The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
    30 posters qualify.
You have 0 points. Copying this list does not send funds. Paste it on Disperse, then connect your wallet there. |
I'm convinced that pensive is the biggest asshole ever
Poast new message in this thread
Date: November 30th, 2005 1:20 PM Author: plum razzle-dazzle school cafeteria Here's the evidence:
* Sure admit for Harvard undergrad, then becomes a cocky ass and says he doesn't want to go and gets rejected. Brags for years about getting yield-protected at Harvard.
* Runs an intensely manipulative and demented schtick that combines misogyny, prestige-whoring, and a fake mental breakdown for the sake of attention.
* Starts unprovoked "fights" with a retired poster whom everyone likes, just to get attention.
* Friends with 174 and Media Kid, a couple of classist bastards who egg him on to be even more of a prick.
Is this not enough to convict him of terminal assholery? |
 |
Date: November 30th, 2005 6:50 PM Author: sickened smoky spot hi pensive (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4422275) |
|
Date: November 30th, 2005 7:02 PM Author: Provocative center 1) he was far from a "sure admit" for harvard. i'd put his chances at under 50%, if i had to bet.
2) he's not schtick. who knows if the mental breakdown was real or not, but he's an attention-starved narcissist and a true misogynist to his core.
3) this part is true, but ignores his motivation of extreme jealousy. not really "fights" at all--he just threw out some insults and then when he didn't get any response, threw out more and more. a jealous asshole, basically.
4) at least one of these posters (media kid) is his own creation. EVERYONE on this board knows that, and the fact that you implicitly deny it leads me to say...
HI PENSIVE! |
|
Date: November 30th, 2005 7:45 PM Author: dashing bull headed liquid oxygen den 1. This is obvious flame, not worthy of response. Harvard undergrad's not selective at all. I got in with a 1320, though granted I was a special case. With his SATs and grades he was "just under 50%" but his math and writing awards put him as close to a lock as possible. I don't know a lot, but I know Harvard admissions. He utterly smashed the lower entry-bar to any undergraduate college in the country, save possibly Caltech and MIT, and you know it. (Okay, now you're going to think I am pensive, but I needed to say that.)
2. How does being awkward around women make someone "a true misogynist to his core"?
3. Nah, I think he even admitted that he didn't much care about Joe Caltech. Besides, if he were jealous of Joe's accomplishments, how in the hell would he be friends with 174 or any of the other accomplished posters.
4. Yeah, I'm the creation of pensive. He's behind all of this. He invented Media Kid, 174, Joe Caltech, and while we're at it, the Internet. Didn't those conspiracy theories flame out in September, or am I missing something? |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 12:11 AM Author: Provocative center 1) bullshit. literally hundreds of people each year have the math credentials he had, and most of them had better SAT scores, too. and you're mike church. and he DIDN'T get into mit or caltech. (hey, his favorite hate-stalking target did, though. how you like dem apples, pensey?)
2) i wasn't so much thinking "awkward around women" as i was thinking "pathologically, aggressively hateful towards women," as seen in statements like:
"Once I leave Carleton, leaving this depressing shell of myself, that women made by being evil, behind, I will go on to make history. The only way Carleton women can prevent me from doing that is to prevent me from making history. They have 35 days to intercept me, destroy me, and I ironically wish them luck. Fuck them. They will fail."
or perhaps:
"Womens' only way of making history of themselves is to take those of us who would otherwise be successful--160+ IQ and good background--and fuck with our heads until we are nothing and can make no history because we are broken. That is the truth. That is all they are good for."
3. that's absurd. mike'd show up on every single thread even tangentially related and actually bring up the guy even if he wasn't the subject of the thread. he's jealous of joe's accomplishments because joe is in science as well, unlike 174, yet has achieved so much more than pensive and still seems to be all-around much less of an asshole. basically, he's hated joe ever since the thread on the grad board where mike made those stupid posts about how madison's graduate math department was going to be a dreamland filled with beautiful women for him to meet, and joe laughed at the idea. (probably stung even more when, of course, he turned out to be right.) that's all far from "not caring."
4. yup, you're mike church. and nope, none of that flamed out in september. it's pretty much the foregone conclusion of the board as a whole. check out:
Pensive's Departure is a Repeat of Carleton
i'd also like to note that since you had your little set of episodes, 174 hasn't said one thing in support of either of the monikers, while "media kid" remains surgically attached to "pensive's" nuts all day, every day. looks pretty guilty to me. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:35 AM Author: Razzle church corn cake MK: Thanks for sending me the PW; please login and reset it around 2 AM today, or shortly after. I still need not to have access to this account.
1. I didn't apply to MIT or Caltech, you dumb fuck. At the time, I was afraid that if I went to either, I'd end up not being "well-rounded". In retrospect, this fear was more imagined than real-- I know plenty of well-rounded MIT and Ctex grads-- but at the time it was enough to deter me from submitting applications.
My SAT-V (710) wasn't great, and quite weak compared to my demonstrated writing skill, but I didn't prep at all. At the time, I didn't want to go to Harvard or any of the East Coast schools, so there was no reason to prepare when my score was already good enough for the type of school I wanted to attend. If I had prepped and gotten a 1560+, then between that, my writing awards, and my math contest results, I would have an application that could make any college's doors swing open faster than your mom's legs. Since the only thing I was missing was the 1560+, somehow I suspect that I would have gotten into Harvard if I had wanted to go. Again, I got rejected because, and only because, I told my interviewer it wasn't my first choice.
I went to Carleton because I wanted to spend some time in the Midwest, knowing I'd probably be on the coasts for most of my life, and I also wanted a liberal arts college. Unlike you, haunting me persistently because of past regrets unknown, I'm happy with my choice. Despite my complaints about the social life (which probably apply to any small school) Carleton has a beautiful campus and great academics; what's not to like? Sometimes I bitched about it, but looking back (and having changed an incredible amount in the past six months) I appreciate the experience quite a lot.
2. Good job. Even using my drunken ramblings-- which I would not consider, by my standard, very well-written-- you've outed me as a better writer than you could ever be. Now suck my fucking cock you white trash piece of shit. No, this isn't misogyny; the fact that you have no balls, you anonymous chickenshit, doesn't make you a woman.
3. No. I started the Joe Jewell rivalry back in May because, well, we were being dicks to each other. In retrospect, I'm as much at fault for that as he was, and certainly only I can take the blame for prolonging it.
What sparked the feud: It had nothing to do with him presenting the argument that graduate school would be a tough place to find dates. (He was right, by the way.) It was his insinuation that I "creeped" women out in college, followed by his references to wild misinterpretations of events in my past. I found this highly disrespectful and rude. That's why I started attacking him so mercilessly. Recently I ended the feud because, as I prepared to leave the board, I realized that I had been a huge fucking dickhead and that, for my own good and Joe's, it was best to let it go. This was never about jealousy; it was about the fact that when I am insulted or engaged in combat I become tenacious and often will not let go of the fight until I have devoured my opponent. Sometimes this is a good trait; other times, it allows minor slights to turn into slugfests, and in these cases it reflects poorly on me.
Anyway, for those hurt by my misbehavior, I'm sorry. My intent is to leave xoxo, and anyway I won't do it again. I harbor no ill will toward Joe Jewell.
4. 174 knows that, if the need arises, I can stand up and defend myself as well as anyone. Why? It has to do with the abundant supply of charisma, intellect, and talent that I possess, at least in comparison to fuckups like you. You have the nerve to accuse me of being "jealous" of Joe Jewell, and yet we know EXACTLY the reason you persistently harass me, even after I leave the board: you envy the hell out of me. Well, if we ever meet in person, I will graciously flow a shot of superior genetic material onto your forehead, and leave it at your liberty to freeze it and wait for an acceptable egg.
5. I am superior to you in every way. I am so far above you in society that if I murdered your loser-fucker ass I would get only the $300 fine for littering.
With contempt, -pensive |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 5:16 AM Author: Adventurous magenta lodge scourge upon the earth You can't have a "rivalry" or a "feud" where one person obsesses and makes up shit and the other person simply isn't around. That sounds a lot more like "hate-stalking" to me. (That pretty much was enough to conclusively demonstrate your extreme jealousy to the rest of the board, by the way. If you wanted to keep up the pretense that you didn't care, you shouldn't have done that.)
So you admit you didn't get into ANY top schools for either undergrad or grad? Good. More than your "Media Kid" moniker seems able to do. As I'm sure you know, "woulda coulda shoulda" counts for jack shit in this game, especially at schools with acceptance rates as low as those you "woulda" gotten into. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 10:14 AM Author: Razzle church corn cake Me: Well-bred, cultured individual who made his educational decision based on academic quality, desired location and educational model. Knowing that I'm smart enough to succeed on my own, and that I utterly destroyed the lower bar at any undergraduate college, I didn't *need* to get into Harvard to affirm myself.
You: Status-obsessed lower-middle-class striver who can't fathom the fact that, at 17, a person might not want to go to Harvard. This is because, for a person with such a mediocre mind as yours, an elite college is the only way out of loser-fucker squalor. You also see educational choices as something that can be described as "this game", a fact with leaves no doubt about your striver-trash arriviste roots. It isn't this way for me. I was born in a better place than you and will always have better life prospects.
Also, you should take note of the fact that any top FORTY (or so) math PhD program is more selective than harvard college, let alone the top 15. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 12:18 PM Author: Adventurous magenta lodge scourge upon the earth So you admit you didn't get into ANY top schools for either undergrad or grad? Good. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4428955) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:22 PM Author: Razzle church corn cake The fact is irrelevant when (1) there is absolutely no dispute that I could have (for undergrad; my graduate rejections were on merit) and (2) I wanted, at the time, to be in a different geographic area: the Midwest.
You are a jealous piece of trash and you need to start leaving me alone. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:55 PM Author: Adventurous magenta lodge scourge upon the earth 2 is all well and good, but 1 is hardly valid. There's plenty of dispute about whether you could have gotten into HYPSMC. (Particularly since you WERE actually rejected at the only one of those where you applied, and WERE NOT accepted anyplace else that competitive.) Frankly, there's no way you can claim that you would've gotten in for sure, since you didn't apply. If you were sitting on HYP and wanted to claim you could've gotten into Stanford--sure. But a 1510, some math stuff, and one Harvard rejection does not a HYPSMC auto-admit make.
I'd be willing to say you'd probably get in anywhere but those places (you'd have been fine at lower ivies and probably at more competitive LACs than Carleton, too), since outside of the very top it's possible to have purely numbers/academic credentials such that you'll be accepted. But fact is, for the top of the top, you need to have the whole package in place, and little about your profile indicates that you're anything more than a math nerd (and not an IMO math nerd either. You were one of hundreds and hundreds.)
Jealousy is what you regularly display(ed) towards Joe Caltech. This is fact-checking, nothing more. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 3:58 PM Author: Razzle church corn cake "Particularly since you WERE actually rejected at the only one of those where you applied, and WERE NOT accepted anyplace else that competitive."
The reason I was rejected at Harvard is well-established. It is a foregone conclusion that an applicant who admits that he is not likely to attend will be rejected. As it were, they made the right decision. Yeah, I'm reasonably bright, and there is no question that I exceeded their standard of "student quality", but I'm not so exceptional that it would have been worth it for them to waste an admission if they're pretty sure I wouldn't attend.
"But fact is, for the top of the top, you need to have the whole package in place".
Wrong. Again you out yourself as entirely uninformed, lower-middle-class at best. The notion that the Ivies consider the "whole applicant" or reject study-nerds because they "demand more" is an idiotic misconception. Do you want to know who propogates it? Life losers like NYCFan and bostonian, insecure about everything but their academic credentials and eager to claim that their HYP acceptances indicate them to be superior in all regards social and intellectual, not just in academics. This misconception is believed only by those low enough in social class not to have known many HYP students. There are plenty of socially inept "study whores", resume kids without personalities, and lottery winners at those schools, just as they are found everywhere else.
HYP admissions are not holistic and never were-- how could a repetitive decision-making task, organized on a mass scale, executed by a small number of people *be* that way? In fact, HYP are just as numerical in their admissions policy as those of other universities. It's true that a 1600 alone isn't enough to get into those places; since they need to make finer distinctions, they include other factors such as length of admission essay, dates of application, et cetera. The #1 differentiating factor among those top-scoring impressive students is not the separation between "very impressive" and "somewhat impressive" since that distinction hasn't been made at 17... rather it's likelihood of attendance, aka yield. Lower-middle-class misconception: "Harvard doesn't have to worry about yield since its yield is 80%". Fact: Harvard has a yield of 80% because its admissions office is excellent at yield optimization; they *do* need to "worry about" yield, and they are successful because they do.
"[L]ittle about your profile indicates that you're anything more than a math nerd."
Yeah, it's not like I had national writing awards. Oh wait, that's right... I did.
I also was a top quiz-bowler and involved in a couple of service activities. These do not make an applicant exceptional, but they round me out enough that my application had no deficiencies.
So, I actually had the "whole package" to which you imagine HYP admissions officers jerking off.
I admit that, at the time, I was a bit goofy, perhaps unpolished and not very "well-rounded". I was even somewhat socially awkward. This might have to do with the fact that, wait for it... I was 17 years old, and these traits are invariantly true of 17-year-olds compared against an adult standard. In that regard, I was no different from the other applicants.
"Jealousy is what you regularly display(ed) towards Joe Caltech."
Having defeated you on every point up to here, I'm going to let this one pass. Why? Because I can honestly see why you would honestly reach that conclusion. After all, I was being an utter dickhead to a person long after he left the board.
My motivations were not jealousy, but rather a more mundane bit of vindictiveness. He pissed me off a long time ago, and it took a while for me to muster up the maturity to realize I just had to let it go. It had nothing to do with envy or with his accomplishments; I would have been just as disproportionately aggressive toward him if he had been a life fuckup. Don't get me wrong: I was a belligerent little prick for how I behaved toward him, but envy was never my motivation.
I don't care much that you suspect me of being jealous of him, so much on face value. I just despise you for your smug overconfidence in your ability (or lack thereof) to assess my emotions and motivations. Face it right now: my mind is, by orders of magnitude, more complex than yours and you will never be able to understand me. My motivations will always elude you. I honestly hope this helps. |
Date: November 30th, 2005 1:24 PM Author: marvelous dog poop You forgot that he writes things like:
"12.30 am Pacific time, 8.25.04: After a dry spell of several months I've met an absolutely outstanding Australian woman: She was smart, beautiful, witty, and the absolute defintion of classiness."
He writes everything like he's writing in pen in a leather bound journal people will read 100 years from now. A normal person would have said "Last summer, there was this girl I wanted to fuck" or something along those lines. |
|
Date: November 30th, 2005 1:26 PM Author: balding hideous factory reset button I don't know, his writing style isn't too bad. Content is more the problem. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4419835) |
|
Date: November 30th, 2005 1:29 PM Author: marvelous dog poop His writing style is horrid, I think. It indicates how seriously he takes himself.
But the content blew too...who cares if he told some guy to get lost? |
|
Date: November 30th, 2005 6:49 PM Author: plum razzle-dazzle school cafeteria His writing style tells of someone who's had English teachers and "intellectuals" tell him he's a great writer, while the rest of the population finds his prose reeking pretentious. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4422272) |
|
Date: November 30th, 2005 7:03 PM Author: Provocative center most of his teachers probably hate him too. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4422348) |
|
Date: November 30th, 2005 7:46 PM Author: dashing bull headed liquid oxygen den That must have been how he got into graduate school. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4422663) |
|
Date: November 30th, 2005 7:50 PM Author: Citrine comical codepig native Writing skill not a priority for math grad admissions. Besides, it's fucking Wisconsin. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4422702) |
|
Date: November 30th, 2005 7:51 PM Author: dashing bull headed liquid oxygen den We weren't talking about his writing skills, but about the creep above's claim that teachers hated him. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4422709) |
|
Date: November 30th, 2005 7:53 PM Author: Citrine comical codepig native Context seemed to be his writing, not his character/personality. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4422725) |
|
Date: November 30th, 2005 7:57 PM Author: dashing bull headed liquid oxygen den Okay; I can see that. His style is that of a third-year professional writer. He's mastered all the commonly understood rules and fashions, but he's a bit too formal and sounds a bit pretentious. I don't see this as something that would make people hate him. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4422765) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 12:14 AM Author: Provocative center what style is this?
"Womens' only way of making history of themselves is to take those of us who would otherwise be successful--160+ IQ and good background--and fuck with our heads until we are nothing and can make no history because we are broken. That is the truth. That is all they are good for."
reads like the style of a 23rd-year professional loser to me. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:40 AM Author: Razzle church corn cake Hey fuckwit, I was fucking drunk. Get over it, you piece of trash. I would've even remember having written that garbage if you didn't keep bringing it up. I hope you get AIDS the next time you get anal-raped by a green monkey. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4426690) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 2:09 AM Author: impressive motley field sandwich Your psychological treatment isn't going well if you're relapsing already. Why did Media Kid give you your password? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4427037) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 10:15 AM Author: Razzle church corn cake I had to pwn some loser-fuckers. I'll be off the board soon enough.
M Kid gave me the password because I asked for it. It's still my account. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 12:15 PM Author: Deranged Lettuce Juggernaut You pwned nothing except your ass-awful rep, even further. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4428932) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 4:58 AM Author: Adventurous magenta lodge scourge upon the earth Sounds good. "In vino veritas," after all.
Drink never actually changes anyone's opinion, in my experience--just loosens the tongue somewhat. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:10 AM Author: Spectacular insecure point twinkling uncleanness "His style is that of a third-year professional writer"
This is getting so preposterous |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:16 AM Author: Mind-boggling university Pensive's actually probably better than 2nd-year douche Ross Douthat. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4426378) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:35 AM Author: Spectacular insecure point twinkling uncleanness Every so often he writes something worthy of a fourth-year journeyman writer (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4426617) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:39 AM Author: Mind-boggling university Tracking down examples would be arduous, though. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4426671) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:38 AM Author: Razzle church corn cake He's more polished than I am.
BTW, he's actually quite a good writer, though some of the "insights" in Privilege were a tad uninteresting, if not mundane. Also, he did a poor job of addressing the various contradictions in the piece. It seemed to be a confusion of an expository piece and a memoir, as if he never figured out what genre he wanted to use. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:42 AM Author: Spectacular insecure point twinkling uncleanness He's similar though in that both of you confuse big words with eloquence (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4426715) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:43 AM Author: Razzle church corn cake Yeah, I agree with that. I think that's what Media meant by "third-year professional writer", because that's an intermediate stage in the process of becoming one who can truly consider oneself "a good writer". (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4426731) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:44 AM Author: Spectacular insecure point twinkling uncleanness Maybe so maybe so
Keep reading, that's my advice to aspiring writers. Read as much as possible. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:46 AM Author: Mind-boggling university "Keep reading, that's my advice to aspiring writers."
How about, "Give it up"? |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 10:42 AM Author: Arousing fanboi hairy legs The world's ears perk up when self-styled writing guru Evans-2001 dispenses advice. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4428312) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:45 AM Author: Mind-boggling university "because that's an intermediate stage in the process of becoming one who can truly consider oneself 'a good writer'."
I'm not sure about that. Some folks are great even before they finish (or fail out of) high school. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:47 AM Author: Spectacular insecure point twinkling uncleanness That could be true (I'd like to hear some examples), but plenty of writers produce a slough of shitty stories before they achieve something great (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4426775) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:56 AM Author: Mind-boggling university By "great," I don't necessarily mean capable of writing Notes from Underground at 20. But anyway, I really do need to get to bed now, though this is the rare xoxo conversation that hasn't yet been beaten to a fine dog-food worthy pulp. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4426890) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:49 AM Author: Razzle church corn cake What do you mean by "great", at such a young age? At 17, I was a great writer for age 17... and may be a great 22-year-old writer at 22; not as sure of it because I'm less in practice... but I'm not actually a great writer, because it takes decades of effort to reach a level approaching true greatness. Writing is an art where even most of the "naturals" have to work their asses off for decades. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4426806) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:55 AM Author: Translucent mad cow disease theater stage How many examples would it take for me to prove you wrong in this case?
Just off the top of my head,
Goethe wrote Sorrows of Young Werther in his early twenties.
J.S. Mill co-founded and edited The Westminster Review at seventeen.
Rimbaud did all his writing in his late teens.
I'll think of more.
|
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:56 AM Author: Spectacular insecure point twinkling uncleanness Frost's high school poems were shockingly good
Dylan Thomas wrote Fern Hill at a very young age
|
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 2:00 AM Author: Out-of-control nowag none of those people count because they weren't tormented like pensive was. He's seen things that would make you cry at night. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4426939) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 10:46 AM Author: scarlet internet-worthy crackhouse T.S. Eliot wrote Prufrock as an undergrad at Harvard, I think.
But generally speaking, I agree that it does take a long time to develop the skill required to become a great writer-- if you read early attempts by Faulkner, Marquez, Fitzgerald, et al, it's remarkable how much each subsequent work improves, even to the casual reader's eye. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 12:16 PM Author: Spectacular insecure point twinkling uncleanness Saul Bellow wrote the adventures of augie march during recess while the other kids played hopscotch (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4428940) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 12:38 PM Author: multi-colored glassy lay Pensive is never going to hit top form because he's too unlike the rest of humanity to evoke any real truths. You can't be excellent and be socially screwy in your head. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4429094) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:25 PM Author: Razzle church corn cake Eh, I'm a lot more normal than I was during early college. In early college, my stories and poetry were so weird as to be unappealing and inaccessible, but I've improved quite a lot.
Also, you're wrong on your claim that "socially screwy" people cannot succeed as writers; history is full of counterexamples: Faulkner, Fitzgerald, Poe, Shakespeare, et cetera. I've heard people make this claim; that such individuals "don't understand people" and therefore could never be successful writers, but it didn't stop Mozart from being a great musician; why would it hinder a writer? |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 2:06 AM Author: walnut irradiated stead You think that's what Media meant? Keep telling yourself that. Literally. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 4:56 AM Author: Adventurous magenta lodge scourge upon the earth Hah! 180. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4427800) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 10:21 AM Author: Razzle church corn cake Eh, as a zeroeth-year professional writer, I can't complain if I have the skill level of a third-year. Not that I think M Kid's magazine is the epitome of great writing. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4428240) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 12:26 PM Author: Adventurous magenta lodge scourge upon the earth The humor escaped him, like a girl avoiding eye contact. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4429016) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:43 AM Author: Mind-boggling university He's a shitty, pretentious writer, and is apt to just brazenly make shit up. Grad students and professors in philosophy couldn't that the factcheckers at The Atlantic would allow him to claim that they're a bunch of postmodernists. (Even an community college undergrad ought to know better. Alas...) (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4426732) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:46 AM Author: Razzle church corn cake Okay, I guess by "good writer" I'm speaking more of raw talent than of ethics. While certainly it reflects poorly on him to have incorrect facts, I wouldn't consider this a black mark against his writing skill so much as against other traits. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4426771) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:47 AM Author: Spectacular insecure point twinkling uncleanness He doesn't have writing skills either (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4426781) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:49 AM Author: Mind-boggling university Part of being a good non-fiction writer is trying to get things right. I suppose that's not a stylistic consideration, but Ross's style also needs plenty of work. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4426812) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 4:57 AM Author: Adventurous magenta lodge scourge upon the earth Mike's never much cared about "getting things right" either. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4427801) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 2:14 AM Author: coral charismatic tanning salon what the fuck is a "third-year professional writer?"
hi pensive! |
|
Date: November 30th, 2005 11:45 PM Author: walnut irradiated stead If some teachers didn't hate him, they were the only ones. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4425343) |
|
Date: November 30th, 2005 11:41 PM Author: Provocative center but not a particularly good graduate school. not even top-10 for his discipline. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4425294) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:46 AM Author: Shivering Excitant Masturbator Telephone d00d, top 10 math grad schools like to see grad courses, especially real analysis, on the transcript! he couldn't help that he went to an inferior school (even though he was a lock at H) (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4426773) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 6:59 AM Author: Adventurous magenta lodge scourge upon the earth Haha, yeah, sounds like his fault to me. Especially since a number of Carleton math students have actually gotten into Harvard, Princeton, MIT, Caltech, (or at least Chicago--Mike didn't even get in there) etc. for grad school, despite the fact that Mike didn't.
This idea that LAC students are locked out of top grad programs is preposterous, and even if it were the case, the number one thing holding them back would be lack of research opportunities, not coursework. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 10:32 AM Author: Razzle church corn cake It's partially my fault, partly luck, partly the comparative lack of graduate coursework/research opportunities, and partly the fact that I may not have the talent to hold my own at Princeton or MIT graduate math departments. Keep in mind that these depts. are 10-20 times more selective than top undergrads. Most people think that a math major who would be good enough for Harvard or MIT undergrad is going to be able to good enough to get into those places for grad school, but as my case indicates, that's not true.
It is very tough, though not impossible, for LAC grads to get into top-5 hard science departments. Anyone who wants to discuss the matter at length, such as for advice, can contact me privately. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 10:39 AM Author: Floppy Alcoholic Stage I’ve never been a pensive defender, but I would say it’s “very tough, though not impossible” for ANYONE to get into one of those programs. Regardless of your school, there aren’t many spots and every competent math major in the country is gunning for them. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4428297) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 12:25 PM Author: Adventurous magenta lodge scourge upon the earth That's a given, but:
1) Pensive acts as if math is in some special category of ultra-selectiveness with respect to other hardcore tech programs, which simply isn't true. If we had a troll for Physics PhD programs or Biomedical Engineering PhD programs on here, I'm sure he could tell us they're just as selective (hell, maybe he'd even post something to back it up, which would surely be nice for a change of pace).
2) Pensive exaggerates quite a bit. "20 times more selective than any top undergrad"? Right. Harvard College (where pensive was rejected, let's not forget) has something like a 9% acceptance rate. I'd be stunned if UW Math (or anyplace else Mike got in) was lower than that even in absolute terms, let alone 20 times lower. I invite Mike to post stats if he'd like counter that, otherwise I invite him to shut the hell up. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:30 PM Author: Razzle church corn cake Physics and biotech PhD programs are damn selective, too. You wouldn't have a chance at any of them either.
Selectivity has to be measured based on the applicant pool, not acceptance rate. This is where your "absolute terms" fall to pieces: applicants to high-profile undergraduate colleges are nowhere near as impressive as applicants to graduate programs; if you're mediocre or worse at math, your professors won't even *write* recommendations to top-15 PhD programs. Moreover, I was only rejected at HC because I was a cocky asshole and told the interviewer I didn't want to attend. Does that make me an arrogant idiot? Yes, but a more prestigious arrogant idiot than you'll ever be, so STFU. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:59 PM Author: Adventurous magenta lodge scourge upon the earth You have nothing to back any of that up.
At least you've finally admitted that math programs aren't significantly more selective than the other hard science/tech PhDs. That's a step.
Baby steps all the way, Mike. We take what we can get. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 3:28 PM Author: Razzle church corn cake Nothing to back what up?
Take a look around a top undergrad, such as HYP. Don't look at the stars, who are definitely quite impressive. Look at the median kids-- bright, talented, but on the whole unremarkable-- and then look at the bottom quarter-- plenty of mediocre resume-kids, to be honest.
Now look at the median and bottom-quartile students at top-15 hard science PhD programs. The bottom-quartile students could easily handle virtually any intellectual challenge presented by the working world outside of academia, and if they work outside of academia they almost always make $75k+ straight out. The median students are probably near geniuses, and the top students are.
Longitudinal comparisons support my claim that top-15 hard-science PhDs PWN the top undergrads. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 12:29 PM Author: Deranged Lettuce Juggernaut "Most people think that a math major who would be good enough for Harvard or MIT undergrad is going to be able to good enough to get into those places for grad school, but as my case indicates, that's not true."
You didn't get into Harvard or MIT undergrad.
You didn't get into Harvard or MIT grad school.
Thus, your case indicates exactly nothing. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:35 PM Author: Razzle church corn cake Right, but I was good enough, in that I exceed the median student at virtually any undergraduate college. I was rejected at Harvard because (as you seem slow to learn) I told the interviewer I didn't want to go-- stupid decision. I didn't apply at all to MIT because I thought it would make me not "well-rounded"-- another stupid decision. Both choices reflect poorly on my decision-making skill at 17, but my academic quality or "student character" or whatever we choose to call those things undergraduate colleges seek remain intact and PWN you 20 times over. Va te faire foutre. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4429533) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 12:39 PM Author: multi-colored glassy lay haha... told some guy to get lost (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4429103) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:17 AM Author: Dead frum forum 178 for that post (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4426398) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 5:03 AM Author: rose pisswyrm That's how the prestigious people talk. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4427809) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:14 AM Author: Appetizing indecent pervert indian lodge http://rosyrockets.com/journal/archives/goatalone.jpg (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4426357) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:35 AM Author: Aphrodisiac dopamine sex offender y? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4426614) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:48 AM Author: Bateful mental disorder space BWHAHAHA
pensive: couldn't stick to just your MK moniker?
pensive is gay |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 10:19 AM Author: racy awkward casino rigor i disagree. after seeing the user file posts, i'm truly intrigued by pensive. by contrast, media kid is a tepid, effete, lackey, just as pensive created him. it's time to abandon media kid, and have pensive reassert himself. media kid was probably intended as nothing more than an object lesson in substandard legacies being admitted to harvard. while that's somewhat more elaborate and entertaining than the usual implausible defenses constructed by those who care a great deal about school status but didn't get into harvard, it's now played out and made cumbersome by the tortured way in which media kid has to explain how he knows enough pensive details to put on a full rebuttal to absolutely any criticism that would happen to pique pensive. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4428233) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 10:24 AM Author: Razzle church corn cake I didn't "create" Media Kid, though we advised each other on schticks to some degree. I was the one who convinced him to go away from prestige rants and toward funny stories. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4428246) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 12:17 PM Author: racy awkward casino rigor i see; that clears it up (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4428946) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 12:30 PM Author: Deranged Lettuce Juggernaut Not really. That's probably how Mike sees it in his fevered imagination. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4429043) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 12:32 PM Author: sickened smoky spot yeah, it could be that he's legitimately insane and genuinely doesn't realize that he's Media Kid etc. - it would fit in w/ his supposed blackout when he didn't remember posting here that one night (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4429053) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 12:36 PM Author: Deranged Lettuce Juggernaut Right. I've come to acknowledge that more and more as a possibility. The blackout night made it even more concrete to me.
It's at best a treasured fantasy (the deep-seated desire for an imaginary, ideal friend for unyielding support even in the most ridiculous situations), and at worst a full out schizophrenic or psychotic issue. |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 1:36 PM Author: Razzle church corn cake People tend to be loyal to those they know in real life on a deeper level than they are to those they know only through message boards. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4429555) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 2:00 PM Author: Adventurous magenta lodge scourge upon the earth And even more loyal to their own alternate personalities. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4429752) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 3:30 PM Author: Razzle church corn cake Yep. I regretfully inform xoxo that I have been diagnosed with the ultra-rare Dissociative Identity Disorder by the expert psychiatrist Old tom Joad. Please excuse me while I turn into a 15-year-old girl with a pathological fear of spiders. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4430561) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 4:01 PM Author: Irate son of senegal brunch keep telling yourself that. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4430810) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 4:14 PM Author: Razzle church corn cake Are you not tired of this argument? I am. Let's move on. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4430937) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 5:09 AM Author: very tactful circlehead What is this "fake mental breakdown" you're talking about? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4427822) |
|
Date: December 1st, 2005 5:12 AM Author: Adventurous magenta lodge scourge upon the earth If it was real, he sure didn't learn from it. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=308818&forum_id=2#4427830) |