Monday's Most Active Threads

The most active thread yesterday was titled, "Would you rat out the neighbor’s kid?" and posted in the "Tweens and Teens" forum. The original poster says that their neighbors went out of town leaving their high school sophomore son at home alone. At 7:30 a,m., the boy's mother texted the original poster asking if a specific car was at their house. The car belongs to the son's girlfriend and the original poster says that the car was there when she left for the gym at 5 a.m. The original poster says that her husband doesn't think that they should tell the mother about the car but the original poster does. She asks what others would do. After reading this thread this morning, I locked it because I believe the entire scenario is made up. I was already suspicious that anyone would immediately remember at 7:30 a car they had seen at 5:00. In some situations, sure, but I was skeptical in this case. But, what sealed my suspicion was a follow-up post the original poster made saying that at 7:40 a.m. her husband — remember the one who didn't want to tell — had texted the neighbor a photo of her home showing the car still there. One poster incorrectly suggested that this had occurred prior to the original poster starting the thread. In fact, the thread was started at 7:37, so her husband would have sent the photo after the thread was started. But the timeline provided by the original poster claimed that the original text from the neighbor was at 7:35. So, we are to believe that the original poster received a text, had a discussion with her husband during which they disagreed, and sat down to post on DCUM all in the course of two minutes. The real kicker, however, is that after her initial post and prior to providing the timeline, the original poster responded several more times. All of those responses were at 7:40 or later. In other words, according to the original poster's timeline, she posted multiple times after her husband sent the photo but she did not bothered to tell anyone what her husband had done. This despite many posts criticizing him for not wanting to tell the truth. That simply doesn't seem believable to me. As for the responses from others, the most common reaction is that posters would not go out of their way to tell on the neighbor's son, but since the neighbor had asked a direct and specific question, they would answer honestly. Some posters would find creative ways of not revealing that the car had been there at 5:00, particularly if it was not there when they were asked. Others said that the would either not reply or reply several hours later claiming not to have seen the text. Some posters theorized that the girl's parents might be frantically trying to find her and, therefore, being honest about the car might be important for them. The original poster had described the boy simply as a "high school sophomore". This led to a debate about whether he was 15, as most kids are at the beginning of their sophomore year, or 16 as kids tend to be when they finish their sophomore year. This was particularly relevant regarding the girlfriend given that she would apparently be old enough to drive. I think this is one more hole in the original poster's made up story. Given how she described her relationship with the neighbors, I doubt she would know exactly what year in school the boy might be or his exact age.

Yesterday's next most active thread was posted in the "College and University Discussion" forum. Titled, "Wake, UGA, or Tulane", the original poster says that Wake Forest University and the University of Georgia are tied for a better ranking than Tulane University and that Georgia is best positioned for the future. The poster asks which of the three others would choose. I was wondering why we are having this discussion now given that it is too late to make such a decision for this coming academic year and too early for next year's. But then I realized the thread was actually started back on April 1 which would have left about a month before decision day arrived. Moreover, as yesterday's activity on the thread demonstrates, DCUM's Fantasy College Admission League has no off season. The thread had been dormant for nearly a month when a poster revived it yesterday asking how the University of Miami in Florida compares. While this would lead to 8 new pages of posts yesterday, I am not sure anyone responded to that question. Instead, posters simply debated the standing of the three schools mentioned in the subject line. I couldn't really force myself to read very many of the posts in this thread because these discussions have become so repetitive and I've had to read so many similar threads. Some posters are fixated on the U.S. News and World Report rankings, either using them to justify their own rankings of the three schools or to criticize the recently-introduced new criteria used by the publication. Either several posters or one very vociferous one kept repeating that the current rankings should be ignored because they relied heavily on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. That criticism is debatable, but the rankings should probably not be considered chiseled in stone regardless of which methodology is being used. Other posters concentrate on the school's objective characteristics. For instance, Georgia is a large public university in contrast to Wake Forest, a small private school. Georgia is located in a college town whereas Tulane is in New Orleans. Which characteristics are preferable to the student in question? But the criticism of USNWR's rankings did have the effect of provoking an off-topic discussion about the rankings and how various universities had fared under the new criteria. As a result, there are many posts about universities in California which are completely irrelevent to the topic of this thread. Then the thread veered off into a discussion of teaching assistants and which schools use them to teach and whether they are good or bad. Basically, this was a free-for-all thread in which posters simply talked about whatever college-related topic happened to pass through their heads.

Next was a thread titled, "Student Reveals That Stanford Rescinded College Offer Months After Due To A ‘Lie’ On Her Application" and, like the previous thread, posted in the "College and University Discussion" forum. The original poster included an excerpt from an article published on a website called "Your Tango" which, relying on a TikTok video, described the plight of a student who had applied to and been accepted by Stanford University but later had her acceptance revoked because she had lied on her application. The TikTok video was produced by a college preparation specialist who says he is telling the story told to him by the student in question but whose identity he didn't reveal. I've never heard of "Your Tango" but its motto is "Revolutionizing your Relationships" and seems to have an emphasis on the zodiac and horoscopes. So, to say the sourcing for this story is loose it to put it extremely mildly. I would say that it is a coin toss whether this story is true or not. But, taking the story at face value, the student wrote in the activities section of her Stanford application that she had worked at a preschool for kids with special needs, putting in 12 hours a week for 32 weeks. Initially, Stanford could not verify the hours, but accepted her nonetheless. Later, however, Stanford learned that she actually had only been a summer volunteer and her time was limited to 4 hours a week for only 12 weeks. Due to this discrepancy, the university rescinded her admission. Many posters don't believe this story, suggesting that the TikTok publisher invented it to attract clicks. But a good number of those responding accept the story as true and are glad that Stanford acted the way that is described. These posters believe those who lie or cheat should be punished and consider this a good step. Other posters also assume that the story is factual, but they don't support Stanford's alleged action. They argue that everyone cheats and that this was a rather mild embellishment — an evaluation that is strongly disputed by other posters. What is remarkable to me in this thread is the widespread belief among posters that "embellishing" applications is extremely common. Posters either claim to have done it themselves or know others who have done it. In other cases, posters seem to believe everyone is lying despite their not having a factual basis for that determination. Some posters present a scenario is which "embellishing" applications is so common that students who don't engage in embellishing are at a disadvantage. Other posters point out that extracurricular activities often involve time commitments that are irregular, for instance maybe requiring minimal involvement regularly but occasionally involving intense, multi-day commitments. College applications are not structured to easily capture this type of involvement. As such, they fear that a student's imperfect attempt to capture a true time commitment could be considered to be dishonest depending on how what was written is perceived. Other posters don't like the idea of extracurricular activities being a factor in college applications in the first place, preferring reliance on test scores and grade point averages.

The final thread that I will discuss today was posted in the "Tweens and Teens" forum. Titled, "are racist text message acceptable now?", the original poster says that she saw her 15-year-old son using Discord and he wrote, "I am not a racist but" and then went on to make a racist statement. The original poster does not believe this is acceptable but asks if all kids are doing it now and whether or not she should say anything. First of all, the original poster is the parent in this scenario. If she believes her son's behavior is unacceptable, as his parent, she should correct him. It doesn't matter what other kids are doing. As my parents used to say, if every other kid jumped off a bridge, would you jump off also? That said, more information about exactly what was written would be helpful. Unfortunately, as far as I can tell, the original poster never returned to the thread so we are not provided any additional details. Instead, posters participate in the discussion largely based on their own assumptions. In many cases, posters simply project their own beliefs on to children. For example, one poster suggests that today's youth are tired of political correctness and are purposely using racial terms. Similarly, several posters suggest that today's definition of "racism" is too broad and that the kids might have been saying things that are "racial generalizations" but are not racist. Some posters argued that kids are often cavalier with their language and, especially groups of kids that include multiple races or ethnicities, prone to jokes about race and ethnicity that are accepted within the group. Other posters say that even racist jokes among friends can be hurtful and while minority kids may laugh outwardly, internally they are bothered. Posters also argue that many of the posts arguing against political correctness are actually from White people who are upset that they can't openly be racist. Much of this thread consists of posters displaying their own personal perceptions. Those who have not had to deal with racial prejudice, or whose version of racial prejudice is White men not automatically being accorded privilege, resent restrictions on their ability to make racial remarks. Those who have had personal experience with racial prejudice generally show little tolerance for racial comments, even those that may have been meant as jokes. Several minority posters explain that this topic is very dependent on context. In certain circumstances and among specific friends, they don't mind racial jokes and may even make them themselves. But other posters argue that this is specific to those individuals. What they may find acceptable is not necessarily acceptable to others of the same race or ethnicity. The point here, and what everyone should remember, is that everyone is an individual. Racism naturally assumes that certain traits are common to all members of a race or ethnicity. That is rarely true. Even when it comes to whether a member of a specific race or ethnicity will tolerate jokes about their race or ethnicity, there are differences among members of the group. Some will, some won't, and some may act like they will, but actually don't. Life is complicated that way. One other point that many posters make is that electronic communication doesn't easily disappear and what is meant as a racial joke may turn up some day as evidence of racism and cause significant harm.