids who are
1) brilliant - your kid likely is not
2) really, really smart AND _____ (fill in blank: leader, athlete, invented)
3) famous and smart enough to get by
4) rich, connect and smart enough to get by
5) did something amazing (like the Parkland survivor activist) and smart enough to get by

So no need to ask for race right?

6) Specific skin color?

Wow, this thread still has life.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but, if you want to increase the number of certain race at competitive colleges, only way is to make them care more about education, put more efforts, and work harder.

Sorry that's the realtiy, and it should be the way.

If you have to work that hard are you really that smart?

I am smart enough to know that working hard gives me better odds of success then relying on good fortune. I suspect you think you are smarter than that. Or maybe- just maybe, you believe you are entitled to success - lack of hard work notwithstanding

Nobody is impressed by the hardest worker bee.

That is totally fine. Nobody is trying to impress you.

Harvard wasn't impressed either, but go on.

Anonymous wrote:these colleges want kids who are
1) brilliant - your kid likely is not
2) really, really smart AND _____ (fill in blank: leader, athlete, invented)
3) famous and smart enough to get by
4) rich, connect and smart enough to get by
5) did something amazing (like the Parkland survivor activist) and smart enough to get by

Here is you again propagating anti-Asian tropes. That is exactly why the Harvard case is being litigated. All these ugly assumptions should be put out in the open and let the nation’s conscience speak.