The Most Active Threads Since Friday

The three most active threads over the weekend were ones that I've previously discussed. Therefore, I am starting with the thread that was fourth most active over the weekend. That thread was titled, "UVA info session today said ‘most rigorous in ALL 5 core subjects.’" and was posted in the "College and University Discussion" forum. The original poster apparently attended an information session for the University of Virginia. During the session, the UVA representative stated that admissions officers expect applicants to have taken the "most rigorous" classes in all 5 core subjects. The original poster asked whether this meant advanced placement classes or dual enrollment classes in all core subjects including world language and was answered in the affirmative. When the original poster tried to further pin the representative down on the meaning of "most rigorous", the representative explained that Common App has a box that an applicant's high school counselor checks to indicate that the student took the high school's most rigorous classes. The original poster concluded by complaining that the UVA representative would not give direct answers and, instead, kept emphasizing the "holistic" nature of of how applications are reviewed. As described by the original poster, the UVA representative's answers seem contradictory. On the one hand, either APs or DEs are required. On the other, only the counselor's certification that the student had taken the "most rigorous" classes was needed. I assumed that this was the root of the original poster's frustration. In a follow-up post, the original poster said that she had asked whether it would be looked down upon if an applicant had not taken an AP foreign language class and was told that it would be, but that the applicant could try to explain this choice. Further posts by the original poster suggested that her child did not want to take an AP foreign language class but didn't want to be eliminated from consideration by UVA as a result. I saw this as a bit ironic given the original poster's complaint about holistic admissions because a holistic review would allow for the absence of an AP foreign language class to be explained and perhaps excused. But I think it was the lack of certainty that bothered the original poster. Unfortunately for the original poster, and many others who have kids applying to UVA, uncertainty is part of the process. Given the competitiveness of UVA's admissions, many qualified students are going to be disappointed. The original poster doesn't get a lot of sympathy from those responding. There is some debate about whether a foreign language should be a requirement and why playing a musical instrument is not considered equally important. But, for the most part, posters don't think the "most rigorous" requirement is inappropriate. To the contrary, they think that it should be expected. Many posters are not particularly put off by the "holistic" admissions policy either. As one poster says, "And it seems to work. Rankings are high. Demand is high. Graduates are very accomplished."

The next most active thread over the weekend was posted in the "Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)" forum. Titled, "Blended learning for long term medically impacted students", the original poster praises an announcement by Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) of a new blended learning program for students who, due to medical reasons, are not able to attend traditional, in-person, classes. The new program combines online synchronous instruction with additional online asynchronous classes. The program is seen as addressing the cancelation of the Montgomery Virtual Academy, an online program previously operated by MCPS. The closing of the MVA has been a topic of multiple threads on DCUM. Even before the MVA was closed, a lively thread on DCUM debated its necessity and protested efforts to reduced its budget. After it was closed, MVA supporters have been very visible in the forum with their complaints. In contrast to the original poster, many MVA supporters in this thread are not happy about the new program and don't see it as a suitable replacement for the MVA. One issue is the schedule. Some of the synchronous instruction will be outside traditional school hours which some posters argue is not workable, or at least very difficult, for them. Of more concern, however, is the requirement of a medical form describing the need for such services. Some posters argue that getting the form completed on a short timeline may be difficult, if not impossible. Other posters argue that complaints about the medical form are from posters whose children have no legitimate medical need. This concern has been at the root of many of the MVA disputes. Supporters of the MVA describe it as a unique solution to their children's special learning challenges. Detractors, on the other hand, repeatedly accuse these parents of being overly dramatic or suffering from mental health issues and, as a result, exaggerating the need for virtual education. Some of this is based on animosity toward virtual learning that has been held over from the COVID pandemic. Posters of this type hate virtual learning so much that they don't want a penny of the school's budget spent on it and oppose any virtual learning efforts. This division is seen throughout this thread which is really a continuation of the MVA debate. In response to posters who express concern about the cost of virtual learning, supporters argue that it is far cheaper than in-person education. Supporters suggest that the budget is not a real concern and, rather, the opponents are simply selfish and have no concern about the well-being of the children who benefit from online courses. Opponents argue that virtual learning supporters simply want the luxury of securing an education for their children while travelling or for other non-medical reasons. Virtual learning supporters in turn, accuse these posters of wanting to control other families. This is really an endless debate between two sides that are both dug-in and unwilling to compromise. But the high point of absurdity in this thread was a senseless debate that broke out regarding the meaning of "immigrant", "expat" and "migrant". The origin of this argument is about as juvenile as you might expect, an accusation by one poster that another poster who moves for part of the year is a "migrant". The second poster considers this to be a "hateful and racist term". As of the time of writing, this dispute had still not been resolved.

Next was a thread titled, "Is anyone following the buried rug story on tiktok?" and posted in the "Off-Topic" forum. This was a fun thread which the original poster started by describing a mystery that was occurring in real time and being documented on TikTok. A woman was digging in her back yard and discovered a rolled-up rug. She posted a video of it on TikTok and was told to call the police in case there was a body wrapped up in it. The police came and cadaver dogs alerted on the rug. At the time the original poster started the thread, the police were in the process of digging up the rug. As it turns out, several DCUM posters were already following the events and several others started as a result of this thread. Those responding added details of the drama, including the fact that the TikToker had gone from a few thousand followers to over 2 million as a result of this incident. There was considerable discussion of the accuracy of cadaver dogs and guesses about what they might have found. Could it be a body or perhaps just blood stains? There were suggestions that the TikToker might have faked the whole thing, though other posters scoffed at that idea. Outside of DCUM, this became a major story with People Magazine posting a summary of events and the local news running a live video feed. As the wait went on for new discoveries, posters went through the back story. It runs out that the house is also suspected of being haunted, adding to the prospect of a dead body being buried in the back yard. Throughout the thread posters who were new to TikTok had to have things explained to them by TikTok veterans. A number of posters weren't ready for a new medium and requested that any new developments be reported in the DCUM thread. But then the drama abruptly ended when the police announced that there was no body in the rug. Earlier in the thread, posters had assured everyone that cadaver dogs are extremely accurate. Now there were questions about why two different cadaver dogs gave false positives. Several posters accused the TikToker of manufacturing this entire thing for clicks or money. Many posters turned on the TikToker, accusing her of staging the drama and wasting police resources. Other posters rushed to her defense, pointing out that she had only reported facts and had never said there was a body buried in her yard. Moreover, she could hardly control the behavior of the cadaver dogs. Others suggested that this had been something that had been planned for a long time with the TikToker laying important groundwork to add to the drama. There were also accusations that everyone who had followed the adventure and who believed it was real were ignorant and gullible.

The final thread that I will discuss today was posted in the "Political Discussion" forum. Titled, "If you are voting for Trump based on immigration- why?", the original poster points out that in 2016 former President, current cult leader, and convicted felon Donald Trump ran on a promise to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it. During his four-year presidency, that didn't happen. Now Trump is running on immigration again and the original poster wonders why anyone believes that he will do anything differently. Any discussion of this sort is guaranteed to be a train wreck. Trump lies all the time and his supporters tend to believe his lies. As a result, this is a perfect illustration of the two different realities about which I have written that are inhabited by Trump supporters and opponents. Factually, Trump built very little new border fence. Instead, parts of the barrier that had been erected earlier were replaced. But, very little new was added. Needless to say, Mexico did not pay a penny. Moreover, former Trump administration official and Trump ally Steve Bannon was indicted for cheating Trump supporters out of money donated to privately build the wall. On his last day in office, Trump pardoned Bannon. The fact that Trump would side with a grifter over his own supporters should be ample evidence of Trump's true commitment to the border issue. It's clear to me that Trump has settled on immigration as the key issue of his campaign because his plans to run on the economy were derailed by the economy improving. Moreover, immigration is an issue that obviously motivates his supporters. As such, Trump has drummed up attention to crimes committed by immigrants, spread lies about legal immigrants such as the Haitians in Springfield, Ohio, and has promised to deport 10 million undocumented immigrants if he wins the election, something that would be an economic and human disaster. However, as the original poster points out, Trump's track record as President was not that great. As such, his supporters in this thread struggle to explain why they think his record will be better a second time. Some simply avoid reality by claiming that he had significant accomplishments during his first time, though they are unable to say what they were. Others focus on their expectations for the a future term. The most common tactic, however, is to make claims about the administration of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris. Posters make a host of false or exaggerated allegations about events over the past four years. In response, Biden and Harris supporters remind others that Biden and Harris supported the bipartisan immigration bill that would have significantly strengthened border controls but Republicans — despite a conservative Republican authoring the bill — turned against it at Trump's behest. The only conservative defense to this fact is to lie about the bill. The basic pro-Trump argument seems to be that Trump essentially stopped illegal immigration during his first term (fact check: false), then Biden and Harris opened the flood gates (fact check: again false), and that if elected again, Trump will both stop additional illegal immigration and deport undocumented migrants who are already here (fact check: hopefully a fact check won't be required). Immigration is such a hot topic among Trump supporters that they bring it up in almost every thread. Provided this opportunity to talk about it until their heart's content, they are, franky, a bit reticent. As such, it is only a 10 page thread.