<p>
Really - what an unfounded remark in post 301. I don’t see a speck of bitterness in reporting that someone attempted to cheat their way into a school or scholarship. Scorn for cheaters does not = bitterness. </p>
<p>I’ve read bitter posts here (haven’t we all) - jym’s wasn’t.</p>
<p>Oh believe me - I realize it is natural for posters on a message board to believe in the superiority of their opinions. Why bother to post if we don’t. </p>
<p>I just found the posts defining and lauding intellectual humility full of everything but.</p>
<p>sewhappy,
man, you sure don’t know how to " read" well into the reasons behind other peoples remarks.<br>
jym wasn’t BITTER. She was APPALLED and INCREDULOUS that another parent would do such a thing. Arent you?</p>
<p>Sheeesh…</p>
<p>Sometimes the grinding of axes overflows from thread to thread.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t have much respect for coy insults, so I think you need to own your criticism of paticular posts & posters. So posts 231, explaining a poster’s personal theory about what may be persuasive in admissions (which I find jives with results, as someone in education in a position to observe results), and post 236, affirming that theory (only a theory, but again, seems often to correspond to admissions results among unhooked students) are arrogant posts?</p>
<p>…because just to be clear, I do not take credit for my mother’s library. That was entirely her doing, and in our neighborhood, an eccentricity that did not make her popular. I don’t think it is arrogant to point out the reality, as research as often corroborated, that one’s home enviornment is hugely influential on a student’s educational success. It also doesn’t mean that such an exposed student will choose to benefit from such a home environment; in our family, two children chose to, two children chose not to. A home environment that is qualitatively different from many others is an environment that has the potential to encourage intellectual depth in a student; that’s all. It does not guarantee that depth, nor did I assume sewhappy meant that it guarantees intellectual depth or intellectual humility. </p>
<p>I also think this is important point that sewhappy brought up, for another reason: the assumption of ‘control’ over admissions outcomes, and particularly a control that can be engineered in the last few years of a student’s existence before his or her admissions season. The subtext on CC is very often an outgrowth of the assumption of deliberate effort and control (including, too often, manipulation).</p>
<p>Nevertheless, I’m certain that this post will also be viewed as arrogant. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>@epiphany. “Wow” was directed at sewhappy questioning whether student at jym626 son’s school was really “cheating”. After all, “A lot of life is unfair”. And if one is to object to this so called “cheating” one is “bitter”. Understood that her offer to hire your D was a joke. Earlier comments were not.</p>
<p>If someone disagrees with a post or a poster’s point of view, it is better to just come straight out to say @oldfort (or old fart as some would like to call me) your point on this is bunch of you know what, instead of trying to go round about way of saying it. Or just quote the point you are referencing to. Sometimes I really have no clue what people are talking about.</p>
<p>I think, oldfort, some of your confusion results because some posts on this thread reflect previous disagreements among posters on other threads. it is like an inside joke, this pattern of posts, mysterious to those not in the know.</p>
<p>Chill out, guys!!!</p>
<p>I think that until we degenerate into this insulting and nicking and attacking, we all have a lot of good stuff to share, whether we agree or not. I appreciate and respect the discourse, so thanks.</p>
<h1>oldfort I thought it was obvious my comment was directed at sewhappy. I was incorrect in that assumption. I usually make it clear which post I am responding.</h1>
<p>I think oldfort is “in the know”, performersmom!</p>
<p>Hope that was not an insult, MOWC!!!</p>
<p>No, not at all. 
I just know that oldfort is very astute and can identify when someone gets all twisted up on CC.</p>
<p>No one else wants to talk about societal metaphors of salmon spawning? It sounds so interesting.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But hasn’t it been done before?</p>
<p>[Dumb</a> & Dumber (1994) - Memorable quotes](<a href=“http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0109686/quotes]Dumb”>Dumb and Dumber (1994) - Quotes - IMDb)
Lloyd: What the **** are we doing here, Harry? We gotta get out of this town!
Harry: Oh yeah, and go where? Where are we gonna go?
Lloyd: I’ll tell you where. Someplace warm. A place where the beer flows like wine. Where beautiful women instinctively flock like the salmon of Capistrano. I’m talking about a little place called Aspen.
Harry: Oh, I don’t know, Lloyd. The French are ***holes.</p>
<p>swallows, not salmon</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Remember – the movie was titled Dumb <em>and</em> Dumber. ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Here we go again! Not that it would make any difference one way or the other, but rest assured that I am not in that “line of work.” As I have stated a few times in my eight years here, I have never charged anyone a cent for my opinions or advice. This helps keeping the price right. All that I have to say on the subject of admissions can be found on this forum, and as long as Roger Dooley keeps the entry fee at the current level, it will mean that you get it for free. Malicious tongues might whisper that it means you pay for what it is worth … and that is OK. The reality is that I truly believe in “self-help” and recommend absolute low cost solutions to simple things as test prep. I am not sure that “clients” would line up at my “office” to hear that all you need is a 12 dollar book from Walmart, an X-acto knife, and plenty of dedication and self-discipline. I don’t think that such message might be the best way to “■■■■■” for clients on CC’s fora. ;)</p>
<p>I am afraid that you might be confused by my positions that I believe that both the providers of private services and the parents who find them useful should be absolutely free to seek one another. I never could have afforded such luxury, but that does not mean that I should condemn people who have the means to do so. Neither should I condemn the people who decide to take a plunge and enter a profession that generate a good share of criticisms and scorn. Speaking about criticisms, I believe that my posts about certain practices of Kat Cohen or that consultant who adviced people to move to a lower performing district indicate that I do not agree with the most egregious recommendation or outright fabrications. </p>
<p>Peace!</p>
<p>“I just found the posts defining and lauding intellectual humility full of everything but.” </p>
<p>I was watching the Kardashians’ reality show hoping to get some intellectual stimulation, but it turned out to be everything butt.</p>
<p>^^ That post belongs in the colonoscopy thread.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s actually turning out kind of cool . . . if I’m interpreting it right she’s saying our demographics are all haywire and we’re living too long and not just laying eggs and fertilizing them and dying like nature intended. And the young salmon (people) aren’t heading out into the open water and then returning home to mate on time either. The whole Great Circle of Life is just really off. And that’s why there’s so much strife in congress and the economy is lousy. </p>
<p>Actually, it’s way weird but it’s getting done and it’s hers and the vibe in the house is a lot less stressed than yesterday. </p>
<p>(jym seemed overly upset about that scholarship thing when his/her kid won it; s/he obviously parented more effectively and that is sweet and the other parent was a horse’s patoot.)</p>