We all know how I like to make predictions. I have another one for you. Please, don't feel slighted if you aren't one of the predicted ones, I'm going purely on what I think will happen. This in no way will effect the outcome or have any bearing on the official decision, this is just what I think will happen. Ready?
MIT '12 Admissions Bloggers:
Kelsey Kennedy
Chris Mills
Shannon Moran
Disagree? Prove me wrong.
27 comments:
Snively,
I'm not trying to regulate what you should and should not say on your personal blog. But I really think this post is out of line. Not only are you hugely slighting the other 25-plus awesome 2012 bloggers who are applying, there is absolutely no point in picking favorites, and that's what this post smacks of.
Sure, I like Chris and Shannon just as much as anyone else (I don't know Kelsey), but is it really necessary for you to proclaim on your blog that you think they are the only ones deserving of being the 2012 bloggers? Despite what you said, this post makes it appear as if you're part of the selection committee - and you simply aren't. And to be perfectly honest, I'm glad I'm not on the selection committee this year, because I simply don't know how I would choose between all the amazing blogs out there.
Bottom line: This post serves no purpose, and you should be ashamed of yourself for even putting it on the Internet.
i think you should link to the bloggers...because i ditto that i have no clue who kelsey is.
Straight up, you don't get to tell me what I should be ashamed of. You are not the "ultimate decider" who judges the morality of other people.
Second: If somebody reading this chooses not to believe me when I say "This in no way will effect the outcome or have any bearing on the official decision" then that's unfortunate. I'd like to think that anybody this post actually effects is capable of understanding that. I've been wrong in enough of my other predictions, enough for me to conclude that I really do have no bearing.
Third: this is the INTERNET! Half the entries in my blog serve no purpose, have you seen the internet lately?
Fourth: Again, sorry if you feel slighted, but think of it more as a challenge. Honestly, prove me wrong, go for it! I want you to do well.
Fifth: So when you say "I'm not trying to regulate what you should and should not say on your personal blog." you know that you spend the next three paragraphs in complete ignorance of that statement, right?
Sixth: Here's the URL to Kelsey's blog: Click
Seventh: And Chris and Shannon
Click and click
Seventh: This is not the MIT blogs, this is pure and straight up Internet, no-man's-land if you will. Not everything's pretty but it's all still there.
Thanks for your time, happy blogging all!
0) Before I go any further, I'd like to reiterate that my reaction to this post is completely unrelated to the three people Snively "picked." I'd have had the same reaction no matter who he listed - for me, it's the principle of this that matters.
1) You put yourself out there on this blog, that's opening yourself up to be judged. I'm expressing my opinion about this post, and I have a right to do that. If you can't handle it, delete it. (See also #5.)
2) Sure, perhaps you will be wrong. It's not up to me - I think there are many possible permutations of bloggers that would be excellent. But that doesn't minimize that you've, essentially, said to 25 other people - people, not just Internet personalities - that you don't think they're good enough to be an MIT blogger. And that is so arrogant I can't even find words for it.
3) If half of your entries serve no purpose, why do you post them? Furthermore, saying that "this is the Internet, why are you taking things so seriously?" is a fallacious argument, in no small part because you, yourself, have taken things on the Internet far too seriously.
4) All this, and all you have to say is, "Sorry if you feel slighted"? That's a pretty flimsy apology, my friend. Try telling that to the three people who have already emailed me to thank me for "sticking up for us on Snively's blog."
5) Untrue. I'm expressing my opinion, just like any other commenter on your blog can. If I were trying to regulate you, I would suggest that you take this post down. And I'm not going to suggest that - this is your space. Just because I think you're being extremely foolish doesn't give me a right to tell you what you can and cannot say.
6) Cool, thank you. I actually have read some of Kelsey's blog, now that I look at it again.
7) Did I ever say this was the MITblogs? No. I will say, though, that this really toes the line, because you're talking about MIT students who care deeply about the blogs. And fundamentally, just because "this is the Internet" doesn't what you say can't hurt people.
Paul...I don't know you but I don't think I would like you. Someone who has a personal blog should be able to post whatever they like. If you don't like it. Don't read it. Simple as that. Quit complaining and go find something else to do...you always seem to try and mold people into your way of seeing the world...so self-righteous. Don't be so rigid and pull the stick out of your _ _ _.
las1, I'm sorry you feel that way. As I said before, though, I'm not trying to tell Snively he doesn't have a right to say he what he said. I just think it was inappropriate and, fundamentally, hurtful.
Paul calm down!
I and many others of Mike's readers read this blog to hear his opinion. And in fact that's pretty much what a blog is, an opinion journal (fine its a bit more than that). This blog is actually my favourite on the net because of Snively's humour, experiences and point of view. Michael is an extremely hard worker and should not have to bear with comments like yours in the first place. You may not agree with his opinion but your not allowed to put him down like that.
I myself am going for omar but heck that's my opinion.
I have chatted with snively a few months ago and we were arguing about wether intelligence is related to work habits and at time we also had different opinions.
As a MIT prospect '15 myself I believe that Mike has every right to post whatever he wants and should not be told what to do by his own readers.
P.s. Excuse the bad grammar and spelling. I had to type this on my iPod touch.
Settle down you guys...
@las1: I don't think Paul's comment had anything to do with self-righteousness. Rather, I think he is very concerned because he understands the magnitude of the final decision.
For what it's worth, I'm done with this: I've said what I wanted to say. If it strikes you as inappropriate - again, I'm sorry, but I actually know Snively, so I was hoping he would take my comment seriously. This was in no way meant to be a personal attack on Michael; he's a good blogger and a fine person - this is just what I think about this particular incident. So let's just move on.
For God's sake Paul, your contradicting yourself!!!
Hey, I know Michael personally as well, and for much longer than you, Paul. I know him well enough to realize that Michael will be Michael, whether you like it or not. He does what he wants, not caring how people will react. You may find his actions/words harsh or brutal sometimes, but overall, he has great intentions and is one of the most respectable, hard-working men I know. He's a good person, and his love of making random predictions isn't enough to condemn him like this. Just give it a break, and let him be who he wants to be and say what he wants to say on his personal blog.
@ Michelle
I wouldn't say his reaction was random. It was his opinion.
i think paul is right. for once in my life.
i also like how you bitch about someone trying to "regulate" what you're saying and then you go and delete a comment.
don't even try to justify yourself.
:)
@curmudgeon
I didn't delete anything. That comment was deleted by the comment author, not me.
Congragulations Michael!
You are officialy MIT's most frequent blogger. Kudos to you!
wow i'm so glad i stumbled upon this... it's somehow very satisfying reading bloggers argue with each other (in public!)
Wow, no pressure or anything...
hahaha what a dickbag-ish post. you've outdone yourself.
Only 2 out of 3.
UR DOIN IT RONG!1!@!!
Statistically-speaking, you're right.
2 out of 3. Not bad...
:)
Meh, when I stumbled upon this after the application came out and I had created a blog specifically for it, I was really disappointed. I was kind of thinking the same thing as Paul, but now that I have proved you wrong, it feels even better! So thanks, I guess.
2 of 3!!! this is good number!!!good work michael!!!!!!!!!
@ Ahmed: Quality and quantity are not the only factors that come into play. Residence and potential activities are considered as well. Just sayin'.
Well I'm glad I've stumbled upon this clusterfuck now. Not sure if anyone's still reading it, but in case you are:
Paul, stop being such a huge fucking tool. Your pretentious attitude about EVERYTHING got old a looooong time ago.
Kelsey: Don't be a [redacted]. As one of the lucky few who actually sat on the selection committee, I can safely say that Ahmed was one of our clear top choices. Sorry you weren't picked, but putting it down to affirmative action is a pretty immature way to try to make yourself feel better.
Love and kisses,
Laura
Post a Comment