Kid got into ivy leagues by cheating

<p>Turning in the cheater way after the fact would just be justice. You did something wrong, you thought you got away with it. Yet like in real life, down the road when you probably forgot about it, it comes back to haunt you. Because if the student is a senior, and the whole class just went through admissions, the result of the cheating, the affects of it, are still occuring. Ranks, college acceptances, etc. were all affected. Where people are going to school next year is affected. Students who deserved a spot in the class where the cheater will attend were cheated. People still feeling angry that someone influenced the system unfairly is another result.</p>

<p>Assuming that life will deal consequences to the cheater down the road is unwise. Remember Enron? Think of how many innocent people were hurt, people who lost their retirement account or money they were going to use to send their kids to college. Cheaters who grow up without suffering consequences could do very scary things in the real world. Looking the other way in the real world can also produce scary results.</p>

<p>Some people on this thread think cheating is no big deal. Anonymously turning them in can then be no big deal as well.</p>

<p>Also, Charisma...read back when Armando posted that being a snitch in his community could get him killed. That brought up the comments on what is going on today with "snitching", and the negativity about "snitching" in school as a couisin (of course, a much less significant one) to snitching in the real world.</p>

<p>There is a respected tradition throughout human history, throughout different religions, and among humanists (who may be agnostic or athiest) that to lie or cheat is wrong. If your fellow man can't trust you, you are really going to have a problem in life. That is true anywhere on this planet today and in the past.</p>

<p>Again, I never said that lying or cheating is acceptable. I only said that cheating in an academic sense, is okay if you could have achieve the same results without cheating. Would I be bothered if the guy have gotten in trouble for it? No, because it's against the rules. But to the act, I'm apathetic.</p>

<p>I don't mind that you brought it up at all, I was just mentioning it because murkywater starting whining about my logical fallacies again.</p>

<p>Charisma wrote: "cheating in an academic sense, is okay if you could have achieve the same results without cheating"</p>

<p>I just find it difficult to believe that you really believe that. I am wondering if you are just taking a position from a debate standpoint, and trying to argue it effectively. It's just so illogical. How can you apply that thinking to other situations? How would that sound to a judge? How can you ever prove that someone could have achieved the same results? Finally, how can we all get along smoothly in groups, which we need to do to survive as a species, with that type of moral relativism? I think the "no cheating" thing is so basic. Ask any Kindergartener! :-)</p>

<p>Charisma wrote: "But to the act, I'm apathetic"</p>

<p>Can you honestly say you would be apathetic if a group of kids cheating in your school bumped them past you in class rank? Or would you truly feel apathetic if one of the cheaters got into your first choice school, where you were waitlisted?</p>

<p>I find it logical. If that person could do produce the same results without cheating, how does it affect me if they did it with cheating? The only thing that would come into play is morals (or jealousy). And morally, I don't have that much of a problem with academic cheating (especially if only in HS and not on everything), but I probably would be jealous that that person could get away with so little work, but the flipside is the amount of work required to cheat, the fear of getting caught (in some cases), and when you'll probably end up screwed once you do finally get caught.</p>

<p>"How can you apply that thinking to other situations?"</p>

<p>Simple, for me, this only applies to this specific situation. Morality isn't cut and dry.</p>

<p>"Finally, how can we all get along smoothly in groups, which we need to do to survive as a species, with that type of moral relativism?"</p>

<p>Do I think or approve of everyone cheating? No, but it doesn't bother me if a few odd people doing it. Oh, and how can we coexist with cheaters? The ones who are dumb enough to let other people know about it get caught and we remain blissfully unaware of the others.</p>

<p>No cheating? That's rather idiotic, everyone is either a cheater, a liar or a saint.</p>

<p>xD My class rank is pretty crappy, I truly don't know anyone who cheats more than occasionally .... usually on homework anyways. And I never even expected to get into my top choice, so wouldn't particularly matter for me. </p>

<p>And quite frankly, I'd be more ****ed if someone extremely dumb, but worked their ass off got in over a genius cheater, but this remark will probably gain even more people hating me.</p>

<p>First of all, please, I'm a girl. I noticed someone else said 'he' up there.</p>

<p>Cheating always gives an unfair advantage, because the person did not use their own intelligence or effort to achieve their means. It doesn't matter if they could have -- that's not the point. They didn't. And that simple fact makes it clear that they had an unfair advantage. Charisma, you can argue all you want about this point, but a smart kid who cheats still had an unfair advantage, regardless of whether they could have done it by themselves or not. You can't prove whether they could -- you can only estimate. And as long as that's true, you can't prove they ever could have done it on their own, which leads me to believe that they had an unfair advantage. There isn't proof saying that they could.</p>

<p>I didn't try to paint you poorly -- you did it yourself. You don't believe in equal opportunity. Cheating gives someone an unfair advantage and you think that's okay as long as they can do it on their own, but the simple fact is that you can't PROVE that someone can do it on their own without cheating. And because you can't, cheating still provides an unfair advantage. Unfair advantages inherently mean unequal opportunity. </p>

<p>Stop telling me I'm whining. If you can't debate right, then don't. If you can't use logic, then stop talking. If you can't argue, whether it's in person, the internet, whatever -- then stop. It's a waste of my time if all I hear is 'stop whining' and talk about how pointing out logical fallacies is a waste of time. That's only because the logical fallacies in your argument point out their weaknesses. And you ARE being negative because you attacked spideygirl and me several times, by telling me that I was whining and that spideygirl needed to grow up. YOU are the one that is being insulting.</p>

<p>I didn't intend to insult you in any of my comments, and if I did, I apologize.</p>

<p>You need to stop pulling the wool over your own eyes. You don't believe in equality of opportunity. You wouldn't support cheating, regardless of whether someone could achieve the same means on their own or not, if you did.</p>

<p>"And quite frankly, I'd be more ****ed if someone extremely dumb, but worked their ass off got in over a genius cheater, but this remark will probably gain even more people hating me."</p>

<p>Yeah, it will, because it makes no sense and you have made no attempt in explaining it. Why shouldn't the dumb kid who worked very hard get in over the intelligent kid who's lazy? Quite frankly, in real life, the former will get stuff done while the latter won't, possibly because of laziness. People who are not doing anything with their gifts are not useful -- the intelligent kid is not doing himself a favor by doing something worthwhile. Intelligence is not the only important thing. There are many other factors, including curiosity, passion and drive that can be equally important. </p>

<p>"I find it logical. If that person could do produce the same results without cheating, how does it affect me if they did it with cheating?"</p>

<p>You can't prove that they can do it on their own, while we can inherently believe that they couldn't because they had to cheat in the first place. You have no evidence that people can do it on their own because they are CHEATING, they aren't doing it on their own. I don't care if the person retakes the test and does well on it, the simple fact is that it doesn't apply to everyone, and even if it does apply to some people, it shows a lack of common sense on their part since cheating gives them an unfair advantage, which is inherently unequal opportunity.</p>

<p>You won't earn haters by saying troll-like comments. You'll earn haters for not substantiating what you say, which is exactly what you are doing. I don't care if you're ranked first, second, last or in the middle -- you would care more if you were at the top, where things actually mattered. And maybe that's why it's okay to you; you don't think you're getting into your first choice, so why bother caring about those who cheat? It doesn't affect you. To people ranked way up there, it DOES matter and it CAN make a difference. It's not the only thing, but it is a factor. Just because it doesn't matter you doesn't mean it doesn't matter to other people (and I know you didn't say anywhere that it didn't matter to other people, but I just felt like saying that).</p>

<p>You would care more if it actually affected you. And because it doesn't, you think it's okay if someone cheats since they could've done it on their own (you don't have any proof, while we have the proof that the person inherently couldn't do it without cheating since they had to cheat in the first place). And quite frankly, I think you simply aren't understanding simple logic, universal human values or foundations, the Constitution, history, etc. I've provided examples from everywhere and yet nothing rings a bell simply because you don't care. I'm done (well, actually, I'm not -- I'll continue arguing as long as you keep providing bad arguments, but that's only because I don't like leaving with the other person believing that their argument is more valid than mine.)</p>

<p>Charisma you didn't answer my questions (not that you have to, of course, but I thought I'd point that out). I think if you did you would see the lack of logic in your position. I am going to try really hard to make this my last post on this thread, as many have left the thread out of boredom. It is common sense that cheating is wrong, and making excuses or weak arguments for the sake of debate will not change that.</p>

<p>It's a lost cause, spideygirl.</p>

<p>Crap, I just lost my post, @ spideygirl, sorry, but could you specify which ones?</p>

<p>@ Charisma, I've already posted my response to you.</p>

<p>I know, I was in the middle of typing my response and my browser shut down.</p>

<p>LEAVE THIS KID THAT CHEATED ALONE!!! don't be a dirty snitch</p>

<p>Firebird44, because that's how we solve problems in life -- by namecalling people who don't necessarily agree with your opinions.</p>

<p>Fine, that's your opinion. Of course you can't prove anything, but not everything is about proof. It's your opinion that no proof means that they had an unfair advantage because you assume that they automatically couldn't have achieve the same results, while I assume the opposite. There's really isn't anything to argue about here.</p>

<p>"but the simple fact is that you can't PROVE that someone can do it on their own without cheating. And because you can't, cheating still provides an unfair advantage."</p>

<p>And you can't prove that they couldn't have, we're pointlessly argueing about theoreticals. Oh, and since when does no proof default to it's not possible?</p>

<p>All I ever said is that I do not think that everyone will ever have 100% perfect equality. So, do you truely believe that such an utopia would ever exist? I never said that we shouldn't strive towards more equality.</p>

<p>Since when did I tell spideygirl to grow up? Give me a quote. Fine, if you take whine as an insult, I apologize.</p>

<p>I don't have a problem with you pointing out my logical fallacies, I do have a problem with the fact that you were using them yourself and insulting me, if you want to point out my logical fallacies, acknowledge your own and start acting civilly.</p>

<p>Don't ever tell me what I would or would not do.</p>

<p>Did I say that being lazy would get you far in life? No, I said that it would personally anger me more if a dumb kid got in over a smart lazy kid, that's all. I'm not looking to earn anything, it's the truth, and there's no reason for me to lie to make myself look better. </p>

<p>I don't need proof, I'm not trying to convince you that it is moral for someone to cheat. I think that it is, and that's my opinion and I really don't care if you think that it's moral at all.</p>

<p>"You would care more if it actually affected you."</p>

<p>Yes, I would, but I think that you fail to understand that while humans try to build up morals and religion and rights and wrongs, they are still selfishly human.</p>

<p>"while we have the proof that the person inherently couldn't do it without cheating since they had to cheat in the first place"</p>

<p>What proof?</p>

<p>I don't even get why this is an issue. The OP wouldn't have even said anything if the guy who cheated got rejected.</p>

<p>murkwater- its part of debating you idiot.. name calling is what defines debating... no swearing=no emotion. :D</p>

<p>only a couple people in the world could pull it off like MLK...</p>

<p>Hahaha. I loved seeing this thread! A kid from my son's school got accepted into an Ivy by listing EC's like "Yearbook editor," and "School Newspaper editor." </p>

<p>Take a look at the yearbook. It says it right in there that some other kid is the editor. By the way, guess how many editions of the school newspaper got published? ZERO!! Hahaha. Makes the admissions people look pretty silly.</p>

<p>Yes, he also cheated or cut corners with his other "credentials." </p>

<p>I think he will have a real tough time when he gets to college. He just doesn't have what it takes.</p>

<p>"To be honest, this kid is actually an amazing computer genius, and he is smart, but incredibly lazy. He was able to steal teachers passwords via a keylogger."</p>

<p>If you are certain that he was stealing tests, then you should have turned him in. If you only heard rumors, then you were right not to report it.</p>

<p>If you did definitely know that he was stealing tests, then by not reporting him, you assisted him in getting into those colleges that you're no complaining about his acceptances to.</p>