Admissions, acceptances, and the possibly on-line fall.

by Harry on April 5, 2020

Few colleges are talking opening about what instruction will look like in the Fall, and my prediction is that it will be a while before they do. There is an elephant in the room, which college administrators are well aware of, but most college faculty and the general public are oblivious to.

Here’s what we are all aware of. A decision about whether to continue with ‘alternative’ delivery (i.e., online teaching) in the fall may affect acceptance rates for selective colleges. A student may have her heart set on attending College X, but probably her heart is set on actually being there in person, and if she thinks that her first semester there will be online she may well choose, instead, to go to College Y, which also seems pretty good, if she thinks that College Y will be in person. (For simplicity’s sake I am ignoring the possibility that sophomores etc might decide just to skip a semester or a year, if we stay online in the Fall — that possibility matters a lot for the financial stability of the institutions, but not for what I am going to tell you). So, assuming that we are allowed to make choices about whether or not to be open in-person, there will be huge pressure to go in-person.

Here’s the complication.

I would guess that some of you believe, wrongly, that when you commit to attending a college on May 1st (or June 1st, if that is what it ends up being this year) you are making a commitment that is at least in some sense binding. In fact, as others of you realise, that is not the case — if you change your mind, you just lose your deposit. It feels like binding commitment because selective colleges abide by the National Association for College Admission Counseling (NACAC) code of ethics, which has long included provisions prohibiting attempts to poach students who have already committed to another college. So — after May 1st (or, if it changes, June 1st), no college will initiate communication with you if you have already committed to another college.

This year, for reasons that have nothing to do with COVID, that will change. In September 2019, responding to intense pressure from the Justice Department, NACAC removed those provisions from its code of ethics. The provisions that were stripped from the code are:

“Colleges must not offer incentives exclusive to students applying or admitted under an early decision application plan. Examples of incentives include the promise of special housing, enhanced financial aid packages, and special scholarships for early decision admits. Colleges may, however, disclose how admission rates for early decision differ from those for other admission plans.”

“College choices should be informed, well-considered, and free from coercion. Students require a reasonable amount of time to identify their college choices; complete applications for admission, financial aid, and scholarships; and decide which offer of admission to accept. Once students have committed themselves to a college, other colleges must respect that choice and cease recruiting them.”

“Colleges will not knowingly recruit or offer enrollment incentives to students who are already enrolled, registered, have declared their intent, or submitted contractual deposits to other institutions. May 1 is the point at which commitments to enroll become final, and colleges must respect that. The recognized exceptions are when students are admitted from a wait list, students initiate inquiries themselves, or cooperation is sought by institutions that provide transfer programs.”

“Colleges must not solicit transfer applications from a previous year’s applicant or prospect pool unless the students have themselves initiated a transfer inquiry or the college has verified prior to contacting the students that they are either enrolled at a college that allows transfer recruitment from other colleges or are not currently enrolled in a college.” [1]

Already, before COVID-19, college leaders were preparing for what this would mean. I talked with a number of college presidents, VPs of enrollment management, and provosts earlier this year, and they were all very anxious about it: one president of a small liberal arts college expressed the view that it would be extremely costly, and would result in several colleges closing even after the first year. Every college is now much more financially precarious than they were at the beginning of this year, and I can only imagine that their anxiety about what happens after May/June 1st is heightened. Suppose that it gets to June 15th, and your college, which has gotten exactly the number of acceptances it aimed for, starts signalling that the first semester — or even just the first part of the first semester — might be online. You are immediately a target for poachers; and whoever can sound most committed to in-person teaching has the best chance of winning.

Of course, colleges have limited control over whether they actually open in-person in the Fall. They all have an incentive, already, to pressure state authorities to allow them to stay open, regardless. But the COVID crisis is an invitation to even more chaos than administrators expected when this decision was made, and the decision will inhibit straightforward an honest deliberation about what to do, and will make planning even more difficult.

Who knows, maybe summer will come and we’ll go back to some semblance of normality.

[1] Here’s a useful article reporting the NACAC decision.



Donald A. Coffin 04.05.20 at 9:05 pm

“Just a reminder in case you haven’t absorbed enough bad news over the past few weeks: epidemiologists expect COVID-19 to return in the fall even if we successfully stamp out the current outbreak by the end of spring. This means that after a few months of respite, we will be adopting social distancing measures again later this year. There’s no telling when, but I’ll bet it will be at the first hint of a new outbreak.”

Which would be just (a month or so) after the fall semester begins…


oldster 04.05.20 at 10:20 pm

“In fact, as others of you, that is not the case—….”

I’m guessing:
“In fact, as others of you , that is not the case—….”


Murali 04.05.20 at 11:02 pm

There is also parental pressure right? After all, if the covid19 situation is not resolved by June or does not look to be resolved by July, parents are going to be unwilling to send their kids to colleges which do not implement distance learning measures regardless of whether state officials allow them to stay open.


mistah charley, ph.d. 04.06.20 at 3:22 am

The current experience of Guayaquil, Ecuador, with the virus suggests that warm humid weather in the temperate zone during the summer will not make a big difference in disease spread.


ph 04.06.20 at 6:31 am

What a return to normal looks like: Elementary school re-opens in Shizuoka –

I strongly recommend the interested click through to see what ‘normal’ looks like in the midst of a pandemic. All students and the teacher wear masks. And many of the masks people will be wearing are not N-95 super-masks.

Wearing masks is normal in many parts of the world – but not in ‘western’ nations, largely-speaking. Look at the classroom and ask yourselves which is more disruptive for the students and the university system as a whole: wearing masks, as deemed necessary – or turning the existing system upside down, with all the attendent financial problems?

Many of the universities in Japan have followed the ‘lead’ of the west, and switched to online classes. K-12 schools don’t have that option. So, elementary, junior-high, and high-school students will likely be attending school as usual, with the sole difference being the mandatory wearing of masks, while their older sisters and brothers will be denied the experience many have years preparing for.

What kind of memories are built from ‘inter-acting’ online?

I stand by my conviction that the universities have failed their students badly by not stepping up to a/delay the opening of classes and b/modeling mask-wearing as a daily practice – because that’s what the new normal looks like, and has looked like since SARS and MERS in Asia.

There was no rush. There is no rush. Protecting the best of what on-campus learning offers is the first responsibility of the administrators. And if turns out that mask-wearing is indeed part of the new normal, then wearing masks for few weeks or months is going to look like an extremely small price to pay, given the looming disaster of the alternatives.

(Addendum: mask wearing – I’m sure that some will remind us that cloth masks quickly become moist and lose their ability to prevent germs from entering the body. Yes. But that’s not why uniform mask-wearing works. Even a cloth mask will contain much of the mucus and saliva expelled during normal respiration. Which means if one is in a room with people all wearing masks, very small amounts of moisture are being injected into the communal space – which means – radically lower chances of infecting others, and being infected by others. Cause we’re all wearing masks, until the all-clear is sounded.)

Most Japanese people wear masks when they have colds or the flu to avoid passing the germs on to others, not to prevent ingesting unhealthy germs – hard as that concept may be to grasp. A value worth teaching – yes?


Mark 04.06.20 at 1:44 pm

Hawaii remains an interesting anomaly – a lot of visitors from the mainland and Asia in January and February, but almost no community transmission, ~300 cases, ~20 hospitalization, and 3 deaths. Far better than other states.


Marc 04.06.20 at 3:22 pm

FYI, a quite valuable online resource for projections of future cases in the US, both national and state by state, is at

This model has performed reasonably well to date and is regularly updated. April is indeed shaping up to be the cruelest month. An important additional factor is that the flow of international students is very likely to be dramatically curtailed. This will have enormous implications for a lot of Us universities, and will almost certainly amplify the very real issues that Harry is talking about.


Omega Centauri 04.06.20 at 4:30 pm

I think it is thought that the effect of summer on R0 will be too small to stop the epidemic by itself. It is also likely that the ability to quickly perform large scale testing for the virus and/or its antibodies will be available by then. A robust test/track/ and isolate regime should be able to substitute for at least some of the social distancing measures.

But, how much social distancing will be necessary probably won’t be known soon enough.
Even without poaching. If I were a student I would seriously consider enrolling in a lowcost online school for the next year. This is not only because the expected quality difference is flattened, but because economic/financial uncertainty will drive people toward low cost options.


Matt 04.06.20 at 9:51 pm

Thanks Harry. I was curious as well, about how the new NACAC policy would impact Fall enrollment, prior to COVID.

Is there any chance institutions will make this decision based on pressure to mass produce online courses that need to be delivered in Fall? Here, the term starts in the third week in August, which means any delayed decision on delivery format will affect production time/quality.

One would also think that assuring incoming students of a quality product would be important, and the sooner one decides to go online (or can rely on an already established online format), presumably it would signal confidence in the online environment to deliver a useful educational experience to new students.


Hidari 04.07.20 at 5:58 am

There will be no return to ‘normal’ until there is a (relatively) cheap and easily available vaccine available. This is 2 to 3 years away.*

By that time we will be in a different, and worse, world.

*The vaccine has to be actually developed (something we haven’t actually managed to do yet) and then all the issues with mass production sorted out. Then it has to be brought to market (passing numerous stringent safety tests), rolled out, and then actually manufactured and bought and shipped to almost every country in the world. Not a small task.


Matt_L 04.08.20 at 4:12 pm

I think that the language the NACAC was asked to strip out of its code of ethics smacks of a cartel, so I don’t feel bad if the elite schools start poaching each other’s draft picks. Maybe they will compete on offering face-to-face classes or maybe they could compete on price instead? If I were running a SLAC I’d offer a discount until things go back to normal and hope for the best. The same students could just as well go to a state school on-line and stay in their own home.

As someone who teaches at a state school I am more worried about the quality end of things. We have been told that all our summer classes have to be taught on-line. Thats OK, my department was doing this for the past three years, it was the only way we could get strong enough enrollments to run the classes. But other colleagues in Music and Lab Sciences, for example, needed those face-to-face courses. Not sure what they are going to do about that now.

I’ve been registering Freshmen this month with the expectation that we would be teaching in classrooms this fall. The administration has not officially asked us to prepare for an on-line fall semester yet, but they have said individual faculty members might want to think about how their courses would have to change if we were under another stay at home order.


ph 04.08.20 at 10:17 pm

Re: quality. If one believes that the most important part of the university experience exists is sitting in a class room listening to some self-absorbed wind-bag wax eloquent on topics of her/his expertise, then online education ‘works.’

Paying 50k per annum for that ‘privilege’ becomes more of a question, if one sees the larger meat-space as a more important, and significant, part of the experience.

Screen-based learning is the great equaliser – and that bobbing head at the center of a screen becomes indistinguishable from every other bobbing head very quickly. The voice, and sound become much more important, because that’s where the real distinguishing markers can be found, if they can be found.

It isn’t clear to me why universities are important at all in world where information is largely free and accessible, and meat-space work involves activities are largely those we associate with blue-collar jobs, skilled as these often are.

Nobody I know wants to be treated by a doctor who completed medical training online. One can imagine an engineer learning all her skills online, but what kind of ‘education’ is really being provided.

Consumers of distance ed may have a very different view of ‘quality’ online education than professional educators. The problems of pushing unqualified and untrained ‘instructors’ upon students in meat-space classrooms has been a topic of various threads at CT for years. These deficiencies are liable to come into sharp relief online, especially if the lectures/classes are recorded.

Does the online economy ‘need’ a large number of online trained workers? The answer may be yes. If that’s the case, the efficacy and practicality of programs – re: offering real-job-related skills is going to come into sharp relief.

I expect a number of meat-space businesses will not survive the covid ‘solution’ of shut-downs and moves to online delivery systems. I’m not sure what jobs will actually remain, given the threat tech represented to jobs prior to the covid test, a test many institutions are clearly failing, if the metric for success is surviving intact. Online education is not the same as meat-space education.

We need to understand at least that much in all discussions of challenges and solutions.


Alan White 04.09.20 at 4:34 am


“Screen-based learning is the great equaliser – and that bobbing head at the center of a screen becomes indistinguishable from every other bobbing head very quickly. The voice, and sound become much more important, because that’s where the real distinguishing markers can be found, if they can be found.”

I so wish this were true, just so you could be silenced.

The overwhelming number of my in-class instructors were duly vetted and came through with competent and even excellent instruction, which is just as acceptable evidence as any other anecdotal tirades.


notGoodenough 04.09.20 at 9:11 am

ph @ 12

“If one believes that the most important part of the university experience exists is sitting in a class room listening to some self-absorbed wind-bag wax eloquent on topics of her/his expertise, then online education ‘works.’”

For someone so obsessed with civility in others, you seem curiously devoid of any yourself. Perhaps if you want your points to be made seriously, and not drive people away, you should avoid name-calling regarding lecturing – a profession which includes many of the CT commentators and blog-hosts?

My experience of university lecturers was not ‘self-absorbed windbags’ but rather mostly dedicated and hard-working professionals who spent considerable amounts of their own time trying to develop multiple ways of understanding key concepts. One of the key things about doing a degree is that while the basis of information you get is important, often even more important is learning a sound epistemology for your field – something which is rather tricky to instil in people. Consequently, I had excellent access to my lecturers who were pretty happy to discuss topics in greater detail and link it to the other subjects at the same time (making the link between, for example, inorganic and physical chemistry is important as both are intertwined). Then there were tutorials, summer internship positions, etc. etc. I’m not sure all these opporuntites could be offered via online learning.

In short, the lectures were only part of the learning experience.

“Paying 50k per annum for that ‘privilege’ becomes more of a question, if one sees the larger meat-space as a more important, and significant, part of the experience.”

Except that that is simply not the case in many countries. As I understand it, Germany and Spain charge no-where near that amount, while until recently the Netherlands actually paid the students to attend (via a government stipend). Perhaps taking a step back from a rather myopic assumption that all universities in all countries are identical would be useful?

Personally I would prefer it if education was entirely free. However, that will be difficult to achieve, and I am realistic that it is unlikely to happen anytime soon (and, for somewhere like USA, perhaps healthcare is more a priority?).

“It isn’t clear to me why universities are important at all in world where information is largely free and accessible, and meat-space work involves activities are largely those we associate with blue-collar jobs, skilled as these often are.”

That it is unclear to you is self-evident.

There are a number of reasons why universities may be important in a world where information is largely free and accessible. For example:

The idea that everyone could learn sufficiently well a topic to university level by studying on their own seems rather faulty. People often learn in different ways, and having courses planned which allow you to move from a basic to advanced understanding can be quite important. You do realise that typically courses are structure so that what you learn in first year supports what you learn in second and third? Moreover, for many topics is would be nearly impossible to learn everything you would need to purely from reading – for example, chemistry, physics, engineering, medicine, vetinary medicine, etc. All these subject greatly benefit when you can access relevant facilities – my university had labs furnished with equipment you need to be familiar with, links to hospitals where students could intern, and even its own farm for the student vets. I would posit any of those would be rather difficult to have access to as an individual self teaching themselves.

Also, being able to tell what is information and what is misinformation is rather important – I can find many professional looking websites which are happy to inform me exactly how homeopathy can cure diseases (it can’t by the way), or read books on how people in positions of power are actually lizard people (which would make history more exciting, but seems to…lack veracity). If you are starting with a very limited understanding of your chosen topic, it is perhaps possible that you could easily learn things which are factually incorrect – leading to considerable issues later on down the line. Universities typically have an accreditation board which ensures that the information you are getting is, to the best of current understanding, correct. I certainly wouldn’t want to be treated by a doctor whose entire medical knowledge came from WebMD, but perhaps you are more comfortable with that?

That of course links into another point, which is that if you have a degree in (for example) chemistry from any accredited UK (and EU and most international) universities, someone can be confident you have a certain level of expertise. If I am hiring someone for my research group, I would like to know that they have achieved a certain level of competence. Now, don’t get me wrong, the CV is not the only important thing (when interviewing I often focus on attitude, enthusiasm, ability to work well with others), but it is helpful to know that the individual I am looking at has a minimum level of experience.

Finally, and just as a relatively minor point, for myself I found the ability to live on my own, but with the support network of the university, was a useful way to transition from living at home to being fully independent. Of course that isn’t necessarily a function of a university, and experiences may differ, but I don’t think I would have been as confident facing sorting out my own life if I hadn’t had that half-way house situation.

In summary, there are potential benefits of attending a university (my list is in no-way meant to be exhaustive). Is it the best choice for everyone? Of course not. Should people have to get a degree before working as a brick layer? I don’t think anyone on CT would say that. But for you to say you don’t see any reason for universities seems to be a rather provocative and disturbingly short-sighted statement – surely just some basic thought would show that there are, in fact, some benefits, even if you personally don’t value them.

The problems of pushing unqualified and untrained ‘instructors’ upon students in meat-space classrooms has been a topic of various threads at CT for years.

I agree that there should be much better training on how to teach for lecturers at universities. It would also be nice if lecturers weren’t expected to have to juggle teaching, research, administration, outreach, tutorials, and grant applications all at the same time (most I know regularly work close to 70/80 hr per week just to try and meet all these targets). Of course that would involve people understanding what is involved in the job and wanting administrators to be more realistic in their requirements, and not simply caricaturing the role as just pompously talking to a class once a week – as some seem to be inclined to do.

However, it isn’t clear to me why you assume that transferring classes online would a) result in greater accountability and b) an improvement in instruction quality. Certainly I had little guidance as a student as to how to select a good university to study at – if it is all online how are you supposed to judge? What exactly is stopping Online Uni A from simply spending ad revenue better tp attract people, and outsourcing all teaching to unqualified people in a call centre somewhere? I don’t 100% trust Yelp reviews for selecting a restaurant, I certainly wouldn’t want to for an education. And, by removing any physical locations, it would seem even harder to monitor and hold to account these places.

Now this isn’t to say you couldn’t find a way to make online instruction comparable (or perhaps even superior) to current university level, while also ensuring accreditation and monitoring for quality – I just find your blasé assumption that it would necessarily be the case not supported by evidence.

These deficiencies are liable to come into sharp relief online, especially if the lectures/classes are recorded.

As an undergraduate, all my classes were recorded and made available to students. I don’t know if that was unusual, but I am unsure that any online class would make recorded classes available to non-students (after all, that would be giving away the thing that you’re supposed to pay for). And that being the case, information would seem to be if anything more limited for people trying to judge the quality of the institute.

Final remarks

I don’t find your points here particularly persuasive, rooted as they seem to be in a very odd view of what a university is like (and the assumption that all are identical in all countries). However, I will agree with your last statement:

“Online education is not the same as meat-space education. We need to understand at least that much in all discussions of challenges and solutions.”

That is true – and perhaps the best way to understand that is actually to research this more, rather than promulgating tired clichés and stereotypes?

The world is changing, and perhaps the best way to adapt is to try and understand situations better before acting.

Oh, and maybe pushing for a society that values its workforce, rather than treating them as disposable goods to be used up and tossed aside when convenient – that would also be nice.


ph 04.09.20 at 11:04 am

Alan, How many online classes have you taken; from which institutions, using which delivery systems?

Perhaps you’re unaware of the immense expenses distance students incur to satisfy residency requirements, which are normally part of the ‘best’ distance programs. Whether you like it or not, people who hold fulltime jobs, and who study part-time, and are also generally ineligible to receive state support because we own homes, or have mortgages, and who are trying to raise families, enjoy the added indignity of not being taken seriously, often by liberals like you, no matter how well we do.

I completed one teaching certificate entirely online to supplement my meat-space courses and training. I also completed a graduate degree part-time online at a very good university, and with a residency requirement. I was hugely successful. I was offered places in doctoral programs, and won international recognition within my discipline for my work. But I was also a successful honors undergraduate, in a meat-space university, and would have almost certainly have been accepted into similar doctoral programs.

I can assure I would have much rather spent more time on-campus in the libraries, etc. None of my experiences online matched being on campus. As a compromise, it worked, but young students deserve better and more.

Online graduate degrees-holders rarely win fulltime positions over meat-space degree holders of equal merit, no matter the quality of the online program. Online education is certainly regarded as second-rate when the decision of who to hire at universities is being adjudicated. If I’m wrong on that point, please correct me. I’d be delighted to learn that’s not case. I fear, however, all you have to add is insult.


Jeff R. 04.09.20 at 11:42 am

This is exactly my situation: my son is a high school senior and covid19 has added a big unknown to the decision process. And if you’re thinking about sending more than one deposit in, you need consider is the pledge you are required to make when using the Common Application:

I affirm that I will send an enrollment deposit (or equivalent) to only one institution; sending multiple deposits (or equivalent) may result in the withdrawal of my admission offers from all institutions.


ph 04.10.20 at 5:09 am

@14 -4.5 hours in the library for every 1.5 hours of classroom instruction.

The 1-3 demand upon students was standard, not exceptional, in my undergraduate program. A student hoping to excel best spend far more time in the library than that. In my final undergraduate year, I moved into a tiny apartment within walking distance of the university and spent every single day in the stacks (almost), from the time the library opened until it closed. I knew all the librarians on the desk. I’m sure others here did something similar and achieved as much, or more, thanks to time spent in libraries.

Pretending free access to libraries isn’t every bit as important as time in the classroom is disingenuous, at best. Library time and easy access to other resources is the spike standing as clear and tall as K2 in the middle of the ‘online is just as good’ discussion.

Online manifestly isn’t. Google books? I love Google books. Unfortunately very little published in the last fifty years is available via Google books, rendering the tool largely useless to online students.

Re: windbags, your @14, I suggest, makes my own argument rather than your own.

Unfettered free time in the stacks? Yes for me, but not for thee.

Pretending that ‘online’ is just as good as ‘in the library’ from the same people who likely privilege their own unfettered access to libraries very highly is an insult to all.

Frankly disgusting. Oh, and btw, we’re going to need all those tuition fees paid in full!!

Don’t forget, y’all!


notGoodenough 04.10.20 at 7:41 am

ph @ 17

Well, frankly I find your comments so incoherent and unrelated to anything I wrote that I really struggle to follow what you are trying to say at all – indeed your post seems unusually unhinged. Many of your comments are accusations of positions which are the exact opposite of what I said. Perhaps you didn’t bother reading what I wrote – that’s fine, I can be boring – but maybe in that case just say you couldn’t be bothered reading what I actually wrote, rather than just hurling insults at me?

“Pretending free access to libraries isn’t every bit as important as time in the classroom is disingenuous, at best.”

Yes, and had I done so you might have a point. But please point out where I said free access to libraries isn’t important? Here’s a hint – I didn’t.

In fact, I specifically said “In short, the lectures were only part of the learning experience.”. As in, other parts of the learning experience are also important. Why did you find fairly basic sentences so hard to understand?

The fact that you are accusing me of a position I don’t hold also doesn’t seem particularly civil. Maybe you should be a little more careful before doing so again?

Oh, and also pretending that access to libraries is the only important thing for an education is also disingenuous – for example, I would have found my chemistry studies rather stunted without a chemistry lab.

“Re: windbags, your @14, I suggest, makes my own argument rather than your own.”

Well, now personal insults aren’t particularly productive, are they? Given how you have repeatedly cried foul regarding this behaviour before, I had hoped you’d be a little less abusive. I certainly hope you are a lot more charitable in your meat-space interactions.

However, if you want to accuse me of being a windbag, well you are entitled to your opinion of course. I would point out that I am not a lecturer, nor do I work at a university (I left academia a good while a go), so I am hardly an example of someone who interacts with a class. Your attempt to argue that lecturers are windbags because I am a windbag is not a valid and sound syllogism. It is, however, rather revealing of your attitude.

“Unfettered free time in the stacks? Yes for me, but not for thee.”

I assume that you are not intending to imply you wish to deprive others of access to libraries, but rather that I do. Given that I have at no time ever said anything along those lines, your remarks are rather poorly directed. In fact, in my meatspace life, I have campaigned for my local library (non academic) multiple times in order to prevent it from being closed – I am, indeed, rather fond of them.

What I did say is that I am unconvinced someone studying aubject by themselves without access to sufficient facilities might find that their education doesn’t cover some essentials. That doesn’t mean libraries aren’t important – it means access to specialised facilities when needed (e.g. chemistry labs for chemistry students) is also rather important. I would hope you agree, or if not at least gave a reason rather than simply throwing out a straw-man argument and childish insults.

“Pretending that ‘online’ is just as good as ‘in the library’ from the same people who likely privilege their own unfettered access to libraries very highly is an insult to all.”

Once again, had you bothered to read what I said, I actually expressed considerable concern over “online only” education – I have yet to be convinced of its efficacy. I do not assert the counterpositive, merely point out there hasn’t been sufficient evidence presented to me yet to convince me online only education will be as good or superior to the systems we currently have in place (flawed though they may be in certain aspects). Apparently, in your mind that equals some bizarre hypocrisy on my part?

Personally, I believe that what is an insult to us all is not addressing the points someone has made, and arguing that they are holding a position they don’t in fact hold. Maybe you should recall the aphorism about better to keep quiet and be thought a fool, than talk and remove all doubt?

Also, I have exactly the same amount of access to a library as any other person with an easily obtained library card from their local council. No more, no less.

” Frankly disgusting.

Yes, your diatribe is frankly disgusting – vacuously free of any substantive reply to my actual points, and happily pretending that I advocate for things which I both never said and in fact do not advocate for. Try and do better next time.

“Oh, and btw, we’re going to need all those tuition fees paid in full!!”

Wow – I said “Personally I would prefer it if education was entirely free.” Apparently in your mind that equates to “pay up those tuition fees”. Are you really this bad at reading comprehension?


Since you seem to struggle to actually read what I wrote, I will boil this down to a nice summary for you.

I have never said libraries aren’t important – as it happens I think they are. Your rant is noted, but I do wonder why you felt it necessary to accuse me of a position I don’t hold.

You have said you don’t see any point to universities. I pointed out sever possible reasons someone might find them useful. You have not responded to those points.

You have been pretty rude and unpleasant in this post. Given how you have repeated yelled at people for far less insulting name calling, it would seem to indicate you’ve either changed your position or are engaging in massive hypocrisy.

Also, if you would consider addressing what I actually said, rather than things which I haven’t said and trying to ascribe them to me – that would be nice. There are few things which irritate me more than people misrepresenting me.

You’ll note that when I respond to people I quote the sentence I am responding to so it is perfectly clear – I don’t, for example, lob accusations at someone and hope they don’t notice I am not actually responding to anything they’ve said. Perhaps you might find that approach more fruitful?

And, just to make a final comment – frankly, if this poorly communicated, incoherent rambling consisting mostly of insults and unfounded accusations is supposed to represent the standard of discourse I am to expect from you, then I have little interest in hearing anything else you have to say.

Comments on this entry are closed.