<p>You were just calling out another complainer by calling him a stuck up snob and Rochester is unlucky to have you. You have a funny way of calling out someone. Of course, I am mean and you’re a delightful person.</p>
<p>So what could get your goat, EastCoastBound, to call someone out by calling him a stuck up snob, and an entire city would be unlucky to have him. Could it be a college student who asked if he could bring an air conditioner to the school. That remark prompted your less-than-polite refrain. If people don’t believe it, check it out for yourself. I guess I am the mean one. Before anyone calls me mean or a whiny female dog, make sure you check your CC posts. Unlike you, I won’t compare you to a disgruntled animal.</p>
<p>Performersmom wrote @post#241:
</p>
<p>There’s been some fairly thoughtful discussion about this on the CMC and Pomona student fora. As Pomkenna points out, quite rightly, the undergraduate reaction has been candid and, if anything, even more critical of the administration than anything posted on this thread.</p>
<p>In particular, I would highly recommend Nathan Falk’s opinion piece, here:
<a href=“http://cmcforum.com/opinion/02012012-rankings-ethics-and-transparency[/url]”>http://cmcforum.com/opinion/02012012-rankings-ethics-and-transparency</a>
and the comments which follow it.</p>
<p>Also, this may be just about the most thorough interview you will ever see with Pres. Gann:
<a href=“http://cmcforum.com/news/02022012-president-pamela-gann-discusses-false-reporting-of-sat-scores#comment-429058784[/url]”>http://cmcforum.com/news/02022012-president-pamela-gann-discusses-false-reporting-of-sat-scores#comment-429058784</a></p>
<p>Why am I so upset? Because someone on the board tried to impeach my credibility by suggesting to others that I am just here to ■■■■■ the board.</p>
<p>Nothing you posted suggested I was “mixing it up” with anyone. I have not made any post that was (whether meant to be or otherwise) personally offensive to any poster or included name calling at another poster. I gave my opinion on CMC. </p>
<p>After my initial posts on this board I moved on, until I saw the Kiplinger’s article which I came back to add here. I’ll be back if I have something of value to add or someone else attacks me here.</p>
<p>Honestly I’ve never seen such rudeness or personal attacks on any school message board except this one. Those who participate in such things are doing a great job representing CMC.</p>
<p>hey guys,
I know CMC isn’t my alma matter, but I feel all the Claremont Colleges are affected somewhat negatively from this news. That said, the extent to which this thread has gone on accompanied by senseless comments-many by people who don’t attend or worse, aren’t even affiliated with the 5cs- seems more upsetting than what CMC actually did. If you look through this thread, you’ll find the majority of posters aren’t even CMC students. Why? Because they have moved on. I’m sure they are aware this has left a permanent blemish on CMC but I’m also sure no one doubts its quality as an academic institution and will continue to attract and produce quality students. So take heed of what current CMC students are doing and stop discussing and beating down this issue and move on, you’re all doing cmc a favor by no longer posting on this thread even if you are defending it.</p>
<p>Should the editor of Kiplinger’s just poll the students to get their feelings about how his magazine should handle the scandal? Gee, I wonder what they’d say to him? </p>
<p>I find the general public’s unbiased opinion of CMC is just as important, if not more so, than what current CMC students think about the situation. In fact I find it somewhat disconcerting that the students aren’t more bothered by it. I’m sure the administration loves it though. My understanding is that a number of controversial things (Kerri Dunn fiasco is one example) have happened under the current school president, yet even after this scandal you describe the student body as having moved on. I wonder what it would take to give the students some lasting pause.</p>
<p>Since I have not had the chance to read the responses to my earlier post on the moral issues involved that potentially impact the organizational culture of Claremont McKenna, I have to say I was disappointed and quite amazed at how my words and intent were distorted by several very passionate defenders of CMC’s handling of this grave matter. I mentioned the Catholic Church’s continuing coverup of child abuse among some of its clergy and leadership only to point out the risks associated with not treating moral lapses among leaders in any institution. You may consider it nauseating drivel, but that can only be, in my opinion, if you fail to see this as an issue of institutional morality. </p>
<p>As far as my response being “sanctimonius”, either you do not understand the meaning of the word, or you did not carefully read my post. My point in closing with the quote by John Donne is to remind everyone of the fact that none of us are flawless.</p>
<p>I write here not to attack CMC–one of my favorite business partners is a CMC grad and I have hired CMC grads in the past with good outcomes. I write as someone concerned about the reputation of liberal arts colleges like Wesleyan (my alma mater and the college of my elder son) as well as CMC (a possible choice for my younger son). </p>
<p>We who love liberal arts education must realize that our type of education is rare in the world and it is under attack in general. The news about CMC is not helpful to our cause. In fact,how CMC handles it will have an impact not just on the reputation of CMC, but in an indirect way, also on Wesleyan, Williams, Amherst, Hamilton, Swarthmore, Haverford, etc.</p>
<p>If you think my position is too harsh, take a look at this morning’s article in the NYT on this issue and the posts of readers there.</p>
<p>And let’s keep in mind that our posts are also being read by prospective students from everywhere. If we want to bring honor to our alma maters, I suggest we conduct ourselves as thoughtful adults and not as sniping and divisive souls.</p>
<p>Morganhil, there is a way to put your message in practice. If you are keenly interested in defending the value of a liberal arts education, you could spend some energy in defending the corrective measures taken by the leaders at CMC. Rather than drawing a nebulous parallel to the Catholic Church, you could have written about the vastly different reactions to the discovery of a fraud at CMC. If a criticism is warranted, it might be to have acted with haste and without enough concern for the malice that permeates the mind of the envious.</p>
<p>As far as helping future LACers, you could write about the lunacy of an excessive focus on SAT scores. And you could have opined on the triviality of the false reporting of such scores. Of course, the deception by an official CANNOT be trivialized.</p>
<p>in the end, it is rather easy to separate posters in categories and recognize the objective posts and the mean, trollish, and shrilling contributions.</p>
<p>Posters can indeed help future generations. This is not done through ad hominems and idle speculation. This is done through analyzing FACTS with objectivity and not through roguish backstabbing and false pretenses.</p>
<p>Mirror on the wall … Who is the fairest of all?</p>
<p>^^I think Morganhil is reacting to the cynicism imbedded in the message. I know that I am. It’s possible you’re too close to see it. I mean, how can the Dean’s wrongdoing be morally wrong, but, its consequences be trivial at the same time? I’ve read the general outlines of this apologia nearly a dozen times, both here and in other threads where, for example, you simultaneously defend the USNews rankings as being “the best of the rankings” while admitting that it’s garbage, and it always sounds as if you are trying to argue two sides of a proposition at the same time. Sorry, if this sounds like an <em>ad hominem</em> attack; it’s not meant to be; it’s the logic of the argument that I’m attacking</p>
<p>JohnWesley, despite my best efforts, I cannot follow your latest post. I always try to make my points as clear and direct as possible. I’ll assume I am not a successful as I thought. If you want a clarification, all you have to do is ask.</p>
<p>Fwiw, allow me to repeat that it is not hard to understand where posters come from and what their true intents are. I have written that critics have the right to voice their negative opinions. Perhaps, we disagree about some being also entitled to their own facts.</p>
<p>As far as ad hominems, they rarely work as intended. :)</p>
<p>Parent57 #88
pomkenna, can you show me where I made negative comments about other schools on this site.</p>
<p>chrisrb #117
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/wesleyan-university/1197037-1-train-wreck-school.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/wesleyan-university/1197037-1-train-wreck-school.html</a></p>
<p>Parent57 (#95):
pickwick, if you think my post # 83 is negative and mean, you really have a thin skin. So you think the Wesleyan poster (with which I guess is the school your affiliated) was genteel and respectful. Reread both posts and tell me which one is attacking and mean-spirited.</p>
<p>Parent57 #217:
“… that thread, which I only posted to see what you guys thought about that survey and the lack of prerequisites at Wesleyan. Gosh, if you have a problem with me, just tell me rather taking it out on a school and their students. Show some maturity.”</p>
<hr>
<p>Sure. </p>
<p>Parent57 "only posted [a link to an totally biased “survey” put together by some mega-politicized far-right theocratic think tank under the misimpression that said “survey” would somehow damage the reputation of some of the greatest colleges in America which it perceived to be from the other side of the political dividing line] to "see what you guys thought about the survey and lack of prerequisites at Wesleyan.</p>
<p>Right. Uh huh. That was the ONLY reason Parent57 started that thread. </p>
<p>What a crock!</p>
<p>You berate others for posting attacking and mean-spririted posts, when it’s plainly obvious to everyone here that yours are some of the most attacking and mean-spirited around.</p>
<p>“Show some maturity?” Hmm. I guess we define that word differently. My definition doesn’t include bullying, transparent hypocrisy, and an acute allergy to accountability.</p>
<p>Learn to tell the truth, Parent57. Jeez.</p>
<p>In the meantime, quit berating others for what you freely allow yourself to do. We’d all be better off … and you’d save CMC from association with the type of reflexive dishonesty that doesn’t serve the college well – especially at this particular time.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I thought I did that. But, if answering a question with another question is the best you can do, I guess, that’ll have to do.:)</p>
<p>Now the Kiplinger thing. I wouldn’t want to be a CMC senior leading info sessions for prospective students/parents during the upcoming college visit season.</p>
<p>I know Xiggi disagrees, but given the large number of ranking factors involved and the additional train of bad news for CMC I, for one, can’t imagine how this isn’t going to end up without CMC becoming a lower ranked college for a while.</p>
<p>(Don’t bother to repost your analysis, Xiggi. I know you get irritated by having to repost things. I don’t blame you, but as you mentioned, in a thread hundreds of posts long it sometimes becomes necessary to do so. Or, alternatively, you could forgo having to repost material by just look up your own earlier posts and giving us the relevant post numbers. I’ve had to do that a few times.)</p>
<p>I wonder if there’s any way to gauge how many visits CMC gets this spring/summer. That might be an early indicator of how the scandal will be affecting application numbers, how the whole thing’s playing out in the “real world” of the college education market, etc.</p>
<h1>251</h1>
<p>I agree. I don’t think postings like this reflect well on the poster or their college. How about you work on getting all the Wesleyan posters herded back over to your forum and we’ll see what we can do to convince Parent57 to stay over here? ;-)</p>
<hr>
<p>schsswcw:</p>
<p>I don’t think you meant to promote the idea that only certain people should be posting in certain threads! What I hear is that you don’t like the tone. I understand, and I agree.</p>
<p>What we’re witnessing here (Parent57’s reflexive/obsessive defensiveness, my own jealous reaction to the fact that CMC has a USNews ranking higher than Wesleyan’s ranking, etc.) is symptomatic of the accelerating hyper-competitiveness in American society playing itself out in the context of frenetic U.S. college admissions insanity in the microcosm of this particular thread on the CC boards.</p>
<p>My own analysis is that fear underlying this destructive and worsening hyper-competitiveness/corruption in this country is what’s driving much of this. Will my favorite college make it? Will my child make it? Will I make it?</p>
<p>In America today, the answer, unfortunately, is increasingly “No … you will not make it. You will have less and less real chance. The system is rigged. You will get screwed.”</p>
<p>A small number in our society get cushy trillion-dollar-big-government-welfare-bailout socialism while all the rest of us get hard-knocks capitalism, foreclosures, lost jobs or job worries, anxiety about sky-high student debt, etc. </p>
<p>SO much in America is gamed at this point, we all know it, and I think that’s part of the reason this whole CMC cheating thing strikes such a nerve. </p>
<p>That’s definitely part of the reason I’m so interested. (Again, part of it is jealousy and a misguided reptilian-brain tribal joy in seeing a rival tribe take a big hit. Not proud of it, but it is so. Working on it.)</p>
<p>My problem with Parent57 has to do with the unacknowledged bullying, hypocrisy, and projection that in my perception characterize so many of his posts.</p>
<p>For what it’s worth, I’m a senior who has applied to CMc and another Claremont school. Despite what some posters have said, I would be absolutely thrilled to have the opportunity to attend either of them. Also, unlike most other schools, I feel as though people who apply and choose to go to the claremonts make their descions not only based on the rankings and superior academic quality of the schools, but because everyone is so exceptionally happy at cmc and the other colleges.</p>
<p>Chrisrb and others:</p>
<p>Ds2 and I are visiting CMC later this month. I disagree that this vitriol is all about the hyper-competitive nature of college admissions. I think it’s about a few posters who immaturely insist on having the last word on an anonymous msg board. C’mon, guys. You all look ridiculous and reflect poorly on your respective schools .</p>
<p>Hi Youdon’tsay:</p>
<p>It would be very nice if you could report back after your visit (on this or on another thread). I am looking forward to hear the opinion of an inpartial person about the “on the ground” perception of the consequences of all of this.</p>
<p>I agree with you (and with cardshark, post just above) that CMC is a great school (*). The issue becomes tricky when one could have the option to decide between CMC and some other good schools. The concern is that this “SAT incident” and its repercussions could tarnish CMC’s reputation just enough that even if the applicant originally wanted to go to CMC, now he/she may need to look more carefully to the other options.</p>
<p>-FCA</p>
<ul>
<li>Part of me still asks: Why did you do that, Dean Vos? Can’t you see you spoiled the party? There are so few nice LACs in California, that it is sad to be thinking that an applicant may have his/her consideration set a bit more constrained because of this. I so much wish this entire embroglio haden’t happened. Perhaps the reason I keep posting here is because I care(cared).</li>
</ul>
<p>I will, FCA. I’ll be very curious if it’s at all addressed in any of the formal events – the tour and info session. He’s a junior and so can’t get an interview.</p>
<p>We’re also looking at Pomona, and if he likes it better he’ll be applying there via Questbridge, which is binding, so all this CMC talk may be for naught. A couple of kids we know pretty well go there, but they are not at all alike so I’m curious to see what the common denominator for them is. One I think is the CMC type; the other I think went there to play his sport. But I definitely will report back. I always do an official visit report on cc.</p>
<p>Ds thinks his favorite right now is in DC – the elusive G’town. But I’m trying to get him to look at schools that are less reachy as only one kid from our school has ever gotten into G’town…</p>
<p>Youdon’tsay: Interesting… I thought that Pomona was more selective than G’town… Anyway, I’ll be looking forward to your review about CMC (and about Pomona as well 
).</p>
<p>Some students say the scandal is actually helping the school shake a community college reputation:</p>
<p>“I think its actually increased C.M.C.s exposure. For a long time my extended family thought I was going to a community college.”</p>
<p>[Students</a> at Claremont McKenna More Worried About Reputation Than Rankings - NYTimes.com](<a href=“Students at Claremont McKenna More Worried About Reputation Than Rankings - The New York Times”>Students at Claremont McKenna More Worried About Reputation Than Rankings - The New York Times)</p>