Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

They came for the Ivy League Presidents, and I laughed at the SNL skit about it...


Fergasun

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Llevron said:

 

He showed numbers saying people are not applying to school as much and took that to mean its because they are so political. There are many more, much more obvious reasons. He could be right. But none of the numbers he showed even came close to implying what he said out of his mouth. 

 

3 hours ago, Spearfeather said:

 

I would agree that this is certainly playing a part.


well. I’ve read a number of things on declining college applicants, and none of them talked about “politics” being a reason. 
 

the expense, return on investment for what they want, negative view towards education system because of student loans (todays students see the children of the student loan generation), or simply believing it a bit overrated as a necessity, high paying tech jobs that require little experience or academic knowledge (and cap out pretty low as a “career”, fwiw), the rising cost of living or healthcare/family changes getting in the way…

 

don’t really recall politics being a thing. Probably because if you cared at all about that sort of thing, at that age, you can probably find a place to go where you’d be with likeminded people 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TradeTheBeal! said:

Fewer racist, neo-confederate institutions that hide their overt political aspirations behind religion would be a tremendous benefit to both the nation and humanity in general.

 

But Liberty Universities Football Team is good now. 🤪

 

4 hours ago, Destino said:

Interestingly enough, religion getting overly political has sent their numbers in the US into an absolute plummet. Theres something to be said for staying in your lane. 

 

First rule in the entertainment industry is never get political. You'll only alienate half your audience. 😇

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, tshile said:

well. I’ve read a number of things on declining college applicants, and none of them talked about “politics” being a reason. 

 

I was agreeing with Destino on cost of college vs. trade schools when I  said " this " was definitely a part of it. How much politics/woke culture accounts for it, I would agree again it probably does for some, even though it's probably not the biggest factor for most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

As much as I’d like to blame the right wing, she was facing a lengthy plagiarism investigation that she would almost certainly lose. Harvard tried to make it go away with a quick US police style “we investigated ourselves and determined we did nothing wrong” but even sympathetic critics noted it was too quick and the evidence was too great. I do not think she stole ideas, that we know of, but she lifted unquoted text by the barrel. That may be a smaller violation but it was evidently repeated. 
 

it’s hard to have standards when the leader gets exposed for not living up to them and the board seems content to allow it. I think she took too long in resigning. By allowing Harvard to defend her she damaged the institution she lead. 

 

And people that say this is politics are right, at least in one regard. It was politics that motivated her enemies to search her work for problems. 

  • Like 4
  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay.  This plagarism scandal that took her down and the counter attack on Ackman's wife are just something that should not reach my conciousness.  

 

"I demanded Harvard President resign over plagarism.  Now my Ivy League wife has been credibly accused of plagarism."  Guess what pal, I think the newspaper made a fair point regarding the level of scandal for the Harvard pres.

 

And why the heck does this still matter so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean Elon, too?

 

I look at this guys background and I wonder "what value did you bring to the world?".  Elon actually has. This guy is a Billionaire financier via real estate.  

 

I keep telling my kids "was this the intention of the Internet?".  Its more in terms of "why you you so desensetized" and they are even talking about having snuff and porn pushed to them thru Tik Tok and Insta...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

This Bill Ackman **** very funny. Never has one man been so mad.

 

TL;DR.  My wife is a thief, but everyone is a thief if you really think about it, so it's okay that she's a thief. But all the other thieves should be punished. 

 

Perhaps he should have plagiarized someone explaining that Twitter is for short thoughts.  He's looking for Medium. 

Edited by PleaseBlitz
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

TL;DR.  My wife is a thief, but everyone is a thief if you really think about it, so it's okay that she's a thief. But all the other thieves should be punished. 

 

Perhaps he should have plagiarized someone explaining that Twitter is for short thoughts.  He's looking for Medium. 

 

The whole thing is meant as a distraction/excuse.

 

The stuff about Wikipedia is just a waste of time/distraction.   If he wants to know what his wife should have done about Wikipedia, he should just ask her.  At the time his wife wrote her thesis, she should have known the standards of her field about citing Wikipedia.  And the standard certainly wasn't that plagiarizing Wikipedia was okay. 

 

(Generally in academic work, you don't cite Wikipedia because Wikipedia is a collector of information.  You should cite the sources underlying Wikipedia that Wikipedia should be and often does cite.  And you shouldn't assume that Wikipedia is citing the right things because people mess up and put the wrong the number behind the wrong sentence sometimes, don't actually understand what they read and so botch the explanation, or just make a typo in paraphrasing it and do something like leave out a not or a negative sign in an equation that makes what is written wrong.  So you should get the source that Wikipedia is citing yourself and make sure that it says what Wikipedia says it says.

 

That way the proper people that originated the idea gets credit, and you actually understand what you're citing and not somebody else's paraphrasing of it.)

  • Thumb up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you've taken definitions from somewhere, then you've used it as a source.  That they didn't mention it before doesn't mean you shouldn't have cite it.  I'll pretty much guarantee you that MIT policies don't mention leading scientific journals like Science and Nature.  That shouldn't be taken as an indication that you don't need to cite them.

 

The added language is to clarify that shouldn't even be using Wikipedia as a source.  Which I'll pretty much guarantee you that people understood at the time.  He's a billionaire.  Why is taking advice from people on Twitter instead of talking to a real lawyer?  Because he's trying to distract and muddy the issue.

 

(Looking at his twitter from what I can see, I didn't know this guy is also a vaccine questioner.

 

"Rather than censor RFK and the skeptics, shouldn’t we instead seek to understand the causes for the massive increase in autism and allergic diseases in our children over the last 30 or so years? If vaccines are not the cause for increased autism and other allergenic conditions, then what is the cause or causes? "

 

A lot of work has been done to understand those things.  We are trying.  And part of that trying has included people looking for a potential role of vaccines, and despite people looking, there is essentially no evidence that those things are associated with any of those diseases.  We have other good ideas of what causes autism and has increased allergies.  Maybe he should try reading Wikipedia.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_autism

Edited by PeterMP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only way to solve this issue is to review every single person in academia or tied to it for plagiarism. Including wives of billionaires.

 

anyone caught to have plagiarized is exiled to Wyoming, where they are to live out the remainder of their days in relative isolation. 
 

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Cooked Crack said:

Citations weren't a thing till 2013

But even if they were a thing it doesn't matter, because don't worry! She was getting her information from a site our organization didn't consider reliable so it's fine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Cooked Crack

I think this a-hole doesn't understand irony.

 

Him (and others) got Professor Gay punished for similar inadequate citation, but no violation of school policy.  Turn the same standard back on his wife (and I think it is fair game since he injected himself into the "Ivy League plagarism scandal") and she also is (or was?) an Ivy professor, and wow... now he's pissed that the standard being used is turned on him.  I believe, as people say.. womp-wump-womp....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...