The natural evolution of BI threads is that they all become some weird exploration of the intersection of history/LA/celebrity/school/Okaydo/Cal/Berkeley.

okaydo said:

---

---

How many are "legacy" admits.

https://t.co/E9sIQ2Lxsg

philbert said:

---

https://t.co/E9sIQ2Lxsg

---

Dang! My parents only paid $2.5 million to get me into Cal.

philbert said:

---

https://t.co/E9sIQ2Lxsg

---

There was no way Stanfurd would be shown up by a second rate weaselturd up start like U$C. Once again the Stanfurd is tops in sleaze.

okaydo said:

---

---

Could be true. Dad probably worked very hard for the 6.5 mil and she probably worked hard in school. Doesn't mean she was the best qualified though. I hope she finds some contrition.

I don't get it. Can't you just outright donate 6.5 million dollars to a university and get in?

82gradDLSdad said:

---

okaydo said:

---

---

Could be true. Dad probably worked very hard for the 6.5 mil and she probably worked hard in school. Doesn't mean she was the best qualified though. I hope she finds some contrition.

---

I remember Rob Lowe's son boasting about how much hard work he put in to get in to Stanford, and receiving backlash. But I'm pretty sure that nearly everybody who applies to Stanford is a boffo candidate with amazing everything. (I mean, if Cal Poly SLO is rejecting 10,000 4.0 GPA students, then....) So you have to stand out. And being a famous person's son helps and so does being really, really rich.

okaydo said:

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

okaydo said:

---

---

Could be true. Dad probably worked very hard for the 6.5 mil and she probably worked hard in school. Doesn't mean she was the best qualified though. I hope she finds some contrition.

---

I remember Rob Lowe's son boasting about how much hard work he put in to get in to Stanford, and receiving backlash. But I'm pretty sure that nearly everybody who applies to Stanford is a boffo candidate with amazing everything. (I mean, if Cal Poly SLO is rejecting 10,000 4.0 GPA students, then....) So you have to stand out. And being a famous person's son helps and so does being really, really rich.

---

Let's just say neither of those postures hurts a bit. For years 'furd has been able to fill the entering class 2-3X over with valedictorians. It's a crap shoot but fame and money don't hurt a bit. The trees might even consider it diversity.

I thought metrics like SAT, AP courses are weighted more than GPA, which makes sense to me. I knew a lot of mediocre HS students that had great GPAs.

GBear4Life said:

---

I thought metrics like SAT, AP courses are weighted more than GPA, which makes sense to me. I knew a lot of mediocre HS students that had great GPAs.

---

My point is that Stanford say can only accept 3000 people (I'm making up the number) but it probably gets 20,000 applications (another made up number) of people who have mind-blowing test scores, APs, GPAs, extracurriculars. They can only take so many people, so a lot of brilliant people are rejected because they don't stand out.

For instance, The Washington Post recently had a story about the phenomenon of high school students posting their college admission reaction standards. The main guy in this story got rejected by USC, but got accepted by Princeton. Was he highly qualified to get into USC? You bet he was! But USC only has so many spaces, and he didn't stand out to them.

okaydo said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I thought metrics like SAT, AP courses are weighted more than GPA, which makes sense to me. I knew a lot of mediocre HS students that had great GPAs.

---

My point is that Stanford say can only accept 3000 people (I'm making up the number) but it probably gets 20,000 applications (another made up number) of people who have mind-blowing test scores, APs, GPAs, extracurriculars. They can only take so many people, so a lot of brilliant people are rejected because they don't stand out.

For instance, The Washington Post recently had a story about the phenomenon of high school students posting their college admission reaction standards. The main guy in this story got rejected by USC, but got accepted by Princeton. Was he highly qualified to get into USC? You bet he was! But USC only has so many spaces, and he didn't stand out to them.

---

Interesting times indeed with College admissions for sure.

We are still trying to figure out how our neighbors son was accepted at Cal but denied admission to USC. This story has a happy ending since he will be going to the better school!

Admissions are subjective. They are being made by groups of people that have nuanced responses to applications. Schools accept/reject people for all sorts of reasons, not necessarily on meeting requirements. Which I think is a good thing.

okaydo said:

---

I remember Rob Lowe's son boasting about how much hard work he put in to get in to Stanford, and receiving backlash.

---

Please tell us more about Rob Lowe's son.

GBear4Life said:

---

Admissions are subjective. They are being made by groups of people that have nuanced responses to applications. Schools accept/reject people for all sorts of reasons, not necessarily on meeting requirements. Which I think is a good thing.

---

Yes, that makes sense. I am thinking that Cal accepted him because he's a great kid and USC rejected him because he was not an arrogant and privileged prima donna.

okaydo said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I thought metrics like SAT, AP courses are weighted more than GPA, which makes sense to me. I knew a lot of mediocre HS students that had great GPAs.

---

My point is that Stanford say can only accept 3000 people (I'm making up the number) but it probably gets 20,000 applications (another made up number) of people who have mind-blowing test scores, APs, GPAs, extracurriculars. They can only take so many people, so a lot of brilliant people are rejected because they don't stand out.

For instance, The Washington Post recently had a story about the phenomenon of high school students posting their college admission reaction standards. The main guy in this story got rejected by USC, but got accepted by Princeton. Was he highly qualified to get into USC? You bet he was! But USC only has so many spaces, and he didn't stand out to them.

---

If you want to hear a strange one our third granddaughter got in to Cal, UCLA, UCSB, UCD, and multiple other schools but did not get into U$C (not even deferred), and she did it on credentials for she has parents that are both UCD grads, and no affirmative action type bennies to help in any way. Go figure. But Papa is very happy even though she would not have gone there anyway.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

okaydo said:

---

I remember Rob Lowe's son boasting about how much hard work he put in to get in to Stanford, and receiving backlash.

---

Please tell us more about Rob Lowe's son.

---

Sure thing. Jonathan Brando Lowe is the oldest son of Rob and Kalinda Lowe. He graduated from Stanford University, where he was president of the Beta Peta Pi fraternity. He is following in the footsteps of his actor father, and was cast as Jason Priestley in Lifetime's "The Shannen Doherty Story." He also co-stars with his brother and father in The Lowe Files.

Hold the phone. There's a Shannen Dougherty biopic? Why has no one shared this information before? Did Ken Burns direct?

No

Hmmmm...was the judge Aaron Persky, the guy who gave Brock the Rapist his light sentence?

Another Bear said:

---

Hmmmm...was the judge Aaron Persky, the guy who gave Brock the Rapist his light sentence?

---

As case evolved it became evident this coach just funneled the money into the sailing club account and didn't abuse it in any way for his personal benefit, and so the prosecutor lowered their recommendation to 1 year prison/1 year house arrest and the judge lowered it more to just 2 years house arrest.

Judge said he is the "least culpable" defendant with the best intentions.

The fact that he barely skated by a 13 month prison and 11 month house arrest sentence and got just 2 years house arrest speaks volumes as to what every other charged in this case is looking at.

Probably other coaches are staring down 1-4 years of prison each(federal guidelines are 3-4 years for their crime), with corresponding house arrest/parole/probation after the fact.

Those deemed "most culpable" in the end that don't plead down may get slapped with further charges to make a point/win for the prosecutor, such as fraud, bribery, tax evasion, non-profit abuse, etc that don't fall under the current charges at this time. In that scenario some could see substantially more than 4 years prison time.

It's not clear to me what crime the sailing coach committed. What I heard (in passing) sounded identical to normal club sport fundraising. What am I missing here?

offshorebear said:

---

Another Bear said:

---

Hmmmm...was the judge Aaron Persky, the guy who gave Brock the Rapist his light sentence?

---

As case evolved it became evident this coach just funneled the money into the sailing club account and didn't abuse it in any way for his personal benefit, and so the prosecutor lowered their recommendation to 1 year prison/1 year house arrest and the judge lowered it more to just 2 years house arrest.

Judge said he is the "least culpable" defendant with the best intentions.

The fact that he barely skated by a 13 month prison and 11 month house arrest sentence and got just 2 years house arrest speaks volumes as to what every other charged in this case is looking at.

Probably other coaches are staring down 1-4 years of prison each(federal guidelines are 3-4 years for their crime), with corresponding house arrest/parole/probation after the fact.

Those deemed "most culpable" in the end that don't plead down may get slapped with further charges to make a point/win for the prosecutor, such as fraud, bribery, tax evasion, non-profit abuse, etc that don't fall under the current charges at this time. In that scenario some could see substantially more than 4 years prison time.

---

I actually think this is worst. Funneling money into the program gives it an institutional advantage that could have had far more long-term impact than had he just did it for personal gain.

Creating an institutional advantage through fundraising isn't illegal. FiatLux - are you saying club sports can't raise money because it would give them an advantage?

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Creating an institutional advantage through fundraising isn't illegal. FiatLux - are you saying club sports can't raise money because it would give them an advantage?

---

But this isn't fundraising, this is rackateering.

This guy is trying to paint himself in a slightly holier than thou way, saying he didn't take any of the money. But I'm guessing the better Stanford sailing became the better he got paid and the more marketable he was.

.

Fyght4Cal said:

---

okaydo said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

okaydo said:

---

I remember Rob Lowe's son boasting about how much hard work he put in to get in to Stanford, and receiving backlash.

---

Please tell us more about Rob Lowe's son.

---

Sure thing. Jonathan Brando Lowe is the oldest son of Rob and Kalinda Lowe. He graduated from Stanford University, where he was president of the Beta Peta Pi fraternity. He is following in the footsteps of his actor father, and was cast as Jason Priestley in Lifetime's "The Shannen Doherty Story." He also co-stars with his brother and father in The Lowe Files.

---

There is no affirmative action in the California public sector, inc. the universities. The voters outlawed it in 1996, with the adoption of Prop. 209.

---

I have no idea what this tweet is responding to? Rob Lowe??

but yes, I'm very familiar with Prop 209 since my first semester at UC Berkeley was fall 1996.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

okaydo said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I thought metrics like SAT, AP courses are weighted more than GPA, which makes sense to me. I knew a lot of mediocre HS students that had great GPAs.

---

My point is that Stanford say can only accept 3000 people (I'm making up the number) but it probably gets 20,000 applications (another made up number) of people who have mind-blowing test scores, APs, GPAs, extracurriculars. They can only take so many people, so a lot of brilliant people are rejected because they don't stand out.

For instance, The Washington Post recently had a story about the phenomenon of high school students posting their college admission reaction standards. The main guy in this story got rejected by USC, but got accepted by Princeton. Was he highly qualified to get into USC? You bet he was! But USC only has so many spaces, and he didn't stand out to them.

---

If you want to hear a strange one our third granddaughter got in to Cal, UCLA, UCSB, UCD, and multiple other schools but did not get into U$C (not even deferred), and she did it on credentials for she has parents that are both UCD grads, and no affirmative action type bennies to help in any way. Go figure. But Papa is very happy even though she would not have gone there anyway.

---

Not terribly surprised to hear this. USC is super competitive these days. They're pushing hard for a national profile, meaning they crave students from outside Cali. I'm certain it's much harder for a Californian, and even harder for SoCal kids than it is for kid from the East Coast, especially high profile private and prep schools.

okaydo said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I thought metrics like SAT, AP courses are weighted more than GPA, which makes sense to me. I knew a lot of mediocre HS students that had great GPAs.

---

My point is that Stanford say can only accept 3000 people (I'm making up the number) but it probably gets 20,000 applications (another made up number) of people who have mind-blowing test scores, APs, GPAs, extracurriculars. They can only take so many people, so a lot of brilliant people are rejected because they don't stand out.

For instance, The Washington Post recently had a story about the phenomenon of high school students posting their college admission reaction standards. The main guy in this story got rejected by USC, but got accepted by Princeton. Was he highly qualified to get into USC? You bet he was! But USC only has so many spaces, and he didn't stand out to them.

---

One rarely discussed detail is the fact that admissions officers from elite schools all communicate about mutual candidates. Each officer tries to gauge the applicant's true interest in attending their respective campus. One reason a school might deny admission to a student because the admit officers learn that the student views their campus as a third choice, or worse. They may even find out that the candidate won admittance to a preferred school.

Fyght4Cal said:

---

okaydo said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I thought metrics like SAT, AP courses are weighted more than GPA, which makes sense to me. I knew a lot of mediocre HS students that had great GPAs.

---

My point is that Stanford say can only accept 3000 people (I'm making up the number) but it probably gets 20,000 applications (another made up number) of people who have mind-blowing test scores, APs, GPAs, extracurriculars. They can only take so many people, so a lot of brilliant people are rejected because they don't stand out.

For instance, The Washington Post recently had a story about the phenomenon of high school students posting their college admission reaction standards. The main guy in this story got rejected by USC, but got accepted by Princeton. Was he highly qualified to get into USC? You bet he was! But USC only has so many spaces, and he didn't stand out to them.

---

One rarely discussed detail is the fact that admissions officers from elite schools all communicate about mutual candidates. Each officer tries to gauge the applicant's true interest in attending their respective campus. One reason a school might deny admission to a student because the admit officers learn that the student views their campus as a third choice, or worse. They may even find out that the candidate won admittance to a preferred school.

---

And I think this played heavily in my aforementioned example. Our GD had applied for EA and G'town, her sister had gone there, she could play soccer there, she was accepted there. Little did I know that other schools may get wind of that until the students send in the "Yays or Nays" on May 1.

**** ! Hit the wrong reply button. My bad.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

okaydo said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

I thought metrics like SAT, AP courses are weighted more than GPA, which makes sense to me. I knew a lot of mediocre HS students that had great GPAs.

---

My point is that Stanford say can only accept 3000 people (I'm making up the number) but it probably gets 20,000 applications (another made up number) of people who have mind-blowing test scores, APs, GPAs, extracurriculars. They can only take so many people, so a lot of brilliant people are rejected because they don't stand out.

For instance, The Washington Post recently had a story about the phenomenon of high school students posting their college admission reaction standards. The main guy in this story got rejected by USC, but got accepted by Princeton. Was he highly qualified to get into USC? You bet he was! But USC only has so many spaces, and he didn't stand out to them.

---

If you want to hear a strange one our third granddaughter got in to Cal, UCLA, UCSB, UCD, and multiple other schools but did not get into U$C (not even deferred), and she did it on credentials for she has parents that are both UCD grads, and no affirmative action type bennies to help in any way. Go figure. But Papa is very happy even though she would not have gone there anyway.

---

There is no affirmative action in the California public sector, inc. the universities. The voters outlawed it in 1996, with the adoption of Prop. 209.