<p>It would be really easy to forge letters at the high school here. In fact one of the teachers my son asked for a recommendation gave him back a folder with 10 copies of the recommendation form and the letter he wrote. My son had given him stamped, pre-addressed envelopes and told him he could mail them directly to the schools if he preferred, but he returned the whole thing back to my son to mail out. Another teacher did use the pre-addressed envelopes S gave him, but even then it was just the teacher directly who dropped them in the mailbox. The counseling office is not involved. Not sure how it works at the OP's school, but even if they have a procedure that involves the counseling office, the college receiving the recommendation letters could very well not know that and have no reason not to accept a letter that arrives sent directly by a teacher or by a student like my son who had to send them himself. The Yale admissions office will have great familiarity with the protocol at some schools, but for many they probably woudn't... especially when you consider that lower-level office staff do most of the envelope-opening and filing of application materials into student folders.</p>
<p>Poetsheart, how the cheating was accomplished has not been a stumbling block for me. I understand that lots of schools send envelopes with the admissions package. The idea is that the applicant gives the envelope to the teacher, who uses it for the recommendation. Then the teacher seals it and signs across the seal. If the applicant never gives the teacher the envelope, it's pretty easy to forge a letter, seal the envelope, forge the seal, and send it without the teacher even knowing. </p>
<p>I too have wondered all along whether Yalecheater actually did it or was boasting for the heck of it. But the moral issue has been the fascinating part of this thread. I too agree that the Ken(ny Boy) Lays of this world get their start as either the cheater or the cheater-justifier. I too agree that letting this go as "no big deal" is morally and ethically repugnant. The issue of whether this particular Yalecheater actually did it is merely factual and doesn't diminish the debate in any way. </p>
<p>In my graduate school there was an imposter. It was a person who was not admitted to my grad school. But his roommate was. At the last minute, the roommate got off the waitlist elsewhere and took that offer. The imposter was asked to mail the withdrawal for him. He didn't. Instead he showed up on day one and masqueraded as the roommate. He got away with it for many months but eventually was found out. I don't remember how but I am very confident it wasn't because he was snitched on. I think somehow the ex-roommate figured it out. It was funny in retrospect because he enrolled under "John Smith" or whatever but told everyone to call him Billy or something. And yes, he was kicked out of school. We students thought kicking him out was appropriate but there was also some honest admiration for the sheer gall and stupidity of it. </p>
<p>I wonder now what my classmates would have thought of the imposter if, instead of faking himself as his roommate, he had forged recommendations to get in. I think we would have thought he was a serious tool. I'm honestly not sure what we would have thought about the person who "ratted him out." I'm pretty sure, xxzzboybank, we wouldn't have killed him though.</p>
<p>Ah that story of the impostor sounds like that of Azia Kim at Stanford. Then, quickly after that, there was another impostor found. I forget her name now but basically she was living in a Physics Lab. And at MIT the head of admissions was found to have committed resume fraud. I find it hard to believe that someone else wasn't in on these cases and decided to "let it slide".</p>
<p>
[quote]
But I wonder if the OP is acting purely out of a sense of moral imperative, or if he just wants to screw someone he hates.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What difference does it make? Are you saying that if OP likes the cheater, then his actions are moral, but if he hates him, OP is just trying to "screw" someone, so the cheater shouldn't be reported? That doesn't make sense. If we hate the murderer, we shouldn't report the murder? Huh?</p>
<p>"the teachers are well aware not to release the OP's name, but they probably do NOT know that its important not to reveal that a student reported this incongruity AT ALL. they would probably casually mention that a student reported it, but they wont release the name. thats still a big problem.
That's why I told the OP to be VERY sure to tell the teachers not to mention the fact that they got a tip at all.</p>
<p>"bad. very bad. the OP should tell the teachers to act like they found out themselves. then he would be totally safe."</p>
<p>That's what I've been explicitly saying the whole time.</p>
<p>"But if i snitch on them, I become their enemy. Enemies is the last thing you want in you high school life."</p>
<p>No, it's the last thing YOU want in your high school life. Please stop projecting your own list of priorities onto others.</p>
<p>"Yes baelor. Because he signed a contract, he deserves whatever, because ofcourse, some signature on a piece of paper is worth more than a person's life right? I mean it's a CONTRACT. It's divine. You just can't go against a contract."</p>
<p>But he said he wouldn't lie in the contract. That's the only issue. We're talking about someone reporting someone else, and others said that it didn't matter. Not true. He signed a contract, and therefore agreed not to submit a fraudulent application. He did break the contract that he made with Yale. If there are legal consequences, then the issue becomes even more important. There's no time limit on the contract, and at least his high school should be aware that he broke the rules to which he agreed.</p>
<p>"Chances are, Yale is going to give this person a bigger punishment than he deserves, because they want to discourage people from cheating."</p>
<p>What Yale does to this kid is by definition what he deserves from Yale.</p>
<p>"If you read through the posts, you'll see mostly flame from people who snitch, while people who don't snitch tries to reason (however flawed YOU THINK it is) calmly."</p>
<p>Assumptions that you haven't backed up at all. I have been extremely agitated, but I formulated my arguments very clearly. There's a huge difference between that and flaming.</p>
<p>Ad hominem attacks, BTW. And they don't make the argument for/against snitching any less valid.</p>
<p>"Baelor, it's not all about mememememe. I am doing the person a favor by not turning him in (and make his life a lot harder). But ofcourse, that's just wrong, because you can't help someone who SIGNED A FREAKING CONTRACT can you? CONTRACT IS GOD! IT'S HIGHER THAN GOD. I mean who in the right mind would help a person who made a mistake?"</p>
<p>It's not a mistake. That's trivializing this. A mistake doesn't involve writing over a long period of time something that you knew all along would be breaking something to which you agreed.</p>
<p>He broke a contract with Yale. If you know about the breach, then it's suddenly your business as well. Does Yale deserve to know who is truly coming onto their campus? Yes.</p>
<p>Plus, the issue is that the school is risking its reputation and it's definitely going to affect the teachers in the future. I'm sorry, I find it very unlikely that the thing will never come out. If it reaches colleges, suddenly the school's reputation is shot. The teachers are humiliated, and have to explain something that they never had any idea about. I fail to see how that's fair to them.</p>
<p>I can answer the quetion why people view this differently(for me I think its not that big of a deal). </p>
<p>I dont want to get into the technical details of this acutal problem since yea im tired of aruging lol.</p>
<p>But for why people view this differently, it is due to we live in different places and encountered different expereinces which shape us the way we are. Everyone here knows that it is wrong because no place on earth say forging is right. But ssome people think this as a serious offense while others like me don't think its a big deal. This is true basically on a lot of different topics from abortion to gay marriage to gun control. Some people view abortion the same as killing others view it as merely getting rid of an unwanted pregancy.</p>
<p>poetsheart, people who think that the event is minor are not the same type of people who runs Enron because there is huge difference. People who ran Enron was actively participating in lying and cheating. While people who say faking a rec is a minor offense that can be overlooked merely think there are worser things and this isn't that bad. No one said that it was the right thing to do. I personally never cheated on the any test(I have copied Hws before) or lied on my college apps(I did make a mistake ill admit that). </p>
<p>all in all: We all know faking rec is the wrong thing to do, we just think differently on the degree of how wrong it is.</p>
<p>You basically can't say people who say just let it go would become cheaters themselves.</p>
<p>What I don't understand is why you wouldn't report something you knew was wrong, regardless of how bad it may be. If someone littered, I would pick up the trash. If someone jaywalked, I can't do anything. I don't even have proof.</p>
<p>But this guy has the evidence, or at least is giving the people who do the opportunity to use it. It's something concrete. Why on earth wouldn't he report it, even if it wasn't the worst thing someone could do in his opinion?</p>
<p>The relevance of the contract is that this kid didn't only forge recs, he completely broke a contract to which he agreed. Yale accepted an applicant who did not represent himself accurately to them. It's not fair to the school not to know about the breach of contract when it's relevant to their decisions. If you don't think breaking a contract is important, how can your word ever be trusted? How can anyone's? The contract isn't divine, but it is completely relevant for assessing honesty. In addition, there is no time limit. Yale would STILL want to know about the incident, even now. And they deserve to know who is coming into their school, just like the poor teachers deserve to know that their names are being used in a completely inappropriate and perhaps illegal manner.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What difference does it make? Are you saying that if OP likes the cheater, then his actions are moral, but if he hates him, OP is just trying to "screw" someone, so the cheater shouldn't be reported? That doesn't make sense. If we hate the murderer, we shouldn't report the murder? Huh?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Did you actually read my whole post, bay? I said that I would not report cheating unless I was pretty sure that cheating had been carried out. What real evidence does the OP have that this kid forged his teacher recs? Sure, the kid told him, "I faked them", but how was it said? Was the kid possibly joking with his assumed "friend"? Or did he appear to be deadly serious? The OP hates someone who believes they have a friendship. That's sad, particularly for the person who believes he has a friendship, when none actually exists. What I have been observing here is that everyone assumes the OP's accusation of cheating is correct. And it may well be so, in which case, the OP's motivation for ratting out the "friend" is well and truly moot. But, in the absence of more compelling evidence (which the OP may have, but simply not have presented to us), I wonder if the OP's judgement of guilt and motivation to report might be colored by his hatred.</p>
<p>Bay:</p>
<p>
[quote]
What difference does it make? Are you saying that if OP likes the cheater, then his actions are moral, but if he hates him, OP is just trying to "screw" someone, so the cheater shouldn't be reported? That doesn't make sense. If we hate the murderer, we shouldn't report the murder? Huh?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Some of the thinking in here is a bit naive. </p>
<p>First of all, you can't make any sort of reasonable comparison between a cheater and a murder. </p>
<p>Second, intentions matter. Just look at our justice system. Take murder for example--since you brought it up. Why do you think there are distinction made between "involuntary" and "voluntary" manslaughter? Why do people care whether a murder was premeditated? Seems to me and most other reasonable people that this is because intentions matter.</p>
<p>If the OP is acting out of malice, I think his conscience--assuming he has one--will weigh him down for the rest of his life especially if the student he is reporting harms himself or others. I can't imagine what it be like to know you ruined someone else's life just because you disliked them even though they wanted to be your friend.</p>
<p>Bay, the point is, almost everyone would tell on a murderer regardless of whether he was a neutral person or a hated person. So it wouldn't matter that the person is hated. But if the OP wouldn't tell on him for forging the recs if he was a neutral person it would be wrong to tell on him based on the fact that he is a hated person. Some people think that is wrong, some people think that's OK. It depends really.</p>
<p>Baelor: I think I can just let some wrongdoer or evencorrect it myself. Like sseriously as you said if someone jaywalked, a person can technically be a jackass and take a picture and send it to the police. Same with littering, if i see someone littering, I can take a picture of the guy throw litter on the ground or find another eye witness or something and give the info to the police and the litter bug can be fined for however much the cost is. But as you say, sometimes even you don't do anything like trying to report jaywalker or people who litter because sometiems even though everyone knows literring and jaywalking is wrong. We can let it go beaucse we don't think its a huge huge crime or wrongdoing. </p>
<p>The same goes for basically this rec problem. Some people don't see it as a big deal some people do. The only difference between you and me is how much wrong it is because we both know its wrogn to forge.</p>
<p>The OP should not be doing this out of spite. That's wrong. Not reporting it would be wrong. Reporting it would be good regardless of how he felt. However, if he were doing it out of spite, that would form a completely new action of "wrongness." </p>
<p>The attitude of the OP is completely separate from whether or not he should report. His motivations don't affect whether reporting is correct or not. It affects whether he himself is doing this for the wrong reasons. He could be doing the right thing for terribly wrong reasons. But it's still the right thing.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What I don't understand is why you wouldn't report something you knew was wrong, regardless of how bad it may be. If someone littered, I would pick up the trash. If someone jaywalked, I can't do anything. I don't even have proof.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Remember in kindergarten when teachers told you to look after Baelor and not worry about so-and-so? It's because it's not your job to police others and question their individual decisions.</p>
<p>For the most part, the only time you should intervene and report another person's wrongdoing is when his or her actions affect others, and in this case that time has already passed. Had the OP found out about this prior to June, then yes he should have told because the student in question was occupying a position that could go to someone else; thus, some good could result. However, now it's too late for anyone to benefit from the student being kicked out as every student has already decided where they will be attending. This is why I question his motives. It seems that from the fact that no one has anything to gain from his snitching and that he said he hates the student that the OP is acting out of pure malice.</p>
<p>"The same goes for basically this rec problem. Some people don't see it as a big deal some people do. The only difference between you and me is how much wrong it is because we both know its wrogn to forge."</p>
<p>Honestly, I don't really think that you do. It can't be that wrong, or else you would think that Yale deserves to know this guy forged his way in and you would feel that the teachers had a right to know that they were completely misrepresented by a student. You would also care that this kid broke a contract he agreed to. If any of that mattered to you, you would think that forging is wrong. If not "screwing this kid over" (which getting rescinded from Yale won't do) is more important than reporting forgery to you, you obviously don't think forging is very wrong because you would let someone who did it get away with absolutely no punishment. Explain to me, then, how exactly you feel it's wrong at all.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The same goes for basically this rec problem. Some people don't see it as a big deal some people do. The only difference between you and me is how much wrong it is because we both know its wrogn to forge.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think that is oversimplifying most people's position who think the OP shouldn't have told. First of all, there is a lot of speculation as to whether the OP was acting out of malice. Second, a lot of people wonder what there is to gain from the OP snitching now. I think that if it were April and not August that there would be more uniformity in saying that he should report it because at that time it would have mattered and some good could have come from it. Telling now is pointless and somewhat destructive.</p>
<p>"Remember in kindergarten when teachers told you to look after Baelor and not worry about so-and-so?"</p>
<p>They never did that. I never had an issue with people doing wrong things, because there was supervision such that wrongdoing was immediately and swiftly (and justly, might I add), punished.</p>
<p>"It's because it's not your job to police others and question their individual decisions."</p>
<p>A man slips a cashier a bill that's obviously counterfeit. Does the cashier have a right to know that he's getting crap money? Yes. It's not policing. The kid told the OP he forged them. The OP is doing Yale, the teachers, and school, and other applicants all a favor by reporting this incident. If he had nothing, he would be unjustified. He has a right and an obligation to clear this up.</p>
<p>"For the most part, the only time you should intervene and report another person's wrongdoing is when his or her actions affect others, and in this case that time has already passed."</p>
<p>Not true. Yale deserves to know who it's getting. How does that depend on what time it is? Are you honestly saying that Yale doesn't deserve accuracy on applications? </p>
<p>"However, now it's too late for anyone to benefit from the student being kicked out as every student has already decided where they will be attending."</p>
<p>Yale benefits. If you don't believe me, ask the adcoms yourselves. Ask what they would do. And no one has to benefit for it to be right. ;) </p>
<p>"It seems that from the fact that no one has anything to gain from his snitching and that he said he hates the student that the OP is acting out of pure malice."</p>
<p>Let others police themselves, is what you said. Why then you would say that the OP shouldn't report because YOU don't like his motives? I don't understand how your advice conveniently doesn't apply to situations to which you don't want it. What is policing anyway? What fits in that category? Plus, I already said that the motives don't matter in whether he should report. It makes a difference only in how pure his motives are, obviously.</p>
<p>"First of all, there is a lot of speculation as to whether the OP was acting out of malice. "</p>
<p>I fail to see how that's relevant. If it's out of malice, it's still right to report. It's just wrong that he had bad intentions. I haven't seen any evidence or support for the idea that reporting out of malice is unjustified, while reporting with good intentions is somehow okay.</p>
<p>"Second, a lot of people wonder what there is to gain from the OP snitching now."</p>
<p>Why must there be a gain? I don't remember anyone establishing that actions that are ethically correct always have to have someone gain something.</p>
<p>Baelor:</p>
<p>How do you feel about kids who have multiple teachers write their recommendations and then screen them as in they don't waive their right to view the recommendations and select which ones they will send colleges?</p>
<p>In my opinion and many others', this practice is just a mere step below forging a recommendation. That's why many teachers refuse to write recommendations unless the student waives their right to read them.</p>
<p>
[Quote]
Not reporting it would be wrong.
[/Quote]
</p>
<p>This is the point of contention. Does it make you wrong if you fail to tell on them? That is the difficult part. That is what we've been discussing. I think it's rather clear that telling on the person is certainly NOT wrong even if it may not be 100% right. However, is letting this go, being apathetic about it, is that wrong? I err on the side of moral relativity and believe it always depends on the situation, the relationship with this person, the teacher, and a lot more information that the OP cannot possibly fully portray to us. I however, will say this, it is not always wrong to not tell. To show this, we must look at the extremes. It is clearly wrong to not tell on a murder. But is it wrong to not tell on a person who speeds six miles over the speed limit? I don't think there's anyone would contend that you are doing something "wrong" because you're not calling the cops on someone speeding. So, in my opinion, it is rather naive to set a "one-size-fits-all" approach towards whether telling is right or wrong.</p>
<p>How about this: We ask the ethics guy. Does he appear in anyone's newspaper? He's a nationally syndicated columnist.</p>