<p>I saw the post where did the OP said she was posting under a different name and yes, now it is gone.</p>
<p>I think the OP’s post was authentic (but then I generally take people at their word). If it was authentic, then she actually has some of the most useful feedback possible, from the fact that people thought she was ■■■■■■■■. She can tell her son: Your actions are so far out of whack that people thought I was making this story up. Which is what I’d tell my kid, if I were in the OP’s place. The son’s actions seem reprehensible, as described.</p>
<p>It never occurred to me to doubt the OP. I had heard of similar ungrateful children stories before unfortunately. </p>
<p>I recently heard a friend said her S was offered $125,000 upon graduation, plus a really good package. Her S is in IT not banking.</p>
<p>I tend to take people at their word too.</p>
<p>This is starting to feel creepy-- talking about people who aren’t here or aren’t choosing to address these questions/thoughts/comments/observations. If the OP is real, I hope things are resolved with her son and that all works out in the near future. If its not true, I hope whoever penned the post is having a good laugh at all us silly parents. Either way, there really isn’t much more to be said. The thread has outlived its usefulness, and probably needs a swan song. JMO.</p>
<p>Pea, are you sure it was the OP who posted that? Is it possible you are thinking of momma-three’s post that said she had posted under a different name? If the OP did indeed post that, it must have been taken down pretty quickly.</p>
<p>As to the comments about the OP understanding the need for clarifiication, I think that might have been easier had she been addressed and questioned directly and in a polite way. Unfortunately, posters immediately started commenting among themselves about how she was a ■■■■■ and how ridiculous her story was. I think it’s preferable to take the risk of feeding a ■■■■■ for a while, than to pile on someone who’s hurting.</p>
<p>I have a friend who wanted to pay for all of her son’s college education. Her belief was that it was best that he not work during the term so he could totally focus on his studies. She meant well, and stood firm on this plan. Previous relational dynamics must have muddied the waters, because the S got angry. From what I could piece together of her story, my guess is he felt she was being controlling and was trying to keep him dependent on her. The situation escalated to the point where he cut her off completely, declared himself independent with the help of a friend’s family who accused my friend of harassing him, and who helped him file a restraining order against her. She also was not invited to his graduation last year. This was the basic story she told me, with some additional odd and confusing side stories.</p>
<p>There were a lot of things that didn’t make sense even after I asked for clarification. Also, she admitted in vague terms that she and her H did and said some things they shouldn’t have. Sometimes when people are in the midst of a hurtful situation they can’t see it clearly, and even though they know deep down they are partly responsible, it hurts too much to acknowledge the extent of their responsibility. My friend’s grief and pain was palpable, but if she had posted on here all the strange details she told me, she might have seemed like a ■■■■■. Some of it is that there are troubled people who get themselves into so many tangled messes that we relatively orderly and disciplined people just can’t fathom how it was possible.</p>
<p>Hi, TheGFG
Re: your post #126
It’s possible that I am not technically “relatively orderly and disciplined” enough, but in my experience, I’ve seen a fairly large number of really good parents whose kids just took a long time to “get it.” It seems to me that’s what’s probably happening here, in a more extreme way than most. And I’m sorry for the OP, who is not being helped by CC.
Maybe the mods could take this thread down, please?</p>
<p>I fail to see how stating that you believe someone is a ■■■■■ is somehow problematic. It is not piling on someone, or insulting or hurting them to suggest their story doesn’t sound real. If a poster is indeed not a ■■■■■, they can say so and explain. That is actually the usual response: to defend and offer up some explanation, not to simply provide a vague response to one poster, and ignore the fact that 20 others have suggested the story sounds unreal. </p>
<p>We could all share actual stories on here that someone might think sound preposterous, not believable. If you said you didn’t believe me, why would I be offended? I might feel frustrated if I’m not getting the help I need, but offended and hurt? Seriously? It’s an anonymous online forum for pete’s sake.</p>
<p>And if it IS a true story, such questioning of its validity only reconfirms and actually validates one’s experience- that it’s soooo bad that it’s hard to believe. </p>
<p>I actually get miffed by the one-too-many obvious ■■■■■■ that come to the parents’ forum. I’m not really sure why it gets my goat but maybe I feel it is abusing the wonderful system of support and kindness shown by so many strangers for those in need. I’m blown away by the generosity of people on this board, so when it feels someone is taking advantage of that for their own amusement, and wasting a lot of wonderful good intentions by thoughtful others…well, it annoys me.</p>
<p>starbright… very well put. Really says it all.</p>
<p>And it puts in perspective the “purpose” of questioning the veracity of a poster and whether s/he is a ■■■■■. This is a warm and welcoming and supportive place. 99.999999% of the time. </p>
<p>Yes, there are some hard-hearted cold people who occasionally post here. But not many. And a gazillion more of the opposite… including many of those who may have questioned whether this particular OP might be a ■■■■■. Just check the posting history of pretty much any of them.</p>
<p>It is upsetting to many here when parents take time, and show care, to help out a student or parent with a tough situation… only to find out later that they have been taken in. Hence the early questioning of a thread like this. There’s not really anything mean-spirited about it.</p>
<p>I only read the first page so I don’t know if it was addressed in the rest of the thread … but for the record, $150,000 in finance is pretty much common if you place into the bulge bracket or the buy-side, and since recruiting takes place in junior year, most of the time you know after your junior summer which firms you have offers from and where you want to go.</p>
<p>As for him, I think he’s a completely insensitive, maladjusted, ignorant asshat who doesn’t deserve the heartache he’s causing you. If my parents made half as many sacrifices on my behalf as that I would have such an immense debt of gratitude I doubt I could ever act as coldly as he is.</p>
<p>Around the time the popcorn came out, the atmosphere lost some sympathy I think. Furthermore, when some familiar posters either substantiated the salary number, or gave an alternative explanation of it, that didn’t quell the charges of how ridiculous the money amount was. The hyperfocus on that point shows how money matters do indeed get people riled up!</p>
<p>I think some also very familiar and, perhaps, more credentialed posters also stated that the salary number is NOT realistic.</p>
<p>Let’s put aside the whole ■■■■■ debate and what is plausible and what isn’t. I’m curious about the subject heading and how it fits the story presented. The message/moral the OP gives is to not spend more than you can afford (heading) and then concludes that if the cost of the college is a stretch, don’t do it. </p>
<p>I’m not following how that topic coordinates with the story. To me, the story is about a family who sacrificed to send their kid to school and told the kid they only had enough to fund three years and it was possible for him to graduate in three years but he stayed for 3.5 and graduated and got a well paying job and then stuck it to the parents and told them not to come to his graduation (resentful as he wanted to stay four years). The story is more about an ungrateful son than about spending more than you can afford, no? Was his college costs not worth it because he lashed out come graduation day? That would not be predictable. The college costs seem worth it in terms of him securing a well paying job. </p>
<p>So, in any case, I don’t get the purpose of the thread when the OP states a subject heading and conclusion that really don’t fit the story (or maybe I’m not getting it). Rather, if this story is true, wouldn’t the OP ask for advice on dealing with son and graduation and so forth?</p>
<p>
THIS. Exactly. Well put. Sometimes the obvious ■■■■■ posts are entertaining and amusing, but I also find that many posters get understandably miffed if they feel or find that someone is yanking their chain and wasting their time. So if a post, right or wrong, for whatever reason, doesn’t pass the smell test, some posters are going to rightfully call them out on it. Some posters use humor to question, some are more direct or blunt than others. Styles may differ, but the questioning is the same. And valid.</p>
<p>Critical thinking is a valued attribute that we learn in school and life, and to apply it here is IMO, fine. If there is something that engenders questioning, then posters question. Usually, hopefully, the poster clarifies and the thread moves on. I think some (many?) of the longtime posters get, in a funny way, protective of the cc community and what the forum has offered over the years. So they, and newer posters too, get peeved when people abuse it or take advantage of this wonderful community. No one likes being lied to. JMO</p>
<p>Forgot to mention one thing… The question of the veracity of the post, the ■■■■■/no ■■■■■ debate began by post #5. The debate/comments were getting entertaining, so I brought out the popcorn in post #30. As I said, sometimes these threads get very funny. I enjoy the clever posts of many posters. Anyone ever read some of the obvious trollposts in the school or college life threads? Some are a riot. I saw this one, for example,and was about to report it as inappropriate, and found that it was actually pretty witty (for the mostpart) .<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-life/1152279-my-dad-wont-let-me-bring-my-big-matress-how-will-i-have-sex.html?[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-life/1152279-my-dad-wont-let-me-bring-my-big-matress-how-will-i-have-sex.html?</a> There are some others, and a few of the college life posters, that are downright hysterical in their tongue-in-cheek posts. Maybe we on the adult forum take ourselves too seriously. Food fo thought…</p>
<p>Here’s a question: do the moderators take note of people posting from the same e-mail but under different screen names? Or does the CC forum set-up prohibit multiple names assigned to the same e-mail? I know some forums do this. Just wondering whether the mods have access to the data to know if a poster really is a long-time member using another screen name for privacy purposes, and could interject that information to lend credibility or not to these threads.</p>
<p>Secondly, I’d like to address the concept of “credentials.” Is anyone on here “credentialed”? Over time, there are definitely posters that most of us recognize as knowing something about a particular topic, eg. like Soozie about musical theater. But other than the official CC college counselors, whom I assume have been vetted, do we have access to any proof of anyone’s knowledge or accomplishments? If someone says they’re an accountant or a lawyer or an investment banker or whatever, we have no way of knowing if that’s true, unless they propagate clearly false info. and then we know it’s not true or they stink at their job. So if there’s a way to ascertain who is more credentialed, please let me know. I can honestly say that whatever information I’ve shared on CC from my and my children’s own experiences is true to the best of my knowledge, and no doubt most of us would say the same. So I don’t see the need to pull rank here.</p>
<p>Regarding “credentials”, don’t know how, other than trusting what people say, or having a backchannel conversation, one would verify a person’s training or vocation. Thats exactly why, because we do want to trust what people say and post here, that people get annoyed when they feel or discover they are being lied to.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure you have to use a different email address if you want to register a different user name. Several years ago when I first found CC, I registered using a username that was the same as my email address (I know…pretty dumb). After I had been here a while it occurred to me that people from school might be able to identify me because we all use email to communicate these days. When I went to register a new user name I had to use another email address. So now I get the occasional CC emails to two different email addresses.</p>
<p>GFG, keep in mind that moderation can’t be discussed on the forum as outlined in the Terms of Service and so I think if you discuss what moderators do, it will be deleted most likely. </p>
<p>I don’t think there is any rank and yes, it is an anonymous forum and nobody knows for sure if anyone is telling the truth, etc. However, based on my experience on this forum for 9 years, the way others give some validity to posts is based on a longer term presence on the forum (years and post counts) and ascertaining over time the validity of the posts and how the member comes across and consistency of posts and so on. Thus, anyone who is brand new to CC isn’t going to be believed in the same way right off the bat as it takes time to get to know someone on a forum (as best as possible when it is anonymous). Obviously everyone starts out at some point with zero or one or two posts and has gone through this stage. But sometimes when a FIRST post is of a certain nature, others sometimes feel suspect. And sometimes there is just cause and the first post is an only post ever and the person really is a ■■■■■. Other times it is genuine. Sometimes it is a regular member who used a secondary name to post a personal dilemma. It isn’t a matter of “credentials,” but more that it is an anonymous forum and the believability of other members becomes more validated over time based on the body of their posts. </p>
<p>By the way, everything I have posted about my experiences is also true. Now, some have no way of knowing that of course, but I have been here nine years and my story hasn’t changed much. Hopefully, there is some credibility but that is built over time on an anonymous forum. </p>
<p>I don’t know about the OP here. May be genuine. But I have seen many first posts be ■■■■■ posts in the past. It does happen.</p>
<p>Well, then.</p>