<p>You really don’t have good reading comprehension. When you bring up the “Last post” about Buddha and such, you are wrong. That wasn’t my last point, that was a while ago. I wasn’t using that as a rebuttal to anything but you saying “last post” all the time, and not knowing what you are talking about. Anybody with a brain could read what you are whining about and wonder why you keep talking. At this point it’s pretty much just blabbering on. </p>
<p>You’re insulting people over the internet. You are SOOOOO cool because the imaginary reader sides with you. What if the imaginary reader sided with me? Now he’s attacking your imaginary College Confidential castle. He’s stealing your post counts. OH NOEZ! There, I set up a much better imaginary reader than you. Try and top it!</p>
<p>A while ago…? Your post was # 84, and mine was #87. How is that even close to a while ago? It was literally one hour. Are you bad at math, too?
I wasn’t whining about anything besides you not bothering to formulate actual responses towards people with different viewpoints. You keep doing that, so I keep trying to press that you shouldn’t. Solution to this? Stop posting. You admit yourself that this is going nowhere.
And hey, I didn’t insult anyone until you did. You said that he was full of himself for calling himself enlightened. You’re so cool, man.</p>
<p>I think three days ago counts as a while. I’m in Calc BC, and got an 800 on SAT Math… And too implies I’m bad at the earlier question, which was reading comprehension which I got 720/36 on, so I can’t be bad “too” at something else when I wasn’t bad at the first thing to begin with.</p>
<p>I’m not formulating an argument because no one is arguing a point. You are continually trying to argue nothing. I formulated arguments against people, you just don’t know how to read. Solution to this? You stop posting. You aren’t getting anywhere either.</p>
<p>People who call themselves enlightened are full of themselves by definition. To think you are mentally above everyone else means you think you are better than everyone else, which is essentially the definition of being full of yourself.</p>
<p>The imaginary reader still sides with me, because apparently the writer dictates what the reader thinks, according to you.</p>
<p>I literally spelled out my point for you like five times - initially, it was that nobody was saying that SAT is worth more than GPA (though it should be worth more). You ignored this completely and kept posting statistics about how SAT was not as good a predictor as GPA. Then, after you decided to insult theenlightened, I told you that you should focus on giving actual responses instead of ignoring our points and insulting people. Not too sure why I didn’t expect you to ignore that, but whatever.
And we were talking about the last post relative to what I said in #87 - which was only one hour after your post. We’re not talking about it relative to now.
P.S, enlightened doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re mentally above everyone else. In the religious sense, it generally means that you’ve become spiritually or self aware.</p>
<p>Go back and learn to read. People were saying that the SAT should be more important. I “ignored” it by responding with why GPA was more important (It is a better predictor, therefore it is more important). I “insulted” him because he started insulting me. Simple as that. No one made points after that, so there was nothing to ignore. Oh, and don’t try to say that he didn’t start it. He called me dull and tried to make what I was saying seem like it wasn’t worth a thought, so yes, he was the first to start this.</p>
<p>It was an hour after everyone else was done talking. Exactly. Arguing for him is pointless. He’s gone.</p>
<p>The imaginary reader is sick of your arguing. He thinks you should stop now while you aren’t too far behind. (I like your imaginary reader tactic. It works well…)</p>
<p>We said “more important than it is CURRENTLY,” not more important than GPA. You’re really telling me to learn how to read when you couldn’t even figure that out? Look at posts # 28, 29, 31, 33, 38, 43, and all of mine.</p>
I’m not talking about kids with similar GPA, but kids with different GPA from different schools, when their schools are those who only have the occasional applicant to top schools. Even for less selective schools, if they have OOS applicants, it may be the only real clue about the differences between the schools.</p>
<p>First of all, to literally spell it out, it would have been in letters such as m-o-r-e, etc. People throw literally around WAY to much.</p>
<p>Secondly, my point, if you would read, was that SAT is already close to GPA in terms of importance, so making it more important would put it on, or above, the level of GPA’s importance, which shouldn’t happen. So I did respond, you just chose to ignore it the whole way through.</p>
<p>CTScoutmom, I didn’t phrase that the way I should of. I meant The SAT helps differentiate between kids with similar academic experience, as in their GPA’s and such all look to show about the same dedication/intelligence in terms of the school. So, yes, the SAT helps show the difference between schools sometimes, but so does the rest of the school reports. Just wondering, have you heard about how extensive the school reports normally are? I would assume that they are wide-reaching, but maybe I’m wrong.</p>
<p>Where did you say that? You didn’t say that anywhere. In fact, in post 25, you said it yourself that SAT was secondary to GPA and in post 27, you say that colleges don’t place weight where “devry thought they did” - which was the SAT. How is saying “colleges don’t place weight on SAT” the same as saying “SAT is already close to GPA in terms of importance?”
Hint: It’s not.
And also, I did literally spell it out. If somebody asked you to spell the word “paper,” do you write p-a-p-e-r? Or do you write paper?</p>
<p>Secondary - Coming after, less important than, or resulting from someone or something else that is primary. Less important could mean it matters .49 instead of .5 which isn’t a big difference. He seemed to believe that they put SAT as the most important, which it isn’t. The SAT is a major consideration, no matter who says what, it just falls behind GPA. Look at a lot of chances threads. Someone with a 3.4 and 2400 at an good to average school will look “a little too low, so your chances aren’t good” but someone with a 4.0 at that same school, with a 2100 is encouraged that “your SAT isn’t the best, but that doesn’t necessarily matter.” So while SAT isn’t the most important most places don’t ignore it.</p>
<p>Spelling it out can’t be the same thing as typing. If someone asks you to spell something out loud, do you just repeat the word? No, so spelling it out would literally be putting letter by letter with a pause between.</p>
<p>Refer to post 28 - he didn’t say that they put SAT as most important. He explicitly says that they don’t weigh it the most and that he never thought they did, lol. So you made an incorrect assumption right off the bat.
And if somebody told me to spell something out, I would just write the word down… as in, if I wrote “NY” on one of my essays and my teacher said “don’t use abbreviations - spell it out.” When I said “literally spelled it out,” I did left nothing to the imagination. “Spell out” also means to make explicit and clear. Google “spell out definition.”</p>
<p>Point out to me where you are imagining that I said you think SAT is more important than GPA AFTER post 28. I can’t find any from a brief scan. After he said that I dropped the actual current importance and focused on you thinking it should be MORE important than it is now. So essentially you’re arguing a completely wrong point.</p>
<p>If someone told me to spell something out, I wouldn’t go hunting for a piece of paper. I’d say it out loud in letters.</p>
<p>You JUST did in post 111… I quote: “he seemed to believe that they put SAT as the most important, which it isn’t.”
On a semi related note, in posts 46 and 47, you post stats that show that colleges count GPA as more important than SAT. Why keep posting statistics about something that we didn’t disagree about…?
And that’s on you, then. So we have different definitions of “spell out…” you brought it up in the first place, I couldn’t care less if you wouldn’t go get a piece of paper.</p>
<p>You spell out the relationship between prediction rate and importance yourself in post number 57.
… In post 113 you specifically say “point out where I said it after post 28.” After. Not before. Post 111 is after post 28. Either way, that was your fault right from the start for misinterpreting what he said.</p>
<p>Exactly the point. I was saying SAT should not become more important than it carries now, using prediction rates.</p>
<p>The point in #111 was about BEFORE #28, I said point out where I say that you think it IS more important AFTER #28. You really need to read more carefully.</p>
<p>It’s not my fault for “misinterpreting” anything, because there was nothing to misinterpret. I was arguing the logical implication of what he was saying until I had more information.</p>
<p>Yeah? And I did the same - the logical implication of secondary isn’t the difference between .49 and .5 - there’s normally a clear difference, and you implied there was a clear difference by saying multiple times that it’s “obvious that GPA is worth more (55).” Obvious implies a great difference.
Yeah, the point in 111 was about before 28 - that’s why I included the point about the prediction rate statistics, which came after 28.</p>
<p>Secondary just means behind, it doesn’t necessarily mean far behind. “Obvious that GPA is worth more” was in reference to the article, not saying that it is leaps and bounds beyond. Obvious doesn’t imply a great difference, it implies a well made point, or a clear decision. In the Olympics there were a lot of obvious winners that were within .25 seconds of each other.</p>
<p>Again, the prediction rate statistics were arguing the point that SAT shouldn’t be more important, not that they aren’t.</p>
<p>By the way, did you know that College Board is a non profit. They seem to enjoy gouging wallets too much to be a non profit.</p>
<p>Non-profit has nothing to do with how much money they make, but what they do with it. There are mega-churches that have enormous incomes, but they too are non-profits. I can only imagine what testing would cost with them as a for-profit company. (Actually, you don’t have to imagine, because there are many for-profit organizations that do corporate testing. It now costs $116 to take the IRS exam to become a Registered Tax Return Preparer, far more than the SAT, and they don’t give fee waivers, so I don’t consider their fees overly high.</p>