<p>Sybbie, </p>
<p>I feel bad that your bitterness and anger is so close to the surface that you feel a need to personally attack me, even when I have continued to state that I support admission preferences for URM’s. I was merely trying to have a civil discussion regarding an important issue that was based on fact. I see now that this is such a divisive issue that a civil discussion it is not possible.</p>
<p>I don’t really wish to stay in this thread any longer and be misrepresented or upset others when that was the farthest thing from my mind when I started it. Before I depart, however, I want to respond to your many misrepresentations. If I am wrong in any of these, please quote me from previous threads.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Yes, my son did get an accommodation for his documented condition. My stance on this is consistent with my support for preferences for URM’s in admission. If there are to be tests, they should do their best to measure aptitude and the experts that prepare these tests have obviously felt that accommodations need to be made in certain circumstances to appropriately measure aptitude. I think I would be doing my S a real disservice by not availing him of this accommodation.</p></li>
<li><p>You say I “marginalized” Drosselmeier’s post. The following is my post:</p></li>
</ol>
<p>"Drosselmeir,</p>
<p>It is no wonder your D has achieved in the manner she has with the wonderful example you have set. Many congratulations!</p>
<p>I have a question. You say:</p>
<p>" In a sea of high scoring whites and asians, someone took a look at my little black daughter and was impressed by all those 800s and all that genuine community service and all that passion and love and heart and soul and might that would surely have gone unnoticed had there been no AA."</p>
<p>Why do you think it would have gone unnoticed? Your D has demonstrated remarkable achievement by any standard."</p>
<p>I sincerely don’t see that as any thing but congratulatory and complimentary. </p>
<ol>
<li> With regard to your obviously outstanding daughter, you said:</li>
</ol>
<p>“But then you will marginalize that also despite that fact that after almost being at her Ivy for 2 years her grades are either at or exceed the average grade (her school posts the average grade for each course) but you will probably say, she picked easy classes, or getting a pass because she is black.”</p>
<p>I never said, inferred or even thought anything like that. Where do you get that? Why would you presuppose my thoughts and stereotype me? I am nothing but thrilled for you daughter, happy that the she is successful and so obviously loved by her devoted mother.</p>
<ol>
<li>“…stronger ones (SAT scores) than your son is presenting but you will be upset if he does not get admitted into an ivy…”</li>
</ol>
<p>And when did I ever say that he wanted to get into an ivy, or that I wanted him to? But thanks for insulting me any way, even though I have been nothing but civil throughout.</p>
<ol>
<li> Yes, I have read the amicus brief and I do agree with the thrust of their arguments. What you will not find in those briefs is any references to the actual scoring systems that any of those institutions use for admissions. The only scoring system divulged in the case is that of U of M, and therefore, that is the one I refer to.</li>
</ol>
<p>Sybbie, again I am sorry for your obvious bitterness and vitriol. As someone who generally supports your view with regard to URM’s, I can’t imagine what it feels like to be actually opposed to your views. I would only ask that you stop misrepresenting me and presupposing my thoughts and opinions. I would not do that to you.</p>