<p>he got into yale, which is arguably more selective than princeton. </p>
<p>but i dunno, maybe he just had pretty numbers.</p>
<p>It is pretty clear that from his acceptance to Yale, we can assume that Li had more than numbers.</p>
<p>I don't think my ideas are "delusional" at all, but such a term is just one more indication of how blown out of proportion the "case" or "complaint" of one misguided student has become -- a student who does not have enough facts to raise such a complaint in the first place.</p>
<p>The so-called civil rights <em>arguments</em>, presented in the form & substance they have been presented on these several we-persecuted-Asians threads, are not civil rights arguments. The points brought up are not evidence of civil rights violations in the context of ethnic discrimination, targeted across the board, & comprehensively, at an ethnic group. Because an office agrees to "investigate" does not mean that there will be a finding of fact. If there's a claim, regulations state that they must go through the process, even routinely, to satisfy the complainant that the issue was responded to. It does not indicate that there is substance to a discrimination complaint, nor that the results will yield in favor of the complainant. I wouldn't get too hopeful if I were you.</p>
<p>Your last paragraph demonstrates again that you are in need of a course in logic. The paragraph is not internally consistent. The last sentence does not follow from the previous. One needs intimate & comprehensive knowledge to make a judgment of discrimination. Selective & partial knowledge (being not in possession of the various applicants' files, to determine what their OTHER THAN SCORE qualifications were) is an insufficent knowledge base with which to bring a successful claim of discrimination. Neither you nor Jian Li has a clue what qualifications the thousands of Princeton applicants had (<em>including</em> other Asian applicants from NJ & the other 49 States), who were competing with him for LIMITED AVAILABLE SEATS at one of the most selective institutions in the land, with some of the most accomplished 17 and 18 year olds on the planet. I will bet you the Tri-State lottery jackpot that there were several Asians as qualified & more qualified than Jian Li, who were admitted to Princeton during the same cycle he was waitlisted. Why do I think that? Because the deck is loaded, just loaded, in Princeton's favor. They have way more qualified applicants than seats available. They hardly need to "look lower" & contort the process to focus strictly on ethnicity in their selections. They get to have it all: ethnic balance, fabulous students, and people with character enough to understand that they're not the center of the universe.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The so-called civil rights <em>arguments</em>, presented in the form & substance they have been presented on these several we-persecuted-Asians threads, are not civil rights arguments. The points brought up are not evidence of civil rights violations in the context of ethnic discrimination, targeted across the board, & comprehensively, at an ethnic group.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I see you still won’t acknowledge the existence of discrimination against Asians. Is it really that hard for you to accept that such a thing actually exists?</p>
<p>Also, you wrote one sentence twice with different wording the second time.</p>
<p>Would you explain WHY they aren't arguments and WHY they're aren't evidence?</p>
<p>
[quote]
…people with character enough to understand that they're not the center of the universe.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That’s interesting. The last time I checked, Li Jian was fighting against ALL group preferences.</p>
<p>Epiphany: Nice insults, but you did not address the susbtance of my argument (no, simply calling it inconsistent does not count). Let's try it again. I'll re-ask you the question, and you can either give a relevant answer, or post another flame. Telling me to reread your previous post counts as the second, by the way:</p>
<p>If you cannot make a complaint unless you know for certain that you have been wronged, how can anyone stop those who make secretive decisions that are discriminatory?</p>