Tuesday's Most Active Threads

The most active thread yesterday was the thread about the Democratic National Convention which had a big night last night. But since I have already discussed that thread, I'll move to the next most active thread which was titled, "To my husband’s work AP", and posted in the "Relationship Discussion (non-explicit)" forum. The original poster writes an open letter to her husband's affair partner who works with the original poster's husband. The original poster tells the affair partner that after working with her husband for so long, she should know that the man can be sloppy. As a result, he didn't cover his tracks regarding the affair very well and the original poster found out about it. Now, the original poster warns, she plans to tell the affair partner's husband about the affair. The original poster seems to take considerable delight regarding the problems that this wil cause in the affair partner's family. This thread is a bit of a mystery. The original poster sock puppeted throughout the thread, repeatedly offering support for herself. In one post, she alluded to earlier threads which she posted on this topic and I did find an earlier thread that is mostly consistent with this one. While I initially thought that the "open letter" format used by the original poster was just a stylistic technique, later in the thread the original poster demonstrated that she truly believes that the affair partner has not only been reading, but participating in the discussion. The original poster posted several messages in response to posts she believed were from the affair partner. As if to confirm the original poster's suspicions, another poster responded to say that she was the affair partner and because she and her husband have an open relationship, her husband would not be bothered by the original poster's revelations. The original poster did not immediately buy what this poster was saying and asked for evidence that the poster really was her husband's affair partner. The original poster has not posted on DCUM since then and the evidence has not been provided by the other poster, who I believe was trolling in any case. That is all to say that I am not sure what to make of this thread. On the one hand, the original poster may be a troll with a flair for the dramatic, being trolled by another poster who also enjoys drama. On the other hand, the original poster could be a slightly deranged, revenge-seeking, obsessive who probably should not be left alone near bunny rabbits and pots of boiling water. I am not sure which alternative is preferable. Frankly, it is not clear to me that most of those reading the thread care whether it is true or not since they are enjoying the drama so much. A few even managed to sleuth out one of the original poster's earlier threads. At this point the original poster might have legitimate concerns that one or more of those involved — assuming the story is true — might be identified.

Next was a thread posted in the "Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)" forum. Titled, "8/20 2024 BOE meeting", the thread was started in anticipation of yesterday's Board of Education meeting in Montgomery County. The original poster asked what could be expected from the meeting. The meeting would be the first for the Montgomery County Public Schools' new superintendent. Posters immediately engaged in a brief debate about the Montgomery Virtual Academy, an online virtual school that the board previously defunded but which continues to have dedicated advocates. Then when the actual meeting started, posters began live posting about it. The meeting started off with a number of personnel announcements. Phone usage appears to be a major issue among parents of school-aged kids these days and the board apparently announced  pilot program restricting phone usage at school as well as plans to block access to social media sites by devices connected to school networks. Another popular proposal was the installation of vape detectors in bathrooms. Both the social media and vape detector plans had a number of critics who quickly found shortcomings in the ideas. The board must be in a bit of dilemma with the social media policy. If members argued that students shouldn't be using social media while at school, but then allowed such access from the school network, they would certainly be criticized. As such, blocking access from school networks is practically required. This will obviously be ineffectual since kids will simply switch to mobile data and avoid the school wifi. That also provokes criticism. Therefore, the board is damned if they do, damned if they don't. Eventually the thread turned to a discussion of board member compensation. This started with posters offering criticism of current board members. Other posters pointed out that the realities of the position lead to only certain types of candidates being attracted and none of those types are very good at overseeing a large public school system. This provoked other posters to argue in favor of increasing compensation for board members. The argument in favor of this was two-folded. One, it might attract more qualified candidates and, two, it would allow working class individuals who currently cannot afford to serve on the board to seek the positions. It was argued that this second group might be more in touch with school realities. At any rate, the entire second half of the thread was devoted to arguing about compensation while the items the board discussed were completely ignored.

The next most active thread was posted in the "Entertainment and Pop Culture" forum and titled, "Jennifer Lopez has officially filed for divorce". There is already a 162 page thread about Jennifer Lopez and a 32 page thread about Ben Affleck, but of course DCUM needed a third thread about their divorce. I am very much out of touch with the DCUM posters who love this type of thread. To me, the topic is about a half-step above the British Royal Family threads. I have no interest in the personal lives of either Lopez or Affleck and my limit for reading about them is less than a page of posts. I will say, however, that Lopez is showing some media savvy by providing her fans plenty of drama. She chose to file for divorce on the two-year anniversary of the couple's wedding ceremony and there appears to be no prenuptial agreement. This may not seem like much to those who, like me, could not possibly care less, but to fans of this genre these are significant details. I made a good faith effort to at least skim this thread so I could write coherently about it, but ultimately I failed. There are only so many gossipy posts about Afflecks's gambling, Lopez' controlling nature, and Jen Garner that I can tolerate in a single sitting. That limit was exceeded very quickly. Suffice it to say that some posters feel bad for Lopez, blaming their failed relationship on Affleck. Others side with Affleck, criticizing Lopez for a number of perceived shortcomings. But probably the biggest group of posters are in the "pox on both their houses" camp. These posters don't think either Lopez or Affleck has the maturity for a serious relationship and believe that both are to blame. I'm sorry that I don't have more to say about this thread. But if you have an insatiable appetite for reading about Lopez and Affleck, there are over 200 pages of posts that you can find just on the first page of the entertainment forum. That should keep you busy for a while, assuming that you haven't already read them.

The final thread that I will discuss today was posted in the "College and University Discussion" forum and titled, "Culture essay question. Feels like a trap". Frankly, what feels like a trap to me is getting sucked into writing about this thread in which the original poster is addressing college application essays about an applicant's culture. The original poster, demonstrating a host of not implicit, but actually explicit biases, suggests that colleges and universities have a number of implicit biases against kids who don't represent a small number of races or ethnicities that the original poster believes are favored. Due to this belief, the original poster suggests that students who are not part of a favored group choose to write about "the pool or the gym or the neighborhood skate park" instead of their race or ethnicity. To their credit, most of those who replied are not suckered into a debate about who has the most advantages. Poster after poster stresses that kids should write about what is meaningful to them. This may be their cultural heritage or it might simply be their summer job. But the original poster is adamant. According to her, a student shouldn't write about the Korean Club or a private pool club. The original poster, taking advantage of DCUM's anonymity, became even more explicit in a sock puppeted post in which she said that she agreed with the original poster (which of course was herself) that colleges were using the cultural essay to identify Black and Hispanic applicants and that Asians should not discuss their culture. Honestly, I had to stop reading this thread after just three pages because my blood pressure was rising to dangerous levels. Despite the valiant efforts of other posters, the original poster was just not understanding and, instead, doubling down on her argument. The first important point which a poster made early in the thread is that nobody posting in this thread knows how universities are using the essays. Everyone is just guessing. Second, the original poster believes there are strict racial and ethnic lines that colleges follow when deciding who to accept. Based on everything I've read, I think it is much more complicated than that. If you write about your father who immigrated from rural China, not knowing a word of English, but was able to open a small corner store and eventually turned that into a chain of retail establishments, I am fairly certain that admissions officers would appreciate an essay describing the cultural values of hard work, perseverance, and ingenuity that might have been learned from that experience. If, on the other hand, your story is that your father arrived in the U.S. from Hong Kong with barely $20 million to his name and even today struggles to afford a third yacht, your story may not be as compelling. It is not the particular ethnic group, but the story that you associate with it that is important.