Why are you quoting me?

I never suggested as much. I was pointing out that it was ridiculous to open up this thread, in this sub-forum, and act upset that race was brought up as a topic for discussion.

Your reply makes perfect sense if you'd have quoted omni.

"Cultural issue" is one of the last pillars of rhetoric racists hide behind, so color me wary that one thing is really just a front for another. What are the cultural issues at play here ITT?

Richard Sherman is my favorite NFL player.

#TeamSherman

Sup carlo

I didn't like him at first when he seemed extremely ungracious in victory. He's kinda growing on me lately; by modern pro athlete standards, he seems like a pretty ok guy to me, overall.

Ali did something. He refused to fight an unjust war in Vietnam.

Has Sherman ever done anything? Or is it like, this guy is really good and blanketing receivers so let's hear what he has to say about politics? I don't know the thinking here.

Unrealistic standards much?

Yes

Yes

Insightful, upstanding, generous, role model

and hauled himself out of one of the biggest ****holes in america to graduate from one of the finest universities in america.

i would say that he has a perspective worth listening to.

I'm not saying he doesn't. But does he have the standing to criticize an activist movement on the grounds he does so? I love the way Sherman deals with the media. And I would like to hear about his personal experiences and struggles. That said, I'm not so sure we need to hear his views on everything, at least not at his age, when he has been deeply involved with football for most of his adult life. I'm glad he has an interest, but he hasn't built any credibility there.

Then again, how many dumbass football opinions does he have to hear from people who have never snapped a chin guard?

Oh, are you a Standford admissions officer or other spokesperson?

He graduated on time despite a tremendously time consuming (unpaid) athletic commitment and went back for a 5th year in order to pursue a masters. But let's take that away from consideration because he didn't have 15 years of SAT prep as do the white and Asian wizards who need Stanford on their passport to the giant rent trough called the financial sector.

I mean, have you ever considered that Stanford takes into account more than someone's SAT score? Would that be a major revelation to you?

Yeah, for example. Do you go into histrionics every time an exceptional at student is granted a scholarship? Do you go around looking for unofficial mentions of their SAT score? What about legacy admits? Do they have your panties in a bunch?

If one person grew up in hell and got a 990 and another student had every life advantage and got the average score for Standford then who is to say how you adjust to evaluate the person underneath? I went to a high school where virtually everyone went to college, and everyone was stressing the SATs. I know how their parents are. They start them in elementary getting them ready. And if they have a bad test day their parents pay money for private, dedicated SAT tutors. I personally knew a kid who raised his score almost 300 points that way. SATs lose meaning across different levels of prep.

Not to mention the rampant cheating that goes on by those who can afford to pay someone to take it for them. There is almost zero security to prevent this because wealthy people would probably freak out if this last ditch option wasn't there for their special precious. This has been exposed but not to the degree it goes on.

So yeah, the SATs don't mean ****. And if you don't believe it that's fine. Stanford admissions does.

Of course he has the standing to so, I have the standing to do so, you have the standing to do so. Who actually doesn't have the standing? Free speech and that kind of thing gives one the "standing" to do so.

Is the SAT culturally biased?

Why when Pokermentor gives any praise to Sherman do I hear in my head a "for a black guy" on the end of it?

Of course it is. And the bias accounts for approximately 400 points.

yup, and it was intentional. right from the very beginning, the goal was to identify the "smart" white males, due to the belief that racial mixing was causing the overall american intelligence to decline.

link

standardized test scores have become less and less relevant, both for college admissions and for scholarships, over the years.

FTR how are these 400 points distributed? I guess my question really amounts to is the math portion culturally biased?

I think you are conflating free speech and standing.

I suppose the problem I am concerned about kind of takes care of itself as people form opinions about how much credibility to give someone. Maybe I am feeling what conservatives feel when they listen to Hollywood liberals use their sizable media platforms to voice their views, like "I'm famous so I get to tell people what to think".

I just think it is debilitating for influence to be given to people who don't clearly know what they are talking about. Like think back to when newspapers were covering online poker developments/downfall. Remember all those journalists printing fantastic falsehoods about online poker and getting it all screwed up? It was as if they googled online poker, called up some anti-poker zealot, and proceeded to be the 'educator' for millions of readers on the subject of online poker. That just made my blood boil.

And so it's been that everyone hates the press. But now, with all these outlets for whoever can get followers/listeners, their are just more elements to hate more because they are even dumber and wronger than journalists. Justin Beiber might be literally the most listened to/read person in this country.

I think Bezos was genius to buy WAPO. The issue of credibility in the information age is perhaps vastly under appreciated.

http://www.seahawks.com/news/2015/12...n-nfl-man-year


https://www.facebook.com/ShermanBlanketCoverage/