|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Attention! | |||
| I do everything I can to pay attention to the game and my opponents as I play |
   
|
18 | 20.22% |
| I have a “sense” of my opponents, but PT does the heavy lifting |
  
|
37 | 41.57% |
| There’s no way I can track all my opponents, so I get the vast majority of my info from PT |
  
|
17 | 19.10% |
| I’m so good that I play and win no matter where my focus is – let’s watch Rounders again... |
  
|
17 | 19.10% |
| Voters: 89. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
10-24-2005, 08:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Would you support this state law?
If the following referendum were on the ballot of your state's next election, would you vote for it:
"Any private or state educational institution shall be forbidden from favoring an applicant for admission based on his or her legacy status or the wealth of his or her parents or guardians." I probably could have worded it better if I thought about it more, but let's not get nitty about the exact wording or other concerns such as what penalties or remedies would apply. And let's limit the discussion to state laws in order to avoid federalism concerns. 
|
|
#2
10-24-2005, 09:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would you support this state law?
I certainly wouldn't favor this applying to private institutions. They are private, so they should set their own standards, even though I am not a fan of legacy admissions for anybody.
|
|
#6
10-25-2005, 11:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would you support this state law?
Same as the other posters. Yes to public, no to private.
|
|
#7
10-25-2005, 11:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would you support this state law?
[ QUOTE ]
I certainly wouldn't favor this applying to private institutions. They are private, so they should set their own standards, even though I am not a fan of legacy admissions for anybody. [/ QUOTE ] Okay, so how about instead of outright prohibiting legacy admissions, the state conditions private institutions' tax-exempt status on their usage of legacy admissions?
|
|
#8
10-25-2005, 11:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would you support this state law?
[ QUOTE ]
Okay, so how about instead of outright prohibiting legacy admissions, the state conditions private institutions' tax-exempt status on their usage of legacy admissions? [/ QUOTE ] How about the state just stay out of it entirely?
|
|
#9
10-25-2005, 12:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would you support this state law?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Okay, so how about instead of outright prohibiting legacy admissions, the state conditions private institutions' tax-exempt status on their usage of legacy admissions? [/ QUOTE ] How about the state just stay out of it entirely? [/ QUOTE ] Because they are giving those institutions a benefit (tax exempt status) that they do not give to others. Why shouldn't they be able to condition that benefit?
|
|
#10
10-25-2005, 01:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would you support this state law?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Okay, so how about instead of outright prohibiting legacy admissions, the state conditions private institutions' tax-exempt status on their usage of legacy admissions? [/ QUOTE ] How about the state just stay out of it entirely? [/ QUOTE ] Because they are giving those institutions a benefit (tax exempt status) that they do not give to others. Why shouldn't they be able to condition that benefit? [/ QUOTE ] "Legacies" get preferred admission because their parents give the school a bunch of money. That money benefits other students in the form of better facilities and scholarships for some who may not have been able to go there without that money. All I can see here is benefits. And if somebody wants to donate a ton of money to State U. with the (wink-wink) condition that his slacker kid gets admitted, I'm all for that too.
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
