With all due respect, VOR, what do you think many of us have done here for many years? Many of “us” have long “graduated” as our cycles ended a while back as a parent or a student. I placed “us” in brackets as the “us” is not a monolithic group that agrees on every issue. Actually we hold very different opinions on several parts and have … argued (and still do) to the bitter end about many separate views on the same principle. The purpose is not to be right but to (perhaps) help the lurkers form their own opinions based on a sprinkle of our divergent opinions.
In a way, I would venture to say that all of us have raised strong displeasure with the system, but over time learned to mellow our opinions as we witness a system that ends working rather well considering the enormity of the exercise. It works well because the overwhelming majority of the students in the US end attending one of their first TWO choices – see NACAC for the details. Over the past 10-20 years, the numbers of selectivity have changed, and all of us will agree that a lot has been fueled by “willy-nilly” applications. Wanna see fireworks? Let me start a thread that attacks the marketing muscle flexed by Chicago! If you think we do NOT AGREE that many students are misled into applying to a school they have no chance to be admitted, I got news for you! Read our posts more carefully!
However, we were seem to have a divide is in the indictment of the schools. You seem determined to expose a deeply nefarious atmosphere in the ivory towers where crooked adcoms are manipulating the outcome to please the worst of them in cycles of discrimination. Some of us here think those same adcoms are doing their best to please many “demanders” and really, really are trying to form the best class for their school, as well as “helping” many students attend a school that fits them better. They could be more open about the process, but we have to stop thinking that selective colleges can redress all the shortcomings of our society!
As far as helping, let me end by sharing that the perennial claims of open discrimination are NOT doing anything to help the future generations. A more pragmatic and dedicated approach to actually ameliorate the contents of the applications … does. The difference is between DOING and merely debating about what should be done by others.