<p>Sorry Xiggi. I have a life. However, I actually do appreciate all of the effort you put into promoting all of your favorites schools.</p>
<p>“RJK, I understand that you perceive your participation to this site to be successful by being a major source of irritation to everyone.”</p>
<p>Thanks. I do my best.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Are you sorry for having a life? I am not sure I understand your point. Or are you sorry to be unable to spend time in trying to understand the basic issues people discuss here? You seem to have enough time to post plenty of non-sensical and hollow contributions, such as duking it out with the Duke boys. </p>
<p>I believe, that if you were not so preoccupied to pepper the board with barbs and cheap shots, you would actually find the time to READ the posts of people. </p>
<p>Let me give an example … your last two posts intimate that you know my favorite schools. Do you really know my “favorite” schools? In addition, you claim to “appreciate all of the effort you put into promoting all of your favorites schools.” I doubt that you could appreciate any effort of mine to promote a school for two simple reasons. The first that you ostensibly would not appreciate the type of school I am supposed to promote, but that you DO NOT KNOW what those schools are. </p>
<p>So, why don’t we cut through the chase. Why don’t you find some evidence of “all the effort you put into promoting all of your favorites schools.” After all, it should be really easy to find them in my past posts. But, please remember that my “favorites are still on the top,” namely on top of the PA list I posted. </p>
<p>Best of luck! Time to put up or shut up!</p>
<p>Hmmm… guidance counselors have Carleton and Haverford below Bucknell, Macalster and Colby.</p>
<p>“Best of luck! Time to put up or shut up!”</p>
<p>I don’t think so. I think I’ll just try to continue to annoy the heck out of you. What I might suggest however, is that you put me on ignore. That way you won’t have to bother with my “barbs” and “cheap shots.” Oh also my “pom pom” waving. I Almost forgot to add that clever remark as well.</p>
<p>It’s alright xiggi, this rjkofnovi fellow is just a terrible eyesore. Its best to ignore him. If you want to irritate him more and be amused at the same time, try subtly bashing UMichigan. Even for fun! He gets insecure and starts blowing up immediately. Its pretty funny.
Besides, haven’t you seen his post history? Every damn post is about UMich and bashing Ivy Level schools. Its terrible. I don’t know why this guy hasn’t been banned yet.</p>
<p>Its terribly difficult to reason with a man like him. Just let it be, think of him more as a amusement tool.</p>
<p>“Besides, haven’t you seen his post history? Every damn post is about UMich and bashing Ivy Level schools.”</p>
<p>I only bash Duke. I don’t bash Ivy Level schools.</p>
<p>“If you want to irritate him more and be amused at the same time, try subtly bashing UMichigan.”</p>
<p>You of all people on this board don’t know the meaning of “subtle.”</p>
<p>I wonder if Michigan will even be in the USNWR top 30 next year. Such a shame to see rjkofnovi’s degree becoming more and more useless year after year…</p>
<p>Lol, well, I respect Tyler09 very much. I’ve seen him give excellent advice to students on these boards. And this is his verdict on you, rjkofnovi:</p>
<p>
Ouch…that’s terrible to be denounced by one of CCs respected senior members…</p>
<p>Oh and you’re proud of bashing Duke? Bashing any university just for the hell of it is ridiculous. And don’t lie to me. You bash anything that isn’t UMichigan or Cal.
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
These quotes? I didn’t even need side-commentary to show how ridiculous these are.
I didn’t have to do anything but click your post history. An array of insults come up. I pretty much take issue with every post you post. Its terrible. I even remember you saying “Emory and Vanderbilt” shouldn’t even be in top 20. </p>
<p>So xiggi, you understand why this fellow can’t be reasoned with? Even more interesting than USC beating UCLA in 2011 UNSWR is why this guy hasn’t been banned yet. </p>
<p>You, rjkofnovi, are a terrible embarrassment to CC and to UMichigan. Just leave.</p>
<p>I don’t think so.</p>
<p>
Pot, meet kettle.</p>
<p>Saiyans only happened to do it in a much shorter tenure.</p>
<p>“These quotes? I didn’t even need side-commentary to show how ridiculous these are.”</p>
<p>Of course you don’t. You are far too subtle.</p>
<p>I resent those remarks thesaiyans666. I bash Cal every now and then too!</p>
<p>UCBChemE: I happened to do what exactly? I don’t go around picking up fights with multiple random people on the internet. Not only does he have a problem with me, but pretty much I can name 6 people rjkofnovi has fought rudely on these forums. </p>
<p>And just because I don’t like UC Berkeley doesn’t make me a a disgrace to CC or UMich. I’m no Berkeley-■■■■■ like you either. </p>
<p>Honestly I don’t understand your post or rjkofnovi’s increasingly cryptic yet useless posts after mine at #32.</p>
<p>One more thing to Alexandre, Sam Lee, and xiggi: Are PA scores directed to undergrad strength or overall (including grad school) strength?</p>
<p>The PA is directed at undergraduate strength but overall academic strength is inevitably going to influence the outcome of the survey. If the PA were purely a gauge for undergraduate academic quality, schools such as Boston College, Emory, Georgetown, Notre Dame, Tufts, Vanderbilt, Wake Forest, William and Mary etc… would have higher scores. If it were purely a gauge for overall academic quality, schools like Texas-Austin, UCLA, UDub, Wisconsin-Madison etc… would all have higher scores.</p>
<p>“Honestly I don’t understand your post or rjkofnovi’s increasingly cryptic yet useless posts after mine at #32.”</p>
<p>That is your misfortune.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Simply stated, there is NO plausible answer to that question. The basic problem of the CURRENT form of the PA is that responders are asked to provide an opinion on academic quality. USNews offers such a nebulous and broad-based definition of “academic quality” that it permits anyone to answer as whimsically as he or she wants. It further permits anyone to find justification and vindication of narrow and self-serving agendas. To make things worse, it is not rare for people to be so confused about their own positions that they contradict themselves. Just in the name of making a point or get a debate going. </p>
<p>As I said many times, the PA is a good idea but also one that is extremely poorly executed and used. USNews should make an effort to expand its questionaire and add a MUCH needed specificity to the questions. All in all, it is NOT a problem to recognize the osmosis between the UG and graduate faculties, but one needs to ask this question and CORRECTLY measure the impact of the answers. </p>
<p>In so many words, the PA should not be the free for all it is today. It should not be an instrument that allows dishonest people such as the officials at Clemson or Wisconsin to make a mockery of the exercise by taking fundamentally ridiculous positions and then pretend they were truthful. Making the survey public would go a long way to give the survey the aura of respectability is TOTALLY lacks today. </p>
<p>As far as your question, the answer is that it is whatever you want it to be. After all, your opinion about the PA or what it measures is as valuable as the opinion of the “experts.” And, let’s not forget that you probably spent more time reading and talking about the PA than the people who PRETEND to fill the survey with integrity and knowledge. By the time, you finish your graduate studies at MIT, you will also know more about two schools than the respondents.</p>
<p>I think this data shows a problem in the scoring of schools with large gaps such as Tufts, Wake, and ND. A .7 gap shouldn’t happen if both groups are really informed observers.</p>