Thursday's Most Active Threads

The most active thread yesterday was titled, "Magnet application result High School" and posted in the "Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)" forum. There are a few annual traditions that we have come to observe on DCUM. These include the college and university admissions season (which seems never-ending this year), private school admissions, and admissions to various public school programs. Those involved in these events follow them with all the intensity of a football fan whose favorite team is in the SuperBowl. The only thing missing is recipes for taco salad being posted as folks prepare for their parties (though to be fair, the parties are also missing). This thread was started back on January 31 with the original poster simply asking when the results for magnet high school admission would be available. Posters responded both with answers that had been communicated by MCPS and by relating past experiences. As expected release dates and times came and went, nerves got a little frazzled and some harsh words were exchanged, but that was just a warm up for the main event. The thread added 20 pages once the results started arriving yesterday. Parents who received notification let others know where the results could be found and posted, either in joy or disappointment, about how their children had fared. As I've mentioned when discussing similar threads, almost nobody is happy with selection policies these days. One poster was convinced that there was social engineering going on to limit certain groups and create diversity. Many posters objected to this allegation and argued that the current system is an improvement on what had been used in the past. Moreover, the poster's vague allegations left many of those who responded confused about exactly what the poster was complaining. The same poster later suggested that Asian boys were being denied opportunties in favor of non-Asian males with worse qualifications. This was met with responses saying that the admissions process is race blind. Regardless, this poster would not give up and repeatedly posted fact-free posts claiming that Asian boys were being discriminated against.

The second most active thread was posted in the "Off-Topic" forum. Titled, "Vent: I hate the terms POC and BIPOC", the original poster prefers to be called "black or African American or a minority" and is upset that Asians are not included in these terms. This thread definitely has a "get off my lawn" quality to it and, frankly, I am not going to waste my time reading it. Rather, I'm going to take this opportunity to discuss this particular poster. Based on my previous experience with this poster, I fully expected that she would either troll or sock puppet the thread. A quick check proved this to be the case with the poster returning to throw gasoline on the fire she had already ignited and sock puppeting to boot. I am not sure whether this poster is a full time troll or just someone with a particularly special personality. She tends to start at least one thread a day and often more. These threads follow a variety of themes, often focusing on transportation issues, particularly bridges and interchanges. In addition, the poster frequently asks about a particular politician's future, but is all over the place in her selection of politicians. The poster has started one thread claiming to be a black Republican woman and another saying that black conservatives are "weird" and that black people who vote Republican should "Enjoy being a puppet". In one thread, the poster claims to have voted for Bernie Sanders and in another supports Kathy Hochul for President. The fact that these two are basically the antithesis of each other doesn't seem to faze her. Occasionally this poster will deviate from her preferred themes to post an outliner such as her thread wondering whether a lizard could mutate and create a real life Godzilla. My one hope is that if a Godzilla does get created, he leaves DC area transportation infrastructure alone because the loss of even a single bridge or interchange would be devastating to this poster.

The third most active thread yesterday was titled, "Would you have a baby with no arms / no legs?" and posted in the "Off-Topic" forum. I became familiar with this thread yesterday due to several posts being reported. Indeed, one report objected to the thread being posted in the "Off-Topic" forum. That poster wasn't sure what forum would be most appropriate and neither was I, so I left it where it was. The original poster says that she has a friend whose unborn baby has been diagnosed as not having either arms or legs. The original poster feels like a decision to have an abortion would have been easy had this condition been identified early, but her friend didn't find out until four or five months into her pregnancy. Several posters replied saying that they would terminate such a pregnancy. Generally this was based on the expectation that such a child would face a difficult life, but in many cases also informed by suspicions that such a deformity would likely be accompanied by additional developmental issues. Some posters felt similar to the original poster in considering a decision to terminate to be easier in the early stages of pregnancy but less sure at later stages. Other posters argued that such a baby could live successfully in today's world and referred to examples. Some consider terminating in such a case to be a form of eugenics and similar to Nazi practices. The discussion eventually devolved to be a debate about abortion and whether abortion involves killing a baby. Basically, the thread can be summarized as saying there are some pro-life posters who would absolutely have this baby and a large number of pro-choice posters who would absolutely terminate. For both of these groups, their decision would be easy. However, there is a large group in the middle who see all sorts of nuances and complexities and who would struggle with a decision.

Like the previous two threads, the last one that I will discuss today was posted in the "Off-Topic" forum. Titled, "What's a person who avoids employment their entire life?", the original poster asks whether there is a diagnosis for a person who is 30 or 40 years of age but has never held a full time salaried job but instead finds ways to earn a little money here and there. Reading the initial replies to this thread suddenly clarified something for me that has been bouncing around in my head for a while. Let's call it the "DCUM Contrary Principle." For whatever reason, posters don't like to engage in discussions in which they agree with the original poster. As a result, responses will normally be contrary to whatever opinion is expressed in the original post. While the original poster was not explicit in her opinion of the non-working individual, the implication of her post — especially the use of the term "diagnosis" — was negative. Hence, following the DCUM Contrary Principle, most of the first responses were favorable to the person the original poster described. He was described as "happy", "lucky", a "total success", and other laudable terms. However, I feel confident that had the original poster praised the individual, the responses would have been overwhelmingly negative about him. Nevertheless, several posters described living as this person was described or knowing others who do and praised the lifestyle. Some posters did fault such people for not having achieved normal accomplishments or not sharing their aspirations. However, these posters were pretty harshly beat back. There were concerns among some posters that this individual is living off others or "leeching", but the original poster has given no suggestion that this is the case. Because the person was described as getting by on work "here and there", he is mostly viewed positively. Based on this thread, a significant number of posters relish the idea of a simpler life with fewer responsibilities. To that end, the lifestyle described by the original poster is romanticized somewhat with many of its shortcomings overlooked.