<p>Its true that there are trends in these matters, and that currently schools in the boondocks (like Dartmouth, Cornell, etc) have lost a little appeal, and that big city locations formerly associated in the public mind with high crime rates and urban blight (like Columbia, NYU, Yale, etc) are enjoying something of a revival.</p>
<p>The worm will undoubtedly turn at some point.</p>
<p>Well god forbid D do something better than H.</p>
<p>damn stats are so *****ing cool!... lets all just type out random numbers to make ourselves feel better about ourselves and our grudges against dartmouth</p>
<p>But random stats matter SO MUCH. In fact so much that I enjoy going on random schools pages and negating all positive messages. I mean even when a schools apps go up 10% there is plenty to complain about. But as a tool that is what I do.</p>
<p><strong>note sarcasm</strong></p>
<p>D may be at the upper end of Ivy increases - along with Princeton and Brown - primarily because all three took a bit of a hit last year in the wake of early admissions rules changes at HYS. (ie, they are working off 2008 base numbers that were depressed somewhat.)</p>
<p>Princeton, in particular, should theoretically see a large increase, as both its ED and RD app numbers fell dramatically last year, and it has, in partial consequence, moved to accept the Common App - something it had previously resisted.</p>
<p>There was no other reason for the huge drop at Princeton last year, and acceptance rate increases at D and B, other than "marketplace" disturbances following rules changes at schools with which they have an overlap.</p>
<p>MIT, Georgetown and Chicago similarly took a hit last year, and should rebound nicely for 2009.</p>
<p>Last year apps were down 1% and are up this year 8-9%!!! That is not explained by "marketplace disturbances". This year was a record all around and you insist on finding little ways to negate this. There is even a thread on the Yale site, "why does Byerly hate Yale." I hate to be negative on this site, but Byerly you are a tool. Go back to your harvard page or find some friends. A guy under the name California1600 might make friends with you.</p>
<p>From: The Dartmouth
Friday, February 20, 2004</p>
<hr>
<p>Ivy League applications drop
By Zachary Goldstein, The Dartmouth Staff </p>
<p>Misa Grannis/The Dartmouth Staff
Cornell and Brown saw a slight increase in applications. Harvard, Dartmouth, Princeton and the University of Pennsylvania all saw their numbers drop this year for the Class of 2008. </p>
<p>Applications to most Ivy League institutions dropped for the Class of 2008 after last year's applicant pools for the Class of 2007 set several record highs. Dartmouth was no exception: The total number of applications, both regular and early-decision, dropped less than one percent from last year's record number of applicants. </p>
<p>As of last week, 11,750 applications had been sorted, Dean of Admissions Karl Furstenberg said.</p>
<p>Did you notice THIS post on the Yale page, slipper?</p>
<p>"Byerly sticks to established facts, and has superb command of them, never gratuitously trashes another school, in fact always shows great respect for Yale, Stanford, Dartmouth, etc. Face it, Harvard just kills in most statistical categories."</p>
<p>Hmm...a post...versus an entire thread...you're about as unbiased as Bill O'Reilly, especially if you're going to compare ED to the Dred Scott case.</p>
<p>I am not the only one who sees this as an apt analogy. </p>
<p>If ED is ever challenged in court, (which the "slave" schools have gone to great lengths to avoid) I believe the analogy will be argued, and that a judge will find it convincing. (Bear in mind that in the ACTUAL Dred Scott case, non-slave states were actually compelled by the Court to enforce slave-state laws that deemed slaves "property" - by seizing and returning escapees to their "owners."</p>
<p>Byerly - no one in their right mind would bring up the Dred Scott case in court, especially in something like this. I actually recently saw a bit of a Q and A with Scalia and Breyer at the American University Law School. Someone brought up the Dred Scott case while talking about original constitutional intent vs. interpretation (granted, a different issue, but still), and they both practically laughed at him.</p>
<p>Do you understand that we're talkking about the Dred Scott decision as a "precedent" to be REJECTED in any challenge to binding ED? I'm not sure you do.</p>
<p>hmm, byerly if I'm rejected will you file suit on my behalf ?</p>
<p>The winner in any such suit will be somebody admitted ED who snubs the ED school in order to matriculate elsewhere RD.</p>
<p>Wouldn't that just be a contract case?</p>
<p>Among other things, it would be a property case.</p>
<p>I'm familiar with the Dred Scott case (but thanks for the refresher).</p>
<p>How would you ever get to the point of litigation? The ED college is going to release a kid from their commitment. Is the kid suing the RD school because they've rescinded their offer because they found out about the ED acceptance? Still think it is a contract case - and the kid didn't have the legal capacity to enter into the contract.</p>
<p>Well I agree the schools would do whatever they thought they had to do - and probably already have, in situations that have been kept quiet - to short circuit any case on procedural grounds. It was nearly 40 years after the Missouri Compromise and 10 years after the Fugitive Slave Act before the Dred Scott case finally percolated to the Supreme Court level.</p>