Most favorable URM for affirmative action? Forum

[tehrocstar]

I don't see how the bolded part is racist.

I don't think you wanted to start an AA debate. But seriously, what is your motivation in wanting to know the most favorable URM for AA? You willing to pull a Black Like Me (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Like_Me)?

[vanwinkle]

My warning was meant as pre-emptive. Even giving OP the benefit of the doubt, and assuming their intentions were benign, the question still could prompt inciting responses, which are not allowed.

This forum used to be thick with nasty and hostile anti-AA reactions to everything. Someone could come along and ask for advice, and the minute they mentioned being URM, people would start tearing into them. The arguments never change, and a web forum argument won't change how schools handle admissions, so the only effect was driving off URMs and discouraging them from asking for advice. People seemed to be doing it for this reason, too, specifically to alienate URM posters and make them feel unwelcome.

So, there are no debates about AA in the on-topic forums. People need to know how it works, not how right or wrong it is, when they're applying to law schools. So, discussing the how is fine, but the why is not.

This is how it is. If you want to complain about mod policies, go to the Mod Q&A thread in the Lounge. That's a much better place than here for such things.

[horrorbusiness]

If you are a URM, knowing and understanding the pecking order - if one even exists - for URM's in law admissions will do absolutely nothing but provide an incentive for certain URM's and non-URM's to spill their venom. It's a lose-lose. We have worn this topic to death.

Yes, absolutely nothing. No URM would ever want to know the value of what "boost" they might receive, just like no other applicants would ever want to know what their chances of getting into a certain law school are. As a URM, I approve of this thread.

[vanwinkle]

Yes, absolutely nothing. No URM would ever want to know the value of what "boost" they might receive, just like no other applicants would ever want to know what their chances of getting into a certain law school are. As a URM, I approve of this thread.

I think there's a difference between how much of a boost you could get, and how that compares to other categories of applicants. The former is useful for admissions, the latter (especially when raised as a generality or hypothetical) is only sure to cause inflammatory debate.

Not common I get to defend PDaddy.

[horrorbusiness]

I think there's a difference between how much of a boost you could get, and how that compares to other categories of applicants. The former is useful for admissions, the latter (especially when raised as a generality or hypothetical) is only sure to cause inflammatory debate.

Not common I get to defend PDaddy.

I totally agree on that distinction, and I thought that this thread was supposed to only be about the former.

But now that carefully reread PDaddy's first post, I see he needlessly introduced this distinction into the thread, thereby derailing the thread and making it more about the "pecking order hierarchy" then it ever would have been otherwise. It's like bursting into a quiet library and yelling "LET'S NOT TALK ABOUT RACISM!!!!!".

[vanwinkle]

I totally agree on that distinction, and I thought that this thread was supposed to only be about the former.

But now that carefully reread PDaddy's first post, I see he needlessly introduced this distinction into the thread, thereby derailing the thread and making it more about the "pecking order hierarchy" then it ever would have been otherwise. It's like bursting into a quiet library and yelling "LET'S NOT TALK ABOUT RACISM!!!!!".

Actually, the OP invited that kind of discussion with the original post by asking for such a "pecking order" in the first place. The OP even said he wanted to know "what order" to put them in. I see that you failed to carefully reread OP and notice that PDaddy was responding to what was already started, or at least suggested.

I disagree with PDaddy that such a discussion will only provoke venomous responses, but only because I'm standing by with a hammer and a desire to play whack-a-mole. If I hadn't already warned people of that, PDaddy's post would've been a lot more relevant.

[20121109]

Not common I get to defend PDaddy.

This.

Though I wish he did not feel the need to make broad requests in bold font, PDaddy was actually a decent guy ITT and I felt that some people attempted to bait him into a discussion that would have ultimately derailed the thread. I was genuinely happy (read, surprised) to see that he wasn't so easily tempted.

[horrorbusiness]

Actually, the OP invited that kind of discussion with the original post by asking for such a "pecking order" in the first place. The OP even said he wanted to know "what order" to put them in. I see that you failed to carefully reread OP and notice that PDaddy was responding to what was already started, or at least suggested.

I disagree with PDaddy that such a discussion will only provoke venomous responses, but only because I'm standing by with a hammer and a desire to play whack-a-mole. If I hadn't already warned people of that, PDaddy's post would've been a lot more relevant.

OP inquired about that order exclusively in terms of "boost", didn't he?

PDaddy wasn't responding to anything explicit in OP's post, that's for sure. If comparing URM boosts necessarily has some subtext about comparing the minorities themselves, then okay PDaddy was responding to something implicit in OP's post.

I didn't get the feeling OP was headed in that direction at all.

Anyway, I understand that sensitivity is required for nebulous topics like this and you're just trying to do your job, so I wont argue with you any further.

If we can be allowed to transition to the intended topic, here's a study by Columbia that has lots of interesting information.

http://blogs.law.columbia.edu/salt/

[AspiringAcademic]

If we can be allowed to transition to the intended topic, here's a study by Columbia that has lots of interesting information.

http://blogs.law.columbia.edu/salt/

That website would be so much more informative if it had data for white applicants in the "Steady Demand" and "Improving Quality" graphs. As it is, it shows that, in a time when minority applicants to law school held constant, minority enrollment also held constant.