<p>He said he was "torn between Princeton ED and Harvard SCEA" and indicated his fields of interest, asked how the schools stacked up in those areas, and wanted to know about his "chances."</p>
<p>In his other post, he said: "I plan on doing Harvard SCEA, I am also looking at Yale, Princeton, Stanford, Williams, Amherst, Columbia & Dartmouth..."</p>
<p>I believe my response was on point and clearly addressed the questions asked.</p>
<p>I said absolutely NOTHING negative about Princeton.</p>
<p>He never did ask "how the schools stacked up in those areas." What he asked was "How do my chances look? Thanks!" And you replied with a non sequitur: "If the issue is Harvard vs Princeton, however, there is no question that the edge goes to Harvard." After that you went on to give a misleading comparison between Woody Woo and the Kennedy school. </p>
<p>The essential point here, though, is that you continually try to turn the Princeton board into the Harvard board. Imagine, for example, if everyone on these boards from Yale, Stanford, Williams, Amherst, Columbia, and Dartmouth had decided to boost their schools here on the Princeton board. It would be utter chaos. It would defeat the purpose of creating boards. In asking the question, the student was offering a bit of background information about himself and looking to people who know about Princeton to offer opinions about his chances there. People who stayed on point saw no need to even discuss the other schools. They only talked about what Princeton has to offer and how his profile looks. Discussions of other schools take place on the boards provided for those schools. </p>
<p>Frankly, even if you came on here and regularly talked about the bookstores or restaurants or the vagrants in Harvard Square, I would find it equally distracting. You often make insightful comments here about Princeton. Those posts are helpful. Once in a while, when a student directly requests it, it is useful to compare the offerings of two different schools, but not every single time someone comes here to ask about Princeton.</p>
<p>See, what he's doing is a time-honored marketing tradition. You assume that people can only absorb so much info. So every time you have a chance to talk to your target audience you say the same thing, one way or another.</p>
<p>I took a PR training course many years ago, mandated by the company I worked for before I could speak to the press. They had this technique - you write an X. In three triangles now formed by the X, you write the points you will make. In the remaining empty X, you will write any point that comes up during the interview that you absolutely have to rebut.</p>
<p>Then when you have the interview, you just make your points no matter what you get asked. The best part is, and you can see Reagan do this in old videos of his press opps, when you get asked a question you don't want to answer you just say, " I can't answer that, but what I can say is...." and you are back to your points.</p>
<p>It's effective when the audience either changes all the time or has limited analytical capacity. But can get tiring when neither of those cases are met.</p>
<p>Don't be silly, you two. </p>
<p>I was responding to the <em>poster</em>, who had sought advice, within a brief span, on not only the Harvard and Princeton "boards", but the Yale board as well! </p>
<p>The idea that no school except Princeton may be so miuch as <em>mentioned</em> on the "Princeton board" is absurd.</p>
<p>Loosen up a bit, aparent and alumother. Don't act so insecure!</p>
<p>We don't seem to be addressing any student applicants anyway, but merely chattering amongst ourselves. I'm off to see the FIREWORKS! Ciao.</p>
<p>Who said no school except Princeton should be mentioned? You set up a straw man and knock it down. I expect more from you, Byerly.</p>
<p>And btw, I have no reason to be insecure about Princeton. Went to Brown myself. But, even though I'm an alum interviewer there, I don't talk about it on this board. I don't see it as appropriate. But then again, when I drive, I try to stay in my lane. ;)</p>
<p>Where I live the fireworks are on the Fourth.</p>
<p>Where I live they're on the 2nd, on an island in the harbor right off our front porch. </p>
<p>On the 3rd, there are Weymouth fireworks, which we can also observe, and then on the 4th, the great Boston show, after the pops concert, which we also see on the horizon. Great times!</p>
<p>Haha, Byerly, now if you wanted to claim that the Boston fireworks were the best around, you'd get no argument from me! Have fun.</p>
<p>I am going to have to find some good adjectives for Byerly since he likes to call everyone silly. I imagine him saying, "You silly goose!". </p>
<p>I didn't really get the insecure comment, but that's OK. Have fun at the fireworks. Best ones I ever saw were on Martha's Vineyard, by the bandstand in Oak Bluffs. We are definitely fireworks challenged out here in wildfire land...</p>
<p>Byerly, I find your argumentative style extremely facetious. I hope at Harvard they don't teach students to ignore good points and boost Harvard no matter the circumstances.</p>
<p>I think it is clear, and I've made this point before, as has "Thenewyear" himself, that he is still choosing an early school. I was pretty set on Yale EA when I was doing the early round--but did I still consider, among other schools, Stanford & Penn? Yes, I did. I may have even asked for my "chances" on those specific board. Can't someone seek advice about a variety of schools. Considering the response from the Princeton types and the harsh response from yourself, a vaguely self-appointed Harvard booster, I certainly hope he goes Princeton ED. </p>
<p>You're doing your wonderful cross-admit-favored institution a disservice by selectively quoting with no real purpose at all. </p>
<p>Moreover, I brought up a very good point in a previous post, about SCEA or EA kids elsewhere ending up at Harvard because they just "can't say no to H-bomb," yet you simply dismiss it with "too many questionable points there to deal with, so I won't bother." </p>
<p>You, moreover, fail to realize that being a Harvard booster, to a greatly excessive extent, on the Princeton board, is by implication making negative remarks toward Princeton and distracting from the purpose of this board. </p>
<p>Alumother brought up a very good point about "staying on message" and its uses. Our current president uses it to great effect with the public (but not the media). But this is not public relations, Byerly. Yes, you have never DIRECTLY (see above) bashed Princeton . But do you really need to stay on message and never actually PRAISE another school? I love Stanford, of course, but I'll admit that Princeton is an amazing institution and as good as Stanford. Can you say that about any other school?</p>
<p>Lastly, you dismiss the name appeal of Harvard. Yet what, other than the name, makes Harvard better than its competitors--SYPM? Cambridge, yes, excellent graduate schools, and so on. Those sound like good arguments, but those can't account for an 80-20 swing when compared to Yale and Princeton and Stanford. Cambridge can't really cause 80% of admits to pick Harvard over any other school now can it? Name, therefore, has a great deal to do with why students pick Harvard, and that is the reason why Harvard is so popular with cross-admits.</p>