Missing Tower

[Jenn]

I drove down to LA and back today for a lesson with my favorite
non-classical guitarist (Laurence Juber). I'm a lucky ducky. But I
still miss Tower Records every time I go down there.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" > wrote in message
...

>I drove down to LA and back today for a lesson with my favorite
> non-classical guitarist (Laurence Juber). I'm a lucky ducky. But I
> still miss Tower Records every time I go down there.

I thought there were so many great mail-order and internet sources for
LPs...

[Jenn]

In article
>,
MiNe 109 > wrote:

> In article >,
> "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
>
> > "Jenn" > wrote in message
> >
> > om
> > ...
> >
> > >I drove down to LA and back today for a lesson with my favorite
> > > non-classical guitarist (Laurence Juber). I'm a lucky ducky. But I
> > > still miss Tower Records every time I go down there.
> >
> > I thought there were so many great mail-order and internet sources for
> > LPs...
>
> Tower was more than lps. As for those great sources, they're nice, but
> none of them are hangouts where one can talk to knowledgeable clerks,
> examine new product and browse an immensely deep inventory. Special
> events such as in-store band promos and early release parties are also
> not quite the same online.

Exactly.

>
> That reminds me: the record convention is in town.
>
> http://www.austinrecords.com/index.shtml

Cool.

Hey, LJ is playing Austin on Friday. If you like stunning acoustic
guitar:
http://www.austinacousticseries.com/

>
> Stephen

[Jenn]

In article >,
"Arny Krueger" > wrote:

> "Jenn" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> >I drove down to LA and back today for a lesson with my favorite
> > non-classical guitarist (Laurence Juber). I'm a lucky ducky. But I
> > still miss Tower Records every time I go down there.
>
> I thought there were so many great mail-order and internet sources for
> LPs...

1. There are, but that's not the same as visiting a store.
2. As I written here many times, I buy MANY more CDs than LPs.
3. I haven't bought a LP at Tower or any other chain store since
sometime in the 80s, I guess.

[Jenn]

In article >,
"ScottW" > wrote:

> "Jenn" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> > In article >,
> > "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> >
> >> "Jenn" > wrote in message
> >> .
> >> com
> >> ...
> >>
> >> >I drove down to LA and back today for a lesson with my favorite
> >> > non-classical guitarist (Laurence Juber). I'm a lucky ducky. But I
> >> > still miss Tower Records every time I go down there.
> >>
> >> I thought there were so many great mail-order and internet sources for
> >> LPs...
> >
> > 1. There are, but that's not the same as visiting a store.
> > 2. As I written here many times, I buy MANY more CDs than LPs.
> > 3. I haven't bought a LP at Tower or any other chain store since
> > sometime in the 80s, I guess.
>
> I bought a bunch at a little shop in Carlsbad recently.
> Guy has a huge stock of trashed 45's.
> I have no idea what the market is there....DJs?
>
> When I asked him if he stocked any audiophile labels
> he said no, there was no demand for them.
> But I found quite a few in the bins...
> The owner was apparently...clueless.
>
> By far the best selection of vinyl I find in SD
> is at Stereo Unlimited, both new and used
> so they focus on more classical than pop/rock.

I agree, SU is at least tied for first of any place I've seen. The other
is the Analog Room in San Jose.

>
> Anyway..while in LA you should visit Amoeba Music
> in Hollywood.
> http://www.amoeba.com/store-locations/index.html

Yep, I'm there quite often, as I am at their Berkeley and Haight stores.

>
> I never saw a Tower close to this place.

The classical Tower stores on Sunset, in San Francisco, and at Lincoln
Center, NYC were even better in their heyday.

[Jenn]

In article
>,
MiNe 109 > wrote:

> In article
>
> et>,
> Jenn > wrote:
>
> > Hey, LJ is playing Austin on Friday. If you like stunning acoustic
> > guitar:
> > http://www.austinacousticseries.com/
>
> Tempting. Good site for guitar; I've seen Austin Classical Guitar
> Society events there.
>
> Stephen

If I weren't so busy right now (not to mention being under a subpoena!)
I'd come along with him.

[Jenn]

In article m>,
Bret Ludwig > wrote:

> Wasn't Juber with Mccartney on the Kampuchea album?

Yep.

>
> Wonder if that actually did any good....

[Jenn]

In article
>,
MiNe 109 > wrote:

> In article
>
> et>,
> Jenn > wrote:
>
> > In article
> > >,
> > MiNe 109 > wrote:
> >
> > > In article
> > >
> > > et>,
> > > Jenn > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hey, LJ is playing Austin on Friday. If you like stunning acoustic
> > > > guitar:
> > > > http://www.austinacousticseries.com/
> > >
> > > Tempting. Good site for guitar; I've seen Austin Classical Guitar
> > > Society events there.
>
> > If I weren't so busy right now (not to mention being under a subpoena!)
> > I'd come along with him.
>
> I imagine that's inconvenient!

Oh yeah! We're trying to fire someone. Ugh.

> Weather's beautiful this week.

Enjoy!

>
> Stephen

[Jenn]

In article >,
"ScottW" > wrote:

> "Jenn" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> > In article
> > >,
> > MiNe 109 > wrote:
> >
> >> In article
> >>
> >> et>,
> >> Jenn > wrote:
> >>
> >> > In article
> >> > >,
> >> > MiNe 109 > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > In article
> >> > > .
> >> > > n
> >> > > et>,
> >> > > Jenn > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Hey, LJ is playing Austin on Friday. If you like stunning acoustic
> >> > > > guitar:
> >> > > > http://www.austinacousticseries.com/
> >> > >
> >> > > Tempting. Good site for guitar; I've seen Austin Classical Guitar
> >> > > Society events there.
> >>
> >> > If I weren't so busy right now (not to mention being under a subpoena!)
> >> > I'd come along with him.
> >>
> >> I imagine that's inconvenient!
> >
> > Oh yeah! We're trying to fire someone. Ugh.
>
> The biggest problem in academia today....

FAR from the biggest problem. The biggest problems are 1. social
promotion brought on by gutless administrators and school boards who
won't hold high standards because they (generally) won't stand up to
parents; they take the easy road, thereby devaluing diplomas and
damaging the motivation of many students, and, 2. factors that schools
have no way to affect but that affect their ability to do their jobs,
i.e. drug abuse, weak parenting, etc.

> Takes a court case to fire anyone.

If you're referring to tenure, this case has nothing to do with that.
It's about a faculty contract negotiated by a far too powerful union
leadership (a leadership put in power by the difference of one vote),
and a too weak administration.

[George M. Middius]

Jenn said:

> > Takes a court case to fire anyone.

> If you're referring to tenure, this case has nothing to do with that.

Scottie just likes the idea of firing people. It's a revenge thing.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 28, 7:41 pm, "ScottW" > wrote:
> "Jenn" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > In article >,
> > "ScottW" > wrote:
>
> >> >> > If I weren't so busy right now (not to mention being under a subpoena!)
> >> >> > I'd come along with him.
>
> >> >> I imagine that's inconvenient!
>
> >> > Oh yeah! We're trying to fire someone. Ugh.
>
> >> The biggest problem in academia today....
>
> > FAR from the biggest problem. The biggest problems are 1. social
> > promotion brought on by gutless administrators and school boards
>
> Mixing collegiate administrators and school boards is a very broad
> brush.
>
> At least you appear to support the guts it took to rid Colorado
> of an obvious loser like Ward Churchill.
>
> > who
> > won't hold high standards because they (generally) won't stand up to
> > parents;
>
> Also a broad brush...most parents want their children held to high
> stds but IME most schools don't really want parent participation
> and do their utmost to erect obstacles against it.

That has not been my experience at all.

If that were the case, you prioritized your kids beneath your job. If
you had lost your job, most would probably have had no qualms about
moving, even across the country, to accept a new position if
circumstances dictated. I know of no conservative who would say
otherwise. I think we discussed the mining country of WV on this
topic.

In this case, you obviously live in an area with a crappy system. If
you couldn't change that circumstance then you should have moved to a
different area or enrolled your children in a private school.

It was so hard when my kids were in grade school to be involved. I
could go visit them in class, but I had to stop at the office first
and get a pass, for example. Talk about inconvenient! Yet I fought
through the system and managed to spend time with them.

Now that they are in high school, it's very hard *not* to be involved.
Between my daughters they are in: basketball, track and field,
danceline, math club, tennis, knowledge bowl (I don't know if this is
common around the country. It's kind of like "Jeopardy"), concert
band, debate and choir. I hope I got them all.

> > they take the easy road, thereby devaluing diplomas and
> > damaging the motivation of many students,
>
> HS students are far too young and generally clueless to
> give a crap about the value of a diploma.

BZZZZZT!

One of my daughters is in 10th grade. She is already planning which
college she wants to go to.

> That isn't what motivates. Peer pressure motivates students
> and parents alike. All this "privacy" on grades
> lets the losers hide among the crowds.

As does all of this "privacy" over income.

So how much do you make, 2pid? How much state and federal tax do you
pay? Got anything stashed for retirement? If yes, what and where?

> Kids openly rebel against state exams that mean nothing
> to them but is the basis for judging their school.

Why should kids care how their school is judged? Did you worry about
how your high school was judged? LOL!

That sounds like an "adult" issue to me.

> > and, 2. factors that schools
> > have no way to affect but that affect their ability to do their jobs,
> > i.e. drug abuse, weak parenting, etc.
>
> Schools do nothing to help parents, no timely feedback,
> no open communication, not held accoutable in any way
> for their kids.

Wow. Sounds like you've had a bad experience.

> Then teachers openly use this BS they half create
> as an excuse for accomplishing little.

Have you ever been to a classroom? It really doesn't sound like it.

> All I ever got from many teachers was excuses about their workload
> while I found them to be incompetent techno-phobes who
> can't apply the efficiency tools available to them, and could
> never succeed in industry where results count and continuous
> improvement in knowledge is an employee requirement.

See above.

> Many can't even manage a 10 min conf. sign-up sheet and
> stay on schedule or even in oder.

Did their room smell bad too? Geez.

> Conferences look like a groupie session around the back
> stage door. Who's next? Look at the sign-up sheet ya moron,
> that's who's next.
> Instead they hide behind their unions and treat kids like cattle
> in public schools...go through this corral and get branded.

2pid, do you ever wonder why the military treats people like cattle?
It's because they have to process large amounts of people and train
them on a standardized set of things. Do you know why drill sergeants
yell a lot, 2pid? It's because there isn't enough time to teach every
individual in a training platoon every lesson individually. They're
being efficient.

The main difference is that the military knows where these people go
at night. The drill sergeants are very involved in their daily lives.
They instill discipline, a strong sense of self-worth and confidence,
a strong sense of right or worng, and generally lead by example.

Why didn't you do this with your kids?

> I had so many teachers flat out tell me in 1 on 1 they can't hold
> half their kids to a std cuz they don't speak english...so the
> whole class suffers.

Perhaps a requirement for teachers should be fluency in Spanish in
your area then. I'll bet you can find teachers like that.

> >> Takes a court case to fire anyone.
>
> > If you're referring to tenure, this case has nothing to do with that.
> > It's about a faculty contract negotiated by a far too powerful union
> > leadership (a leadership put in power by the difference of one vote),
> > and a too weak administration.
>
> Politically active teachers unions are another reason the focus
> gets away from teaching.

It's always somebody else's fault, isn't it?

[George M. Middius]

MiNe 109 said:

> Tenure is a small problem at most, unless you have an agenda to remove
> profs with political views you disagree with.

That's only a side benefit for Scottie. His real ulterior motive is to get
back at all those elitist teachers who made him feel inferior because he
couldn't learn what they were teaching. Politics is all well and good, but
nothing trumps class hatred in ScottieWorld.

[Jenn]

In article >,
"ScottW" > wrote:

> "Jenn" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> > In article >,
> > "ScottW" > wrote:
> >
> >> >>
> >> >> > If I weren't so busy right now (not to mention being under a
> >> >> > subpoena!)
> >> >> > I'd come along with him.
> >> >>
> >> >> I imagine that's inconvenient!
> >> >
> >> > Oh yeah! We're trying to fire someone. Ugh.
> >>
> >> The biggest problem in academia today....
> >
> > FAR from the biggest problem. The biggest problems are 1. social
> > promotion brought on by gutless administrators and school boards
>
> Mixing collegiate administrators and school boards is a very broad
> brush.

You said "academia", which includes both.

>
> At least you appear to support the guts it took to rid Colorado
> of an obvious loser like Ward Churchill.
>
>
> > who
> > won't hold high standards because they (generally) won't stand up to
> > parents;
>
> Also a broad brush...most parents want their children held to high
> stds

Sure, up until they are held back in school. What will the neighbors
say, after all?

> but IME most schools don't really want parent participation
> and do their utmost to erect obstacles against it.

I've never seen evidence of that.

>
> > they take the easy road, thereby devaluing diplomas and
> > damaging the motivation of many students,
>
> HS students are far too young and generally clueless to
> give a crap about the value of a diploma.

You've got to be kidding. By 10th grade any student who is serious at
all is planning for college.

> That isn't what motivates. Peer pressure motivates students
> and parents alike. All this "privacy" on grades
> lets the losers hide among the crowds.

Please explain.

> Kids openly rebel against state exams that mean nothing
> to them but is the basis for judging their school.

Thanks to NCLB.

>
> > and, 2. factors that schools
> > have no way to affect but that affect their ability to do their jobs,
> > i.e. drug abuse, weak parenting, etc.
>
> Schools do nothing to help parents, no timely feedback,

For example?

> no open communication,

Explain.

> not held accoutable in any way
> for their kids.

What would you suggest?

> Then teachers openly use this BS they half create
> as an excuse for accomplishing little.
> All I ever got from many teachers was excuses about their workload
> while I found them to be incompetent techno-phobes who
> can't apply the efficiency tools available to them, and could
> never succeed in industry where results count and continuous
> improvement in knowledge is an employee requirement.
> Many can't even manage a 10 min conf. sign-up sheet and
> stay on schedule or even in oder.
> Conferences look like a groupie session around the back
> stage door. Who's next? Look at the sign-up sheet ya moron,
> that's who's next.
> Instead they hide behind their unions and treat kids like cattle
> in public schools...go through this corral and get branded.
>
> I had so many teachers flat out tell me in 1 on 1 they can't hold
> half their kids to a std cuz they don't speak english...so the
> whole class suffers.

Suggestions for a solution?

>
> >
> >> Takes a court case to fire anyone.
> >
> > If you're referring to tenure, this case has nothing to do with that.
> > It's about a faculty contract negotiated by a far too powerful union
> > leadership (a leadership put in power by the difference of one vote),
> > and a too weak administration.
>
> Politically active teachers unions are another reason the focus
> gets away from teaching.

Sometimes, sure. But the political activism is needed, obviously.

[George M. Middius]

MiNe 109 said:

> Tenure is a small problem at most, unless you have an agenda to remove
> profs with political views you disagree with.

That's only a side benefit for Scottie. His real ulterior motive is to get
back at all those elitist teachers who made him feel inferior because he
couldn't learn what they were teaching. Politics is all well and good, but
nothing trumps class hatred in ScottieWorld.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 29, 6:18 pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 29, 3:07 pm, MiNe 109 > wrote:

> > ScottW > wrote:
> > > > You've got to be kidding. By 10th grade any student who is serious
>
> > > That's about 2%...maybe less.
>
> > > > at
> > > > all is planning for college.
>
> > > > > That isn't what motivates. Peer pressure motivates students
> > > > > and parents alike. All this "privacy" on grades
> > > > > lets the losers hide among the crowds.
>
> > > > Please explain.
>
> > > Keeping kids grades and performance private lets the losers
> > > operate in anonymity to the public who cares...while they
> > > berate and abuse the 2% who do care.
>
> > No wonder you don't like your schools! 2%! You need one of these:
>
> >http://www.msdf.org/mediacenter/Release.aspx?ID=73
>
> > "In just one year, the number of AISD students applying to at least one
> > college has gone from 50 percent to 79 percent, and the total dollars
> > awarded in scholarships has increased by 55 percent."
>
> I just love it when bull**** programs have to use BS numbers to look
> good.
>
> Explain why is there not a single direct real measurement of student
> college enrollment on that entire page?

· A 25% increase in the percentage of seniors taking the SAT;

· 575% increase in parents taking part in school financial aid
workshops;

· 59% increase in the percentage of seniors applying to colleges,
universities, technical schools;

· 17% increase in the number of students winning scholarships;

· 55% increase in amount of scholarships awarded;

For a little over one million dollars.

Yes, I can see why you'd call it a "bull**** program."

Say, 2pid, where did you get your 2% college enrollment number? Or was
that "bull****"?

Here are some examples:

http://www.collegeboard.com/press/releases/35457.html

Fortunately, none of these high schools teachers have to worry about
speaking Spanish. LOL!

Here's another:

http://www.gatesfoundation.org/UnitedStates/Education/TransformingHighSchools/Announcements/Announce-060629.htm

When the Gates Foundation stops supporting these schools, one wonders
if the voters in the district would vote to support them through
higher levies.

Let me guess, 2pid. You are against increased levies for school
districts. You vote "no" every time, don't you. You're probably also
against the small amount that teachers can deduct from their taxes
since many have to pay for supplies out-of-pocket.

And then you wonder why your school disctrict sucks to the point of
only 2% going on to higher education.

Embrace diversity, 2pid, and open your 'mind'. There's a big wide
world out there, and not all of it is horrible. LOL!

[George M. Middius]

MiNe 109 said:

> > berate and abuse the 2% who do care.

> No wonder you don't like your schools! 2%!

The actual reason Scottie doesn't like school is because he was so bad at
it. Especially language arts.

[Jenn]

In article
>,
MiNe 109 > wrote:


> Here's Vista High:
>
> http://www.just4kids.org/en/california/school_data/chart.cfm?campus_id=37
> 684523738705

"Hail Alma Mater, we pledge our loyalty..."

[Jenn]

In article . com>,
ScottW > wrote:

> On Oct 29, 12:09 pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > In article >,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "ScottW" > wrote:
> > > "Jenn" > wrote in message
> > .
> > >net
> > > ...
> > > > In article >,
> > > > "ScottW" > wrote:
> >
> > > >> >> > If I weren't so busy right now (not to mention being under a
> > > >> >> > subpoena!)
> > > >> >> > I'd come along with him.
> >
> > > >> >> I imagine that's inconvenient!
> >
> > > >> > Oh yeah! We're trying to fire someone. Ugh.
> >
> > > >> The biggest problem in academia today....
> >
> > > > FAR from the biggest problem. The biggest problems are 1. social
> > > > promotion brought on by gutless administrators and school boards
> >
> > > Mixing collegiate administrators and school boards is a very broad
> > > brush.
> >
> > You said "academia", which includes both.
>
> Wiki disagrees:
> "Academia is a collective term for the scientific and cultural
> community engaged in higher education and research, taken as a whole."

Wiki...well, that settles that, I guess.

>
> >
> > > At least you appear to support the guts it took to rid Colorado
> > > of an obvious loser like Ward Churchill.
> >
> > > > who
> > > > won't hold high standards because they (generally) won't stand up to
> > > > parents;
> >
> > > Also a broad brush...most parents want their children held to high
> > > stds
> >
> > Sure, up until they are held back in school. What will the neighbors
> > say, after all?
>
> That's the problem...don't hide their lack of satisfactory
> performance
> until it's too late...publish them early and often.

So much to say... Let's try this one first. Do you mean publish the
performance of individuals?

>
> >
> > > but IME most schools don't really want parent participation
> > > and do their utmost to erect obstacles against it.
> >
> > I've never seen evidence of that.
>
> Do you have any kids?
>
> How about middle school village teaching where a kid has 3 teachers
> and a parent
> has to meet with all 3 at once for any conference....basically
> requiring about
> 3 weeks notice to get a meeting.
>
> >
> >
> >
> > > > they take the easy road, thereby devaluing diplomas and
> > > > damaging the motivation of many students,
> >
> > > HS students are far too young and generally clueless to
> > > give a crap about the value of a diploma.
> >
> > You've got to be kidding. By 10th grade any student who is serious
>
> That's about 2%...maybe less.
>
> > at
> > all is planning for college.
> >
> > > That isn't what motivates. Peer pressure motivates students
> > > and parents alike. All this "privacy" on grades
> > > lets the losers hide among the crowds.
> >
> > Please explain.
>
> Keeping kids grades and performance private lets the losers
> operate in anonymity to the public who cares...while they
> berate and abuse the 2% who do care.
>
> >
> > > Kids openly rebel against state exams that mean nothing
> > > to them but is the basis for judging their school.
> >
> > Thanks to NCLB.
>
> Lol...BDS invades academia.
>
> >
> >
> >
> > > > and, 2. factors that schools
> > > > have no way to affect but that affect their ability to do their jobs,
> > > > i.e. drug abuse, weak parenting, etc.
> >
> > > Schools do nothing to help parents, no timely feedback,
> >
> > For example?
>
> For example web pages that allow for access to test scores,
> homework, or just a class syllabus exist but teachers don't have to
> use them. All they have to do is the midsemester progress report.
>
> >
> > > no open communication,
> >
> > Explain.
> >
> > > not held accoutable in any way
> > > for their kids.
> >
> > What would you suggest?
>
> Total open records.
>
> Schools publish kids grades, states publish kids and schools overall
> scores,
> parents of underperforming kids are called in to explain WTF they're
> gonna do about.
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Then teachers openly use this BS they half create
> > > as an excuse for accomplishing little.
> > > All I ever got from many teachers was excuses about their workload
> > > while I found them to be incompetent techno-phobes who
> > > can't apply the efficiency tools available to them, and could
> > > never succeed in industry where results count and continuous
> > > improvement in knowledge is an employee requirement.
> > > Many can't even manage a 10 min conf. sign-up sheet and
> > > stay on schedule or even in oder.
> > > Conferences look like a groupie session around the back
> > > stage door. Who's next? Look at the sign-up sheet ya moron,
> > > that's who's next.
> > > Instead they hide behind their unions and treat kids like cattle
> > > in public schools...go through this corral and get branded.
> >
> > > I had so many teachers flat out tell me in 1 on 1 they can't hold
> > > half their kids to a std cuz they don't speak english...so the
> > > whole class suffers.
> >
> > Suggestions for a solution?
>
> Vouchers
>
> >
> >
> >
> > > >> Takes a court case to fire anyone.
> >
> > > > If you're referring to tenure, this case has nothing to do with that.
> > > > It's about a faculty contract negotiated by a far too powerful union
> > > > leadership (a leadership put in power by the difference of one vote),
> > > > and a too weak administration.
> >
> > > Politically active teachers unions are another reason the focus
> > > gets away from teaching.
> >
> > Sometimes, sure. But the political activism is needed, obviously.
>
> Not it's not obviously needed. Just like we don't need doctors
> deciding only doctors can issue prescriptions.
>
> ScottW

[Jenn]

In article >,
"ScottW" > wrote:

> "Jenn" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> >>
> >> That's the problem...don't hide their lack of satisfactory
> >> performance
> >> until it's too late...publish them early and often.
> >
> > So much to say... Let's try this one first. Do you mean publish the
> > performance of individuals?
>
> Yes... It's been tried with good results, unfortunately the link
> to the old article I read no longer works.

If I remember correctly, making individual test scores etc. is illegal,
at least in this state. For example, remember the common college
practice of posting test scores on a prof's door so one can run by and
see how you did? You can't so that anymore, unless you assign private
numbers to substitute for names.

>
> Anyway...IME kids are very responsive to peer pressure,

You mean from the "2% or less" who are serious?

> unfortunately all they experience is generally negative.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 31, 11:02 am, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 31, 7:53 am, Jenn > wrote:

> > In article >,
>
> > "ScottW" > wrote:
> > > "Jenn" > wrote in message
> >
> > > ...
>
> > > >> That's the problem...don't hide their lack of satisfactory
> > > >> performance
> > > >> until it's too late...publish them early and often.
>
> > > > So much to say... Let's try this one first. Do you mean publish the
> > > > performance of individuals?
>
> > > Yes... It's been tried with good results, unfortunately the link
> > > to the old article I read no longer works.
>
> > If I remember correctly, making individual test scores etc. is illegal,
> > at least in this state.
>
> Yeah...turns out that is really dumb.
> I think someone in academia who has devoted their life to
> education should undertake a crusade to fix that.
>
> > For example, remember the common college
> > practice of posting test scores on a prof's door so one can run by and
> > see how you did? You can't so that anymore, unless you assign private
> > numbers to substitute for names.
>
> > > Anyway...IME kids are very responsive to peer pressure,
>
> > You mean from the "2% or less" who are serious?
>
> Nope, all kids are responsive to peer pressure.

You assume that peer pressure is a guaranteed positive influence. It
is just as likely that the smart kids would be beaten up by the dumb
ones for showing them up and peer-pressured into joining a gang. Drugs
and prostitution would surely follow.

Here's the dilemma you create for yourself, 2pid: it all starts at
home. Parents read to the kids, challenge them, take them to
interesting cultural things like museums and zoos, and even watch
their TV shows with them. They get involved with their lives. They
talk to them about challenges that they face.

Now, since many parents are utterly failing at this (go to any grocery
store, WalMart, etc. and watch. I would wager that within a few
minutes you'll see someone cuff their kid, berate them, belittle them
or otherwise display poor parenting skills), everybody screams at the
school systems. It can't be, after all, *MY* fault that my child is
unmotivated and doing poorly in school. I'm the best parent ever!

So on the one hand, I'm guessing you want less government at each and
every level possible. OTOH, you want the schools to nanny the kids,
and I'm pretty sure you vote against paying for it each and every time
a levy is voted on.

These are adult-level issues concerning parenting IMO, *not* a failure
of all school systems. Are there bad systems out there? I'm sure there
are. I'll place a side bet that a disproportionate amount of the bad
ones are in areas on the lower end of the economic scale.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 31, 12:37 pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 31, 9:34 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Oct 31, 11:02 am, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 31, 7:53 am, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > In article >,
>
> > > > "ScottW" > wrote:
> > > > > "Jenn" > wrote in message
> > > >
> > > > > ...
>
> > > > > >> That's the problem...don't hide their lack of satisfactory
> > > > > >> performance
> > > > > >> until it's too late...publish them early and often.
>
> > > > > > So much to say... Let's try this one first. Do you mean publish the
> > > > > > performance of individuals?
>
> > > > > Yes... It's been tried with good results, unfortunately the link
> > > > > to the old article I read no longer works.
>
> > > > If I remember correctly, making individual test scores etc. is illegal,
> > > > at least in this state.
>
> > > Yeah...turns out that is really dumb.
> > > I think someone in academia who has devoted their life to
> > > education should undertake a crusade to fix that.
>
> > > > For example, remember the common college
> > > > practice of posting test scores on a prof's door so one can run by and
> > > > see how you did? You can't so that anymore, unless you assign private
> > > > numbers to substitute for names.
>
> > > > > Anyway...IME kids are very responsive to peer pressure,
>
> > > > You mean from the "2% or less" who are serious?
>
> > > Nope, all kids are responsive to peer pressure.
>
> > You assume that peer pressure is a guaranteed positive influence.
>
> This is about the 4th time in the past week you've demonstrated total
> and complete comprehension failure of what was clearly stated.
> Are you off your meds again? Or has the witching season got you
> troubled?

As I see it, your argument is that publishing grades will create peer
pressure to improve them. You 'think' it's an answer to improving the
failing failing grades of students.

I just reread the thread and I still come to the same conclusion about
your meaning. However, knowing the severity of your communcation
disorder, I can fully appreciate the fact that you often either say
what you don't mean, or you don't know what you are saying. Why don't
you spell out exactly what you meant, then?

As an alternative, there is always the possibility that you didn't
understand the response...

[George M. Middius]

The Idiot yapped:

> > As I see it, your argument is that publishing grades will create peer
> > pressure to improve them. You 'think' it's an answer to improving the
> > failing failing grades of students.

> It's part of an effort to increase parent involvement

Beneath all this blah-blah-blah about grades, are you pleading for pity
because you're claiming your own dismal performance in grade school was
the result of adverse "peer pressure"? Speaking for most (if not all) of
us, that's much less pity-worthy than the obvious conclusion we've all
drawn -- namely, you're mentally defective.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 31, 1:21 pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 31, 10:51 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Oct 31, 12:37 pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 31, 9:34 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > On Oct 31, 11:02 am, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Oct 31, 7:53 am, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > > > In article >,
>
> > > > > > "ScottW" > wrote:
> > > > > > > "Jenn" > wrote in message
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > ...
>
> > > > > > > >> That's the problem...don't hide their lack of satisfactory
> > > > > > > >> performance
> > > > > > > >> until it's too late...publish them early and often.
>
> > > > > > > > So much to say... Let's try this one first. Do you mean publish the
> > > > > > > > performance of individuals?
>
> > > > > > > Yes... It's been tried with good results, unfortunately the link
> > > > > > > to the old article I read no longer works.
>
> > > > > > If I remember correctly, making individual test scores etc. is illegal,
> > > > > > at least in this state.
>
> > > > > Yeah...turns out that is really dumb.
> > > > > I think someone in academia who has devoted their life to
> > > > > education should undertake a crusade to fix that.
>
> > > > > > For example, remember the common college
> > > > > > practice of posting test scores on a prof's door so one can run by and
> > > > > > see how you did? You can't so that anymore, unless you assign private
> > > > > > numbers to substitute for names.
>
> > > > > > > Anyway...IME kids are very responsive to peer pressure,
>
> > > > > > You mean from the "2% or less" who are serious?
>
> > > > > Nope, all kids are responsive to peer pressure.
>
> > > > You assume that peer pressure is a guaranteed positive influence.
>
> > > This is about the 4th time in the past week you've demonstrated total
> > > and complete comprehension failure of what was clearly stated.
> > > Are you off your meds again? Or has the witching season got you
> > > troubled?
>
> > As I see it, your argument is that publishing grades will create peer
> > pressure to improve them. You 'think' it's an answer to improving the
> > failing failing grades of students.
>
> It's part of an effort to increase parent involvement (who also can
> benefit from peer pressure) and change the balance of peer pressure
> to positive encouraging effort to succeed rather the usual teenage
> wannabe gangster rebellious crap that discourages and ridicules
> good performance.

So your argument is that posting children's grades on the wall of the
school, or on the professor's door, with the student's names attached
publicly to their grades will lead to more parental involvement and
will also develop positive peer pressure (both parent-to-student and
parent-to-parent) to improve grades.

Or did I miss your 'point' again.

And all of that results from a simple invasion of privacy. I think you
should lead by example, 2pid, like we do in the Army. I think you
should post all of your secondary and post-secondary grades here. If
they are deemed inadequate, we will apply peer pressure on you to go
back and retake those courses, striving to your utmost to improve
them. Maybe this time through school, you'll actually learn something.

Say, 2pid, do they still have stocks in California? If we go back to
putting people in stocks for punishment, we can not only reduce crime
through public humiliation and peer pressure, but conservatives could
also vent their frustration in other stupid ways, like yelling and
throwing rocks and **** at them.

> > I just reread the thread and I still come to the same conclusion
>
> What do you think I meant with this post
> "Anyway...IME kids are very responsive to peer pressure,
> unfortunately all they experience is generally negative. "
>
> You have my sympathy....and an F for this lesson.

Maybe that's the problem: people like you are doing the grading. It is
now quite obvious that you simply did not understand the response. You
could have just said so and saved yourself from giving yourself a
public golden shower... again.

LMAO!

[Jenn]

In article m>,
ScottW > wrote:

> On Oct 31, 7:53 am, Jenn > wrote:
> > In article >,
> >
> > "ScottW" > wrote:
> > > "Jenn" > wrote in message
> > .
> > >net
> > > ...
> >
> > > >> That's the problem...don't hide their lack of satisfactory
> > > >> performance
> > > >> until it's too late...publish them early and often.
> >
> > > > So much to say... Let's try this one first. Do you mean publish the
> > > > performance of individuals?
> >
> > > Yes... It's been tried with good results, unfortunately the link
> > > to the old article I read no longer works.
> >
> > If I remember correctly, making individual test scores etc. is illegal,
> > at least in this state.
>
> Yeah...turns out that is really dumb.
> I think someone in academia who has devoted their life to
> education should undertake a crusade to fix that.

WAY down on the priority list of things to fix. So anyway, we can now
agree that not publicly posting grades is not the fault of the school
system.

>
> > For example, remember the common college
> > practice of posting test scores on a prof's door so one can run by and
> > see how you did? You can't do that anymore, unless you assign private
> > numbers to substitute for names.
> >
> >
> >
> > > Anyway...IME kids are very responsive to peer pressure,
> >
> > You mean from the "2% or less" who are serious?
>
> Nope, all kids are responsive to peer pressure.

But "only 2%" are serious. So what kind of peer pressure do the other
98% give?

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 31, 4:59 pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 31, 12:56 pm, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Oct 31, 1:21 pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 31, 10:51 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > On Oct 31, 12:37 pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Oct 31, 9:34 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > On Oct 31, 11:02 am, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Oct 31, 7:53 am, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > > > > > In article >,
>
> > > > > > > > "ScottW" > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > "Jenn" > wrote in message
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > ...
>
> > > > > > > > > >> That's the problem...don't hide their lack of satisfactory
> > > > > > > > > >> performance
> > > > > > > > > >> until it's too late...publish them early and often.
>
> > > > > > > > > > So much to say... Let's try this one first. Do you mean publish the
> > > > > > > > > > performance of individuals?
>
> > > > > > > > > Yes... It's been tried with good results, unfortunately the link
> > > > > > > > > to the old article I read no longer works.
>
> > > > > > > > If I remember correctly, making individual test scores etc. is illegal,
> > > > > > > > at least in this state.
>
> > > > > > > Yeah...turns out that is really dumb.
> > > > > > > I think someone in academia who has devoted their life to
> > > > > > > education should undertake a crusade to fix that.
>
> > > > > > > > For example, remember the common college
> > > > > > > > practice of posting test scores on a prof's door so one can run by and
> > > > > > > > see how you did? You can't so that anymore, unless you assign private
> > > > > > > > numbers to substitute for names.
>
> > > > > > > > > Anyway...IME kids are very responsive to peer pressure,
>
> > > > > > > > You mean from the "2% or less" who are serious?
>
> > > > > > > Nope, all kids are responsive to peer pressure.
>
> > > > > > You assume that peer pressure is a guaranteed positive influence.
>
> > > > > This is about the 4th time in the past week you've demonstrated total
> > > > > and complete comprehension failure of what was clearly stated.
> > > > > Are you off your meds again? Or has the witching season got you
> > > > > troubled?
>
> > > > As I see it, your argument is that publishing grades will create peer
> > > > pressure to improve them. You 'think' it's an answer to improving the
> > > > failing failing grades of students.
>
> > > It's part of an effort to increase parent involvement (who also can
> > > benefit from peer pressure) and change the balance of peer pressure
> > > to positive encouraging effort to succeed rather the usual teenage
> > > wannabe gangster rebellious crap that discourages and ridicules
> > > good performance.
>
> > So your argument is that posting children's grades on the wall of the
> > school, or on the professor's door, with the student's names attached
> > publicly to their grades will lead to more parental involvement and
> > will also develop positive peer pressure (both parent-to-student and
> > parent-to-parent) to improve grades.
>
> > Or did I miss your 'point' again.
>
> 3rd try is the charm for you.

That's the exact same argument I replied to, imbecile. LOL!

I got it the first time, except the part about how posting grades in
schools will somehow create peer pressure among parents.

Gosh, 2pid, I wish you could find that one article in that one blog
that doesn't open any more that quoted something about this subject
from that one guy who seems to know a lot about it so I could examine
your 'proof' that supports such a stupid idea.

> > And all of that results from a simple invasion of privacy.
>
> A simple return to a time when people were accountable and
> subjected to a community std of socially accepted norms.
>
> > I think you
> > should lead by example, 2pid, like we do in the Army.
>
> We?....no one followed you.

Um, very, very close, 2pid, but the correct answer is in the other 50%
of possible answers.

By "we" I meant, of course, those of us who actually served the
nation, 2pid. That wasn't addressed to you.

> You're the only RIP'er I know.

And you're the only guy I know who actively looks for ass-lickings.
Where do we go from here? (And no, I won't.)

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 31, 5:02 pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Oct 31, 2:53 pm, Jenn > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article m>,
>
> > ScottW > wrote:
> > > On Oct 31, 7:53 am, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > In article >,
>
> > > > "ScottW" > wrote:
> > > > > "Jenn" > wrote in message
> > > > .
> > > > >net
> > > > > ...
>
> > > > > >> That's the problem...don't hide their lack of satisfactory
> > > > > >> performance
> > > > > >> until it's too late...publish them early and often.
>
> > > > > > So much to say... Let's try this one first. Do you mean publish the
> > > > > > performance of individuals?
>
> > > > > Yes... It's been tried with good results, unfortunately the link
> > > > > to the old article I read no longer works.
>
> > > > If I remember correctly, making individual test scores etc. is illegal,
> > > > at least in this state.
>
> > > Yeah...turns out that is really dumb.
> > > I think someone in academia who has devoted their life to
> > > education should undertake a crusade to fix that.
>
> > WAY down on the priority list of things to fix. So anyway, we can now
> > agree that not publicly posting grades is not the fault of the school
> > system.
>
> > > > For example, remember the common college
> > > > practice of posting test scores on a prof's door so one can run by and
> > > > see how you did? You can't do that anymore, unless you assign private
> > > > numbers to substitute for names.
>
> > > > > Anyway...IME kids are very responsive to peer pressure,
>
> > > > You mean from the "2% or less" who are serious?
>
> > > Nope, all kids are responsive to peer pressure.
>
> > But "only 2%" are serious.
>
> Yeah...only 2% can endure in the face of all that negative
> peer pressure.
>
> > So what kind of peer pressure do the other
> > 98% give?
>
> Sex, drugs, and rock & roll....

Time to bring 2pid back to reality...

The only thing I see close to 2% is the 1.6% of HS students who
graduate before age 17.

http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/education/cps2006/tab01a-01.xls

There are only three times I see you go OT: when you're making **** up
with nothing to back it, or when you look at some data and invariably
misunderstand it, or when you are acting stupid for no other apparent
reason.

Any of those is possible here.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Oct 31, 6:59 pm, "ScottW" > wrote:
> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in oglegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 31, 4:59 pm, ScottW > wrote:
> >> On Oct 31, 12:56 pm, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > On Oct 31, 1:21 pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> >> > > On Oct 31, 10:51 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
>
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > > On Oct 31, 12:37 pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> >> > > > > On Oct 31, 9:34 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
>
> >> > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > On Oct 31, 11:02 am, ScottW > wrote:
>
> >> > > > > > > On Oct 31, 7:53 am, Jenn >
> >> > > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > In article >,
>
> >> > > > > > > > "ScottW" > wrote:
> >> > > > > > > > > "Jenn" > wrote in message
> >> > > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > > > ...
>
> >> > > > > > > > > >> That's the problem...don't hide their lack of
> >> > > > > > > > > >> satisfactory
> >> > > > > > > > > >> performance
> >> > > > > > > > > >> until it's too late...publish them early and often.
>
> >> > > > > > > > > > So much to say... Let's try this one first. Do you mean
> >> > > > > > > > > > publish the
> >> > > > > > > > > > performance of individuals?
>
> >> > > > > > > > > Yes... It's been tried with good results, unfortunately the
> >> > > > > > > > > link
> >> > > > > > > > > to the old article I read no longer works.
>
> >> > > > > > > > If I remember correctly, making individual test scores etc. is
> >> > > > > > > > illegal,
> >> > > > > > > > at least in this state.
>
> >> > > > > > > Yeah...turns out that is really dumb.
> >> > > > > > > I think someone in academia who has devoted their life to
> >> > > > > > > education should undertake a crusade to fix that.
>
> >> > > > > > > > For example, remember the common college
> >> > > > > > > > practice of posting test scores on a prof's door so one can run
> >> > > > > > > > by and
> >> > > > > > > > see how you did? You can't so that anymore, unless you assign
> >> > > > > > > > private
> >> > > > > > > > numbers to substitute for names.
>
> >> > > > > > > > > Anyway...IME kids are very responsive to peer pressure,
>
> >> > > > > > > > You mean from the "2% or less" who are serious?
>
> >> > > > > > > Nope, all kids are responsive to peer pressure.
>
> >> > > > > > You assume that peer pressure is a guaranteed positive influence.
>
> >> > > > > This is about the 4th time in the past week you've demonstrated total
> >> > > > > and complete comprehension failure of what was clearly stated.
> >> > > > > Are you off your meds again? Or has the witching season got you
> >> > > > > troubled?
>
> >> > > > As I see it, your argument is that publishing grades will create peer
> >> > > > pressure to improve them. You 'think' it's an answer to improving the
> >> > > > failing failing grades of students.
>
> >> > > It's part of an effort to increase parent involvement (who also can
> >> > > benefit from peer pressure) and change the balance of peer pressure
> >> > > to positive encouraging effort to succeed rather the usual teenage
> >> > > wannabe gangster rebellious crap that discourages and ridicules
> >> > > good performance.
>
> >> > So your argument is that posting children's grades on the wall of the
> >> > school, or on the professor's door, with the student's names attached
> >> > publicly to their grades will lead to more parental involvement and
> >> > will also develop positive peer pressure (both parent-to-student and
> >> > parent-to-parent) to improve grades.
>
> >> > Or did I miss your 'point' again.
>
> >> 3rd try is the charm for you.
>
> > That's the exact same argument I replied to, imbecile. LOL!
>
> Wrong again. I'll let you do the homework this time.

No need to. I already know what I wrote, imbecile.

> I have to go trick or treating with the family.

You're finally hanging out with your mental peers.

This is a big step forward. Good luck.

[Jenn]

In article . com>,
ScottW > wrote:

> On Oct 31, 2:53 pm, Jenn > wrote:
> > In article m>,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ScottW > wrote:
> > > On Oct 31, 7:53 am, Jenn > wrote:
> > > > In article >,
> >
> > > > "ScottW" > wrote:
> > > > > "Jenn" > wrote in message
> > > >
> > > > >igy.
> > > > >net
> > > > > ...
> >
> > > > > >> That's the problem...don't hide their lack of satisfactory
> > > > > >> performance
> > > > > >> until it's too late...publish them early and often.
> >
> > > > > > So much to say... Let's try this one first. Do you mean publish
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > performance of individuals?
> >
> > > > > Yes... It's been tried with good results, unfortunately the link
> > > > > to the old article I read no longer works.
> >
> > > > If I remember correctly, making individual test scores etc. is illegal,
> > > > at least in this state.
> >
> > > Yeah...turns out that is really dumb.
> > > I think someone in academia who has devoted their life to
> > > education should undertake a crusade to fix that.
> >
> > WAY down on the priority list of things to fix. So anyway, we can now
> > agree that not publicly posting grades is not the fault of the school
> > system.
> >
> >
> >
> > > > For example, remember the common college
> > > > practice of posting test scores on a prof's door so one can run by and
> > > > see how you did? You can't do that anymore, unless you assign private
> > > > numbers to substitute for names.
> >
> > > > > Anyway...IME kids are very responsive to peer pressure,
> >
> > > > You mean from the "2% or less" who are serious?
> >
> > > Nope, all kids are responsive to peer pressure.
> >
> > But "only 2%" are serious.
>
> Yeah...only 2% can endure in the face of all that negative
> peer pressure.

While I still disagree with your 2% figure, how does your proposal to
make public the grades of individuals (again, a decision of the courts,
not of the schools) help?

>
> > So what kind of peer pressure do the other
> > 98% give?
>
> Sex, drugs, and rock & roll....

There you go.

[Jenn]

In article m>,
ScottW > wrote:

> On Oct 31, 12:56 pm, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> > wrote:
> > On Oct 31, 1:21 pm, ScottW > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Oct 31, 10:51 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > On Oct 31, 12:37 pm, ScottW > wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Oct 31, 9:34 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > On Oct 31, 11:02 am, ScottW > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > On Oct 31, 7:53 am, Jenn >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > In article >,
> >
> > > > > > > > "ScottW" > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > "Jenn" > wrote in message
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >ews.prodigy.net
> > > > > > > > > ...
> >
> > > > > > > > > >> That's the problem...don't hide their lack of
> > > > > > > > > >> satisfactory
> > > > > > > > > >> performance
> > > > > > > > > >> until it's too late...publish them early and often.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > So much to say... Let's try this one first. Do you mean
> > > > > > > > > > publish the
> > > > > > > > > > performance of individuals?
> >
> > > > > > > > > Yes... It's been tried with good results, unfortunately the
> > > > > > > > > link
> > > > > > > > > to the old article I read no longer works.
> >
> > > > > > > > If I remember correctly, making individual test scores etc. is
> > > > > > > > illegal,
> > > > > > > > at least in this state.
> >
> > > > > > > Yeah...turns out that is really dumb.
> > > > > > > I think someone in academia who has devoted their life to
> > > > > > > education should undertake a crusade to fix that.
> >
> > > > > > > > For example, remember the common college
> > > > > > > > practice of posting test scores on a prof's door so one can run
> > > > > > > > by and
> > > > > > > > see how you did? You can't so that anymore, unless you assign
> > > > > > > > private
> > > > > > > > numbers to substitute for names.
> >
> > > > > > > > > Anyway...IME kids are very responsive to peer pressure,
> >
> > > > > > > > You mean from the "2% or less" who are serious?
> >
> > > > > > > Nope, all kids are responsive to peer pressure.
> >
> > > > > > You assume that peer pressure is a guaranteed positive influence.
> >
> > > > > This is about the 4th time in the past week you've demonstrated total
> > > > > and complete comprehension failure of what was clearly stated.
> > > > > Are you off your meds again? Or has the witching season got you
> > > > > troubled?
> >
> > > > As I see it, your argument is that publishing grades will create peer
> > > > pressure to improve them. You 'think' it's an answer to improving the
> > > > failing failing grades of students.
> >
> > > It's part of an effort to increase parent involvement (who also can
> > > benefit from peer pressure) and change the balance of peer pressure
> > > to positive encouraging effort to succeed rather the usual teenage
> > > wannabe gangster rebellious crap that discourages and ridicules
> > > good performance.
> >
> > So your argument is that posting children's grades on the wall of the
> > school, or on the professor's door, with the student's names attached
> > publicly to their grades will lead to more parental involvement and
> > will also develop positive peer pressure (both parent-to-student and
> > parent-to-parent) to improve grades.
> >
> > Or did I miss your 'point' again.
>
> 3rd try is the charm for you.
>
> >
> > And all of that results from a simple invasion of privacy.
>
> A simple return to a time when people were accountable and
> subjected to a community std of socially accepted norms.

I would agree with your goal, but not your method. Making grades public
is not going to have the desired effect. It's throwing a glass of water
on a raging fire.

[Clyde Slick]

On 1 Noi, 11:10, Jenn > wrote:
> In article m>,
>
>
>
> ScottW > wrote:
> > On Oct 31, 12:56 pm, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> > > wrote:
> > > On Oct 31, 1:21 pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > > On Oct 31, 10:51 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > On Oct 31, 12:37 pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Oct 31, 9:34 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > On Oct 31, 11:02 am, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On Oct 31, 7:53 am, Jenn >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > In article >,
>
> > > > > > > > > "ScottW" > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > "Jenn" > wrote in message
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >ews.prodigy.net
> > > > > > > > > > ...
>
> > > > > > > > > > >> That's the problem...don't hide their lack of
> > > > > > > > > > >> satisfactory
> > > > > > > > > > >> performance
> > > > > > > > > > >> until it's too late...publish them early and often.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > So much to say... Let's try this one first. Do you mean
> > > > > > > > > > > publish the
> > > > > > > > > > > performance of individuals?
>
> > > > > > > > > > Yes... It's been tried with good results, unfortunately the
> > > > > > > > > > link
> > > > > > > > > > to the old article I read no longer works.
>
> > > > > > > > > If I remember correctly, making individual test scores etc. is
> > > > > > > > > illegal,
> > > > > > > > > at least in this state.
>
> > > > > > > > Yeah...turns out that is really dumb.
> > > > > > > > I think someone in academia who has devoted their life to
> > > > > > > > education should undertake a crusade to fix that.
>
> > > > > > > > > For example, remember the common college
> > > > > > > > > practice of posting test scores on a prof's door so one can run
> > > > > > > > > by and
> > > > > > > > > see how you did? You can't so that anymore, unless you assign
> > > > > > > > > private
> > > > > > > > > numbers to substitute for names.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Anyway...IME kids are very responsive to peer pressure,
>
> > > > > > > > > You mean from the "2% or less" who are serious?
>
> > > > > > > > Nope, all kids are responsive to peer pressure.
>
> > > > > > > You assume that peer pressure is a guaranteed positive influence.
>
> > > > > > This is about the 4th time in the past week you've demonstrated total
> > > > > > and complete comprehension failure of what was clearly stated.
> > > > > > Are you off your meds again? Or has the witching season got you
> > > > > > troubled?
>
> > > > > As I see it, your argument is that publishing grades will create peer
> > > > > pressure to improve them. You 'think' it's an answer to improving the
> > > > > failing failing grades of students.
>
> > > > It's part of an effort to increase parent involvement (who also can
> > > > benefit from peer pressure) and change the balance of peer pressure
> > > > to positive encouraging effort to succeed rather the usual teenage
> > > > wannabe gangster rebellious crap that discourages and ridicules
> > > > good performance.
>
> > > So your argument is that posting children's grades on the wall of the
> > > school, or on the professor's door, with the student's names attached
> > > publicly to their grades will lead to more parental involvement and
> > > will also develop positive peer pressure (both parent-to-student and
> > > parent-to-parent) to improve grades.
>
> > > Or did I miss your 'point' again.
>
> > 3rd try is the charm for you.
>
> > > And all of that results from a simple invasion of privacy.
>
> > A simple return to a time when people were accountable and
> > subjected to a community std of socially accepted norms.
>
> I would agree with your goal, but not your method. Making grades public
> is not going to have the desired effect. It's throwing a glass of water
> on a raging fire.

publish the grades and kids will be subject to ridicule, No not the
ones failing, the ones with A's !!

[George M. Middius]

Clyde Slick said:

> publish the grades and kids will be subject to ridicule, No not the
> ones failing, the ones with A's !!

Tell your comrades in arms you're gay, and they'll hate and fear you.

[Clyde Slick]

On 1 Noi, 16:46, George M. Middius <cmndr _ george @ comcast . net>
wrote:
> Clyde Slick said:
>
> > publish the grades and kids will be subject to ridicule, No not the
> > ones failing, the ones with A's !!
>
> Tell your comrades in arms you're gay, and they'll hate and fear you.

you must hate and fear being hated and feared.

[Bill Riel]

In article m>,
says...

> publish the grades and kids will be subject to ridicule, No not the
> ones failing, the ones with A's !!

LOL! Unfortunately, there's some truth to that.

--
Bill

[Jenn]

In article m>,
Clyde Slick > wrote:

> On 1 Noi, 11:10, Jenn > wrote:
> > In article m>,
> >
> >
> >
> > ScottW > wrote:
> > > On Oct 31, 12:56 pm, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> > > > wrote:
> > > > On Oct 31, 1:21 pm, ScottW > wrote:
> >
> > > > > On Oct 31, 10:51 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > On Oct 31, 12:37 pm, ScottW > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > On Oct 31, 9:34 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Oct 31, 11:02 am, ScottW > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > > > > On Oct 31, 7:53 am, Jenn >
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > In article >,
> >
> > > > > > > > > > "ScottW" > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > "Jenn" > wrote in
> > > > > > > > > > > message
> > > > > > > > > > >news:jennconductsREMOVETHIS-841104.19321929102007@newsclstr
> > > > > > > > > > >03.n
> > > > > > > > > > >ews.prodigy.net
> > > > > > > > > > > ...
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > >> That's the problem...don't hide their lack of
> > > > > > > > > > > >> satisfactory
> > > > > > > > > > > >> performance
> > > > > > > > > > > >> until it's too late...publish them early and often.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > > So much to say... Let's try this one first. Do you
> > > > > > > > > > > > mean
> > > > > > > > > > > > publish the
> > > > > > > > > > > > performance of individuals?
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > Yes... It's been tried with good results, unfortunately
> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > link
> > > > > > > > > > > to the old article I read no longer works.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > If I remember correctly, making individual test scores etc.
> > > > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > illegal,
> > > > > > > > > > at least in this state.
> >
> > > > > > > > > Yeah...turns out that is really dumb.
> > > > > > > > > I think someone in academia who has devoted their life to
> > > > > > > > > education should undertake a crusade to fix that.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > For example, remember the common college
> > > > > > > > > > practice of posting test scores on a prof's door so one can
> > > > > > > > > > run
> > > > > > > > > > by and
> > > > > > > > > > see how you did? You can't so that anymore, unless you
> > > > > > > > > > assign
> > > > > > > > > > private
> > > > > > > > > > numbers to substitute for names.
> >
> > > > > > > > > > > Anyway...IME kids are very responsive to peer pressure,
> >
> > > > > > > > > > You mean from the "2% or less" who are serious?
> >
> > > > > > > > > Nope, all kids are responsive to peer pressure.
> >
> > > > > > > > You assume that peer pressure is a guaranteed positive
> > > > > > > > influence.
> >
> > > > > > > This is about the 4th time in the past week you've demonstrated
> > > > > > > total
> > > > > > > and complete comprehension failure of what was clearly stated.
> > > > > > > Are you off your meds again? Or has the witching season got you
> > > > > > > troubled?
> >
> > > > > > As I see it, your argument is that publishing grades will create
> > > > > > peer
> > > > > > pressure to improve them. You 'think' it's an answer to improving
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > failing failing grades of students.
> >
> > > > > It's part of an effort to increase parent involvement (who also can
> > > > > benefit from peer pressure) and change the balance of peer pressure
> > > > > to positive encouraging effort to succeed rather the usual teenage
> > > > > wannabe gangster rebellious crap that discourages and ridicules
> > > > > good performance.
> >
> > > > So your argument is that posting children's grades on the wall of the
> > > > school, or on the professor's door, with the student's names attached
> > > > publicly to their grades will lead to more parental involvement and
> > > > will also develop positive peer pressure (both parent-to-student and
> > > > parent-to-parent) to improve grades.
> >
> > > > Or did I miss your 'point' again.
> >
> > > 3rd try is the charm for you.
> >
> > > > And all of that results from a simple invasion of privacy.
> >
> > > A simple return to a time when people were accountable and
> > > subjected to a community std of socially accepted norms.
> >
> > I would agree with your goal, but not your method. Making grades public
> > is not going to have the desired effect. It's throwing a glass of water
> > on a raging fire.
>
> publish the grades and kids will be subject to ridicule, No not the
> ones failing, the ones with A's !!

I understand what you're saying, but that's not my experience. The kids
that you think would would ridicule simply don't get involved in that
"loop". They don't give a ****.

[George M. Middius]

Jenn said:

> > publish the grades and kids will be subject to ridicule, No not the
> > ones failing, the ones with A's !!

> I understand what you're saying, but that's not my experience. The kids
> that you think would would ridicule simply don't get involved in that
> "loop". They don't give a ****.

Sacky's point is that the behavior of the minority should be tailored to
accommodate the prejudices of the majority, no matter how ignorant and
intolerant they are.

[Clyde Slick]

On 1 Noi, 18:59, George M. Middius <cmndr _ george @ comcast . net>
wrote:
> Jenn said:
>
> > > publish the grades and kids will be subject to ridicule, No not the
> > > ones failing, the ones with A's !!
> > I understand what you're saying, but that's not my experience. The kids
> > that you think would would ridicule simply don't get involved in that
> > "loop". They don't give a ****.
>
> Sacky's point is that the behavior of the minority should be tailored to
> accommodate the prejudices of the majority, no matter how ignorant and
> intolerant they are.

the ignorant and intolerant prejudices of the majority include respect
for the law.
how ignorant and intolerant of us!

[George M. Middius]

Clyde Slick said:

> > Sacky's point is that the behavior of the minority should be tailored to
> > accommodate the prejudices of the majority, no matter how ignorant and
> > intolerant they are.

> the ignorant and intolerant prejudices of the majority include respect
> for the law.

What else do they "include"? Don't be shy about criticizing your Brain
Bug.

[Clyde Slick]

On 1 Noi, 19:12, George M. Middius <cmndr _ george @ comcast . net>
wrote:
> Clyde Slick said:
>
> > > Sacky's point is that the behavior of the minority should be tailored to
> > > accommodate the prejudices of the majority, no matter how ignorant and
> > > intolerant they are.
> > the ignorant and intolerant prejudices of the majority include respect
> > for the law.
>
> What else do they "include"? Don't be shy about criticizing your Brain
> Bug.

now you made my head hurt!
just what is 'the majority"
on any particular issue, it can beany
number of conglomerations of peoples
or sub groups. it can change by location,
in a number of cities, blacks are a majority.
Are Reps or Dems the majority?
Do we go by registered voters?, Congress?
what party the Pres is from. All that can change
every 2 to 4 years.so, really, it is a pretty stupid question you
asked.

anyway, to give a straight answer, another ignorant and intolerant
prejudice of the majority that
must be conformed to by the minority, is that man made global warming,
mostly from
the past 30 to 40 years,
presents an imminent catastrophe for planet earth.
Another such prejudice is that any unpleasant
weather occurrence must have been caused by man made global warming.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Nov 1, 6:53 pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:

> anyway, to give a straight answer, another ignorant and intolerant
> prejudice of the majority that
> must be conformed to by the minority, is that man made global warming,
> mostly from
> the past 30 to 40 years,
> presents an imminent catastrophe for planet earth.
> Another such prejudice is that any unpleasant
> weather occurrence must have been caused by man made global warming.

Hm. That's not how I would phrase the argument at all. I don't believe
that I've ever seen anybody else phrase it that way either. You're the
first.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Nov 1, 3:41 pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> On 1 Noi, 11:10, Jenn > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article m>,
>
> > ScottW > wrote:
> > > On Oct 31, 12:56 pm, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> > > > wrote:
> > > > On Oct 31, 1:21 pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Oct 31, 10:51 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > On Oct 31, 12:37 pm, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Oct 31, 9:34 am, Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Oct 31, 11:02 am, ScottW > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > On Oct 31, 7:53 am, Jenn >
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > In article >,
>
> > > > > > > > > > "ScottW" > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > "Jenn" > wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >ews.prodigy.net
> > > > > > > > > > > ...
>
> > > > > > > > > > > >> That's the problem...don't hide their lack of
> > > > > > > > > > > >> satisfactory
> > > > > > > > > > > >> performance
> > > > > > > > > > > >> until it's too late...publish them early and often.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > So much to say... Let's try this one first. Do you mean
> > > > > > > > > > > > publish the
> > > > > > > > > > > > performance of individuals?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Yes... It's been tried with good results, unfortunately the
> > > > > > > > > > > link
> > > > > > > > > > > to the old article I read no longer works.
>
> > > > > > > > > > If I remember correctly, making individual test scores etc. is
> > > > > > > > > > illegal,
> > > > > > > > > > at least in this state.
>
> > > > > > > > > Yeah...turns out that is really dumb.
> > > > > > > > > I think someone in academia who has devoted their life to
> > > > > > > > > education should undertake a crusade to fix that.
>
> > > > > > > > > > For example, remember the common college
> > > > > > > > > > practice of posting test scores on a prof's door so one can run
> > > > > > > > > > by and
> > > > > > > > > > see how you did? You can't so that anymore, unless you assign
> > > > > > > > > > private
> > > > > > > > > > numbers to substitute for names.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Anyway...IME kids are very responsive to peer pressure,
>
> > > > > > > > > > You mean from the "2% or less" who are serious?
>
> > > > > > > > > Nope, all kids are responsive to peer pressure.
>
> > > > > > > > You assume that peer pressure is a guaranteed positive influence.
>
> > > > > > > This is about the 4th time in the past week you've demonstrated total
> > > > > > > and complete comprehension failure of what was clearly stated.
> > > > > > > Are you off your meds again? Or has the witching season got you
> > > > > > > troubled?
>
> > > > > > As I see it, your argument is that publishing grades will create peer
> > > > > > pressure to improve them. You 'think' it's an answer to improving the
> > > > > > failing failing grades of students.
>
> > > > > It's part of an effort to increase parent involvement (who also can
> > > > > benefit from peer pressure) and change the balance of peer pressure
> > > > > to positive encouraging effort to succeed rather the usual teenage
> > > > > wannabe gangster rebellious crap that discourages and ridicules
> > > > > good performance.
>
> > > > So your argument is that posting children's grades on the wall of the
> > > > school, or on the professor's door, with the student's names attached
> > > > publicly to their grades will lead to more parental involvement and
> > > > will also develop positive peer pressure (both parent-to-student and
> > > > parent-to-parent) to improve grades.
>
> > > > Or did I miss your 'point' again.
>
> > > 3rd try is the charm for you.
>
> > > > And all of that results from a simple invasion of privacy.
>
> > > A simple return to a time when people were accountable and
> > > subjected to a community std of socially accepted norms.
>
> > I would agree with your goal, but not your method. Making grades public
> > is not going to have the desired effect. It's throwing a glass of water
> > on a raging fire.
>
> publish the grades and kids will be subject to ridicule, No not the
> ones failing, the ones with A's !!

That's exactly what I said earlier, in the response to which 2pid said
I didn't understand his 'deep' argument.

So, Clyde, if you're going to say something counter to what 2pid has
said, the only possibility is that you did not understand what 2pid
meant, because everything 2pid says is so brilliant and ****.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Nov 2, 4:09 pm, "ScottW" > wrote:
> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote in ooglegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 1, 3:41 pm, Clyde Slick > wrote:
> >> On 1 Noi, 11:10, Jenn > wrote:
>
> >> > > > Or did I miss your 'point' again.
>
> >> > > 3rd try is the charm for you.
>
> >> > > > And all of that results from a simple invasion of privacy.
>
> >> > > A simple return to a time when people were accountable and
> >> > > subjected to a community std of socially accepted norms.
>
> >> > I would agree with your goal, but not your method. Making grades public
> >> > is not going to have the desired effect. It's throwing a glass of water
> >> > on a raging fire.
>
> >> publish the grades and kids will be subject to ridicule, No not the
> >> ones failing, the ones with A's !!
>
> > That's exactly what I said earlier, in the response to which 2pid said
> > I didn't understand his 'deep' argument.
>
> > So, Clyde, if you're going to say something counter to what 2pid has
> > said, the only possibility is that you did not understand what 2pid
> > meant, because everything 2pid says is so brilliant and ****.
>
> A minor issue compared to the improved parent involvement
> and responsibility that can be instigated with grade publication.

LOL!

Someone once said that there is no such thing as a dumb idea. I'll bet
a million trillion dollars that person had never met 2pid.

You are indeed a dim one, 2pid.

Say, did you find that page that won't open on that blog you can't
find where that one guy whose name you don't know wrote about the guy
that knows a lot about this whose name you don't know, IYRC, has proof
your dumb idea will work? I'd still like to see it. If you have no
proof that your dumb idea will work, just say so, 2pid. Just say that
you have 'intuition' it will work. That'll convince me...

Many parents never set foot inside the school, 2pid. I fail to see how
publicly posting grades will suddenly change that. They'd have to go
into the school to see the posted grades. Are the kids going to come
home and say, "Mom, Dad, I have some very bad news. I'm being publicly
humiliated because of my grades. A little help, please?" Assume a few
parents do go to the school that hadn't been going before, 2pid, due
to 'peer pressure'. Are they going to 'motivate' their kids with a few
cuffs to the side of the head? LOL!

I know it's too late for your wee todd did children, 2pid, but you
really should have been more involved, and earlier. You know, because
you wanted to be involved. Not because the school had some obscure
'thinking' behind posting grades.

Public humilliation will have no affect on at least some of the
population. I mean, look at you. LOL!

Are all conservatives as dumb as you are, 2pid, or are you on the
extreme lower end of the intelligence spectrum in that population, too?