CJCS responds to Rep. Gaetz

[Mirage]

Also should points be given based on race? Of course not. But that doesn’t happen and if it has in certain places it needs to stop.

But the majority of affirmative action is not that

Can you explain to me what you believe affirmative action does?

My understanding is that it's a law that enables colleges to consider race in admissions (use race as a discriminator... ie discriminate based on race), so that they can give certain races a better opportunity to be accepted than they'd get otherwise. Is that also your understanding?

 

[nodropinufaka]

Harvard Rated Asian-American Applicants Lower on Personality Traits, Suit Says (Published 2018)

Personal ratings brought down Asian-American applicants’ chances of being admitted, according to an analysis filed by a group suing the school for bias.

www.nytimes.com

"Harvard... admitted only 4.6 percent of it's applicants this year"
"Harvard consistently rated Asian-American applicants lower than others on traits like 'positive personality'..."

So excuse me. Amend my scenario to the college I create is a very good college and only lets in 4.6% of it's applicants. Now can you answer this hypothetical question that is about whether such a policy would be racist or discriminatory assuming it happened and was possible, or are you going to keep avoiding it?

I absolutely have no problem with them looking at the whole person concept, so long as that doesn't include ranking people lower based on their skin color or genitals (you know, protected categories). Extracurriculars, family income, school they attended, class ranking, etc... Great!

I’m confused. You said they were basing it on race.

the article says it was on other aspects and I didn’t see race.

Am I missing something?

 

[Spekkio]

So excuse me. Amend my scenario to the college I create is a very good college and only lets in 4.6% of it's applicants. Now can you answer this hypothetical question that is about whether such a policy would be racist or discriminatory assuming it happened and was possible, or are you going to keep avoiding it?

I answered your question two posts ago.

Re: Harvard....

Harvard's average academic student credentials were a 4.18 GPA and 1550 SAT score. Nationally, roughly 5000-8000 students achieved this, yet Harvard had 57,000 applicants.

Secondly, 1/5 of a student's acceptance into Harvard relies on academic credentials. The other four are leadership, character, recommendations, and athletics. A student who had to overcome poverty would score very high on 'character' due to being at the top of his class in an advserse environment, despite not scoring as well on academics as people from better areas.

 

[nodropinufaka]

I answered your question two posts ago.

To address the Harvard statistics, I have some questions:

• What % of applicants met the minimum academic threshold for acceptance (>1450 SAT and >3.8 weighted GPA) and weren't just throwing a hail mary ?
• Why are you picking on a school for biasing against Asians when its student body is 25% Asian, or 6x the national percentage?

But Harvard wasn’t even basing points on race which is what confuses me.

Personality traits scored lower for some races. That isn’t place a point on race like @Mirage said.

 

[Mirage]

I answered your question two posts ago.

Re: Harvard....

Harvard's average academic student credentials were a 4.18 GPA and 1550 SAT score. Nationally, roughly 5000-8000 students achieved this, yet Harvard had 57,000 applicants.

Secondly, 1/5 of a student's acceptance into Harvard relies on academic credentials. The other four are leadership, character, recommendations, and athletics. A student who had to overcome poverty would score very high on 'character' due to being at the top of his class in an advserse environment, despite not scoring as well on academics as people from better areas.

You never answered my question and are still avoiding it... The both of you.

Here it is again. All you have to do is say "yes" or "no". It's that simple.

If I took over as head of Harvard admissions and created a completely subjective criteria that factored into applicants ratings called "personality", and then ranked Black people lower in this category compared to all other races consistently over time.. would you think this was racist?

Edit: nevermind. I cant believe I'm wasting so much time on trolls. I'm done.

 

[Spekkio]

You never answered my question and are still avoiding it... The both of you.

Nobody is avoiding anything. You're asking a stupid, loaded question based on a yellow journalism article you read from a boomer publication behind a paywall, and are demonstrating that you lack the mental capacity to utilize a basic internet search on Harvard's actual admissions processes.

If I took over as head of Harvard admissions and created a completely subjective criteria that factored into applicants ratings called "personality", and then ranked Black people lower in this category compared to all other races consistently over time.. would you think this was racist?

Yes, in your fantasy world where you become the head of Harvard admissions and completely change its policies in the way you describe, you would be liable in a civil lawsuit for discrimination.

 

[nodropinufaka]

You never answered my question and are still avoiding it... The both of you.

Here it is again. All you have to do is say "yes" or "no". It's that simple.

If I took over as head of Harvard admissions and created a completely subjective criteria that factored into applicants ratings called "personality", and then ranked Black people lower in this category compared to all other races consistently over time.. would you think this was racist?

Edit: nevermind. I cant believe I'm wasting so much time on trolls. I'm done.

Pretty sure I already said no your race should not count against you.

 

[Spekkio]

 

[Jim123]

Of course STEM is needed but it isn’t the end all be all. Can’t even count the amount of JOs I knew who called themselves engineers cause they had an engineering degree. That just makes you someone with a degree. You’re not working as an engineer or licensed.

Part of that is them taking liberties with the word, as you described (engineering professional associations and licensing bodies put a lot of effort into preserving the word, it has to do with the public trust that some proverbial yahoo isn't designing a bridge that will fall down).

Part of it is naval and nautical lingo too. If you work in the bowels of the ship, where the heavy machinery and engines are, then you're an "engineer" just like the guys who used to oil the wheels of the old steam locomotives at each stop and do a bunch of other things to take care of the machinery. The mechanic who fixes your car is called an engineer in British vernacular, similar idea and meaning of the word.

But yeah, anyone who got an engineering degree but didn't start the licensing process nor ever practice professionally is not an engineer, never was, and should know better than to casually refer to themselves as an engineer. It's a subtle but important distinction.

 

[taxi1]

@Mirage, is it discriminatory to focus some recruiting visits and recruiting dollars on a minority population in order to increase the recruiting pool?

 

[nodropinufaka]

Part of that is them taking liberties with the word, as you described (engineering professional associations and licensing bodies put a lot of effort into preserving the word, it has to do with the public trust that some proverbial yahoo isn't designing a bridge that will fall down).

Part of it is naval and nautical lingo too. If you work in the bowels of the ship, where the heavy machinery and engines are, then you're an "engineer" just like the guys who used to oil the wheels of the old steam locomotives at each stop and do a bunch of other things to take care of the machinery. The mechanic who fixes your car is called an engineer in British vernacular, similar idea and meaning of the word.

But yeah, anyone who got an engineering degree but didn't start the licensing process nor ever practice professionally is not an engineer, never was, and should know better than to casually refer to themselves as an engineer. It's a subtle but important distinction.

I think that it also comes from the Navy putting such an emphasis on it during undergrad that some feel cheated afterwards that their degree was super difficult and the people who got easy degrees stil get to do the same thing.

A captain once told me during brief as he was pointing out a mistake that he was an Electrical Engineer and can spell better then me.

The whole time in my head I’m thinking wtf you’re a intel captain and never once worked as an electrical engineer.

Same with this Intel JO that kept saying “we need more engineers in our community” despite him having graduated from canoe U and never once working in his degree field.

 

[Mirage]

@Mirage, is it discriminatory to focus some recruiting visits and recruiting dollars on a minority population in order to increase the recruiting pool?

My opinion will always be that we must treat all races exactly equally. To do otherwise is to create systemic racism that future generations will look back and be ashamed of, just like we are of our past generations.

So, to answer your specific question, it depends on how we go about it. Our goal should not be to recruit more of this race or that. Our goal should be to recruit as many people who meet the (non-racial or gender) criteria we need, and if that leads us to send a black recruiter to a black engineer student club, then great. That's not discrimination. If we refuse to also send a recruiter to a predominately white and asian engineer student club because those races are over-represented, then the whole thing becomes racist discrimination.

If you disagree, then I'd ask that you apply the test I suggested earlier. Would it be systemic racism in the future if white people become underrepresented and blacks over-represented, so we decided to target just whites and ignore African American clubs?

 

[nodropinufaka]

My opinion will always be that we must treat all races exactly equally. To do otherwise is to create systemic racism that future generations will look back and be ashamed of, just like we are of our past generations.

So, to answer your specific question, it depends on how we go about it. Our goal should not be to recruit more of this race or that. Our goal should be to recruit as many people who meet the (non-racial or gender) criteria we need, and if that leads us to send a black recruiter to a black engineer student club, then great. That's not discrimination. If we refuse to also send a recruiter to a predominately white and asian engineer student club because those races are over-represented, then the whole thing becomes racist discrimination.

If you disagree, then I'd ask that you apply the test I suggested earlier. Would it be systemic racism in the future if white people become underrepresented and blacks over-represented, so we decided to target just whites and ignore African American clubs?

Can you please provide examples of where people were getting points taken away from them for their race like you were previously talking about?

 

[Mirage]

Can you please provide examples of where people were getting points taken away from them for their race like you were previously talking about?

If you have half a brain, aren't a troll, and read my posts and the article I provided (or just Google the issue and find any article you want), you'll be able to figure it out. If not, I have no desire to talk to complete idiots who have no desire to actually discuss the issues at hand in an honest way.

 

[nodropinufaka]

If you have half a brain, aren't a troll, and read my posts and the article I provided (or just Google the issue and find any article you want), you'll be able to figure it out. If not, I have no desire to talk to complete idiots who have no desire to actually discuss the issues at hand in an honest way.

I did read it and I’m trying to discuss it with you.

They were not marking them down or assigning points based on race from what I gathered.

Certain races scored lower on graded traits but is that the same thing? In any large data set you’re going to find trends.