JenDarby wrote: JCFindley wrote:
ajax wrote:Also, Fordham told a correspondent that they were not accepting applications, while telling an applicant they are. Sounds like an institution that places a high premium on integrity.
Slow news day for ya ajax?
ajax is still bitter about his rejection. It's not a shocker to me that a school might consider admitting someone with great credentials once the red tape deadline, they themselves set, has passed. Ajax, should a school accept your 163 because you applied before the deadline or should they accept someone who applied late with exceptional credentials. This isn't that complicated, or even scandalous to me, if schools were to do the latter.
A friend of mine got into BU after being rejected, due to an exceptional June retake. I was neither shocked, bitter, nor offended at the schools egregious hypocrisy (hyperbole).
I bet you 30,000 USD I was accepted. Please take that bet. PM me to pay up.
It's scandalous if they accept someone after the deadline after telling someone else they are not accepting applications. In fact, at a public school that would be borderline illegal. But you know that right Jen, because you're already in law school.
"(5) Does this behavior raise any potential legal liability? My correspondent who called the schools wonders if at least the public institutions in the group who told him he couldn’t apply, while telling the e-mailer he could, might be violating certain procedural norms to an extent that could be actionable. (There’s a nice little con law hypo)."
Fortunately for Fordham they are private. So they're welcome to preach ethical behavior while acting the opposite.