<p>
[quote]
I'm pretty much impartial, but I will make a few comments. In the original post by Fifi was valid, until the end, where it started being sheer bias. Of course, he did paste the disclaimer at the top. His main points can, like others argued, be very versatile and be applied to other schools.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>At the end you say there's sheer bias? Um... I admit there's a couple of points that can be argued in the middle, but the end is just as much truth as the rest. Let's focus on the last five:
13) So what if the weather in winter is bad?! It rains a few days a month. Big Deal. Not like I'm hiding anything. This was supposed to be partly tongue-in-cheek, if you didn't pick up on it.
14) "Itās a huge campus." IT'S THE LARGEST CONTIGUOUS COLLEGE CAMPUS IN AMERICA! I mean, jeez. It even states this in the viewbook. It's a fact.
15) "Stanford has Gaieties, a satirical play before the Big Game v. Berkeley. Cal has a big bonfire where they burn an effigy of the tree, and tell stories." Total truth. This was a turn off to me, and I thought it might be a turn off for someone else. How is comparing their pre-Big Game festivities biased? Because it's a potential turn off? This thread is about the bad parts of Stanford after all. I'm just trying to stick to the main topic.
16) "The administration is a pain." In the following sentence I supported it using a specific example. How is that biased? Most people would expect Stanford, for being a relatively small school, to have little to no red tape. I'm just showing Stanford isn't immune to common problems.
17) You're kidding. This point is "sheer bias"? I say, "Stanford is ideal, and thatās one of the biggest problems in itself." I'm saying the school is too perfect (which I've began to realize it's far from it), and you say I'm biased? Of all people, I should dislike the school the most, but I was praising it.
If you're complaining that saying "Stanford is ideal" is too biased from a rejected applicant, you need to get over your view on the school. It's not perfect, end of story.</p>
<p>A lot of my points are common to many schools, and I've never denied that.
But as I've previously stated, the combination of common problems is what gives Stanford it's character. Quoting myself, since you couldn't be bothered to read page two of the discussion,
[quote]
"No, because so many universities share common problems. Princeton and Stanford are both relatively far from major cities. Berkeley and Stanford students have to fight one another for Silicon Valley internships. Harvard and Stanford have to reject so many qualified candidates. It's not each problem that is unique to Stanford, it's the combination that creates a relatively problem-free environment."
[/quote]
"problem-free environment" - Can you not see that I'm still saying Stanford is a great place? After looking into this more, I wish I could take it back. Stanford has problems, just like any other school. Just because it's Stanford doesn't mean it's above everything. Stanford seems to have one problem that most schools don't have, its students/profros can't deal with the fact that it has problems.</p>
<p>
[quote]
by placing his later points on his list, fifi was looking for someone to call him out. I always had my suspicions as to why mathboy posted so often in the Stanford threads... maybe a coping mechanism? If not, who knows/no big, I won't judge.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I wasn't looking for someone to call me out. I wanted people to know that if they were distraught about Stanford, and were looking for reasons to dislike it, they could find them.
"why mathboy posted so often in the Stanford threads... maybe a coping mechanism? If not, who knows/no big, I won't judge"
By saying that it is a coping mechanism, you are judging, which nullifies your second sentence. Before attempting to analyze someone else, it would be smart to analyze your argument.</p>
<p>On a second thought, why do you feel the need to comment on this? Is it because you think that you can look at this so subjectively? Anyone who peruses the thread can surmise your points, but you feel the need to state them. Would this have anything to do with the mantra, "I got into Stanford so my opinion matters"? It appears so.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The acceptance was a gift, BUT it doesn't mean that it blows my ego out of proportion and that I'm not open to hearing criticism. Matter of fact, I came to this group FOR the criticism (the seemingly unbiased ones, that is) because every school has its flaws, can't hide them.
[/quote]
Let's stop there. How would you want criticism about the school? If you think about it for a second or two, you would realize that ANY criticism has some bias. How in the world could you expect a lengthy opinion about the place, unless that person has some profound connection with it? I've not only stated my bias upfront, but I let it influence few of my points. If I had gotten in, there was no doubt that I would be complaining about these problems. You act like I'm just pulling things out of nowhere, when in reality, my points only scratch the surface. Every school does have it's flaws, and you are trying to figure out what Stanford's flaws are.
Rather than attacking my points, why don't you do some research about the school? You appear to want to find the flaws, but then say they're not flaws and I'm wrong. Are you attacking me because I'm the only person to find real flaws in the school?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I would disagree with the point, from earlier, that Beef was still finding reasons to fall in love with the school, because he was accepted (I don't know the exact quote), because, well in my case, I don't find myself constantly battling points brought up against Stanford, nor do I find myself running around like a Stanford maniac. I don't know, I said this in another thread, but I don't like stereotypes being thrown around (in anything) so the stereotype that every Stanford student is the same, or that by being accepted/going there it makes your ego swell to a point where Stanford = heaven
[/quote]
First, you refer to me as a "Stanford maniac." That's a really great way to support your statement "I don't like stereotypes being thrown around," as you're just pigeonholing me.
He was still trying to find reasons to like the school. Why do you think he was attacking me so viciously? Because my points were invalid? Well, since he wasn't even a student there yet, he couldn't argue with me on my points. By his copious amounts of caustic language directed towards me, it was evident that he needed to let his superiority-complex loose.</p>
<p>You come to a thread about the bad parts of a school, and then complain about stereotyping? Please. How do you expect someone to state negative aspects about something if they can't generalize? It's impossible to do otherwise. It's not like I'm even making things up by saying "oh all stanfurd students are elitist grade suckers lawl."
If you looked at the second page of the thread, you would see that every single one of my points have support. I cited my sources, and you couldn't be bothered to read them.</p>
<p>Honestly, I'm tired of this 100 vs. 1 battle. If some of you can't be bothered to admit what Stanford's flaws are, then there's no point arguing.</p>