Asians at W&M

cavalier302
Tue, 02 May 2006 00:24:55 +0000

Some gems from your previous posts:



It’s really cute that some of you have tried to use statistics to explain



The condescension begins. You establish your statement by letting us (primarily soccerguy, et al - - the ones who did the number crunching) know that our arguments are cute? Ok.



While I sincerely enjoy and appreciate the efforts of everyone’s input as it relates to statistics, I hope you also consider infusing a little Sociology 100 once in a while into your understanding of life. Sometimes, things aren’t always as they appear.



So we’re ignorant, eh…



My point is your statistics is pointless.



You call the numbers presented by soccerguy (and others) pointless. Hmm. I’ll grant you the point that demographics of Virginia and California need to be taken into account. Clearly, the asian populations in both states are different. But to call the statistics pointless? I don’t know about that. In college admissions today, it seems that races are generally lumped together. As a WASP, I’m considered no differently than a jew, a slav or a scandinavian.



First and foremost, the data used have to actually be representative of something. My contention was that the data used did not make sense from the very start. Therefore, any conclusions derived from it means absolutely nothing.



The data did make sense and they did represent something. Again, I’ll concede that demographics were not taken into account.



The fact that you tell me my understandings of the conditions I have lived around all my life are “mere speculation” shows what you know.



I never called your understandings of your life as an asian in California “mere speculation.” I believe I said that sociology in the absense of supporting statistical data is “mere speculation.” There’s a difference. Now, in response to your statement that “my” data were pointless, I did say that they were no more so than your sociological babble. I didn’t mean to imply that sociology is worthless or that your statements were incoherent. I was just making the statement that the statistics presented were no less pointless than the sociological argument you presented.



it’s not my attempt to have “everyone” understand what I’m writing, just those who understand logic; I shouldn’t have to tailor my responses for other people, like yourself.



Ok, here’s where the condescending posts start. Apparently I don’t understand logic, eh? Show me clear evidence of a logical shortfall on my part. And you say that you shouldn’t have to tailor responses for people, such as myself? Why’s that? I’m too dumb? Again, get off yer high horse and knock off the thinly veiled ad hominems.



you apparently don’t have the capability to read arguments



Ok, this is a more overt ad hominem. I disagreed with the content of your post and you attack my cognitive abilities?



arrogant and condescending only towards you, perhaps



And you top it off by yet again asserting that I am somehow “special” (tho not in the good way).

Look, I never criticized you personally or your reasoning; rather, I questioned and criticized your style or argument and the appropriateness of the content of your posts in the context of this thread. Certainly sociological and demographic factors should be considered, but your responses could have been better phrased.