 | | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds" —Kevin Loch
|
| | | (...) That's why I said "in general" Obviously there are exceptions, and you would expect to find them here on LUGNET. (...) I guess we would have to look at the motive. If the motive was in fact to skirt the law then it's wrong, and probably not (...) (25 years ago, 1-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds" —Scott Edward Sanburn
|
| | | | | Kevin, (...) That's what the article said, which I mentioned in the quote earlier. (...) Mine was probably CAD and drafting classes, along with history. Again, I think this is just a way to get around the recent court rulings about affirmative (...) (25 years ago, 1-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds" —John Cromer
|
| | | | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Edward Sanburn writes: [SNIP] (...) Once again, Limbaugh shows his vast ignorance. These kinds of tests are routinely used by management consulting firms to test employees to see how well they fit into an (...) (25 years ago, 1-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds" —Scott Edward Sanburn
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Or you are showing yours, but I digress... (...) Yes, but what does that have to do with admitting minorities into a college? Business and college are very different. (...) Yes, see above.. (...) Yes, work again... (...) My point exactly. (...) (25 years ago, 1-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds" —Lindsay Frederick Braun
|
| | | | | | Sorry, just a nitpick: (...) I just want to point out that the single largest group that has benefited from Affirmative Action and equal-hiring legislation is actually white females, both numerically and qualitatively. What's to fear from adding a (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds" —Matthew Wilkins
|
| | | | | | | Lindsay, have you ever been passed up for a job because you were a white male? "Sorry, even though you are the most qualified, and out of work, we hired this Hispanic guy with no experience and a family to support because the government will pay (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds" —Scott Edward Sanburn
|
| | | | | | Lindsay, (...) That's not what the article was about, or the intention of this and other tests. Affirmative action is discrimination, and should not be there period, whether whit females, pink elephants, or blue martians benefit from it. No one (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds" —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | I'm just sort of picking tiny snippets to comment on... (...) I know for a fact from personal experience that a high SAT score is not a perfect predictor of college success (at a good college, where good study skills are important). Don't even ask (...) (25 years ago, 2-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Rush: "Lego is a Tool for 4 year olds" —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) No one claims that it is a perfect predictor. Not high schools, not colleges, not even SAT. (...) SAT is a pretty good predictor. It maybe didn't predict well for you, but on average it does. And it's a hell of a lot cheaper for schools and (...) (25 years ago, 3-Feb-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
