Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Penn St the grand liberal experimentFollow

#77 Nov 14 2011 at 7:45 PM Rating: Good
****
5,684 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Bardalicious wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
catwho wrote:
He feels that all sports programs should end and universities should instead focus on the business of educating.
I guess he doesn't understand where the most donations to the schools come from, eh?

I'm not sure what you're after here. At my school the athletics department keeps its budget separate from the university.
Fair enough as it was poorly worded. What I should have said was "Do you have any idea how many donations are a result of the national exposure a school gets due to it's athletic departments?"
I'd wager that the majority of donations a university receives are from successful alumni who want to give back to their alma mater. At least the ones that don't go directly to the athletic department's coffers.

I doubt many donations to University academic programs are based upon a school's football winnings.

Edited, Nov 14th 2011 7:45pm by Bardalicious
____________________________
Almalieque wrote:
I admit that I was wrong

God bless Lili St. Cyr
#78 Nov 14 2011 at 7:48 PM Rating: Excellent
****
6,471 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Eske Esquire wrote:
This'd be a great segway

And an even better segue Smiley: wink2


Yeah, as I wrote that, somewhere in the back of my head I knew it was wrong. I think I use the word so infrequently that I let this spelling take over in my brain.

/sigh. Smiley: glare
#79 Nov 14 2011 at 8:13 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,381 posts
Bardalicious wrote:
I doubt many donations to University academic programs are based upon a school's football winnings
You do live in America right? And you're on the internet, so you do use forms of media. Are you intentionally lying or just super naive?

You are aware of how much money the entrainment industry generates, yes?
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#80 Nov 14 2011 at 8:24 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Uh huh. So saying that the issue is more complex than "this side==bad; that side==good" is now douchebaggery, and closed-minded? Ever consider you're the one with the closed mind in that you're unwilling to see any faults at all in a group you've decided to champion in some way?

Really, the fact that you need to divide it into "teams" (or try to make it about homosexuals) is pathological enough.


I didn't do this though. I responded to a post addressing the question as to whether attraction to children of the same *** is associated at all with homosexuality. While I'll fully admit to leading the argument a bit, I don't think it's a stretch to see the usual anti-*** suspects on one side of that argument, and the usual pro-*** suspects on the other. You also have to remember that I'd just finished skimming through Varus' link when I replied to the post in question, and there was a **** of a lot BS as well as a smattering of valid statements.


Put more simply, the fact that there are folks who oppose homosexuality on principle and will exaggerate their position, does not mean that every claim they make is wrong. The attempts by *** advocacy groups to distance homosexuality (especially male homosexuality) from molestation of boys by older men is a pretty clear attempt at PR and is pretty questionable in terms of honest evaluation of what's going on. And certainly when we're looking at a case like Sandusky, who targeted boys just barely pre-adolescent, this is less about generic attraction to children, and far more likely to be some form of displaced sexual (homosexual in this case) targeting, most likely deriving from some form of abuse he suffered when he was the same age.


I just jumped ahead a bit and played out the argument for *why* that happens from a broader sociological perspective and presented the two sides of that argument and attempted to play middle ground by saying that both bear some blame.


Quote:
Hint: everyone else was mocking Varus by talking about Republicans or whatever.


Yeah. I didn't say anything about political party's either Joph. That's the "I wont touch this with a 10 foot pole" bit I started out with. Again though, it doesn't invalidate some other aspects of the issue. And judging by the "hit a nerve" like response, I'd say I was justified to bring those other aspects up.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#81 Nov 14 2011 at 8:25 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smiley: disappointed

Whatever. This would be like arguing with your racist uncle; not fruitful nor amusing. Have fun being... whatever.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#82 Nov 14 2011 at 9:25 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
Message has high abuse count and will not be displayed.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#83 Nov 14 2011 at 9:57 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
No, by "racist" I meant it was like arguing with someone so disgusting in their thoughts that it was neither amusing nor fruitful to have a discussion with them.

But apparently I "touched a nerve" so I guess you needed to hear it Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#84 Nov 14 2011 at 10:30 PM Rating: Excellent
****
5,684 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Bardalicious wrote:
I doubt many donations to University academic programs are based upon a school's football winnings
You do live in America right? And you're on the internet, so you do use forms of media. Are you intentionally lying or just super naive?

You are aware of how much money the entrainment industry generates, yes?
Yes, but the money generated by the entertainment industry stays with the athletics department treasury, and does not suddenly jump over to the academic university's budget.
____________________________
Almalieque wrote:
I admit that I was wrong

God bless Lili St. Cyr
#85 Nov 14 2011 at 10:37 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
7,547 posts
that sounds mighty anecdotal to me. Smiley: dubious
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#86 Nov 14 2011 at 11:55 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
20,917 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Bardalicious wrote:
I'm not sure what you're after here. At my school the athletics department keeps its budget separate from the university.
Fair enough as it was poorly worded. What I should have said was "Do you have any idea how many donations are a result of the national exposure a school gets due to it's athletic departments?"

I'd just like to make a few points.

1. A lot of colleges do mix fees from students for tuition into the athletics departments.
2. Most athletic departments lose money.
3. It's hard to find data on how athletic departments affect donations, but one small study doesn't show significant results.
Quote:
When a male graduate's former team wins its conference championship, his donations for general purposes increase by about 7 percent and his donations to the athletic program increase by about the same percentage. Football and basketball records generally have small and statistically insignificant effects; in some specifications, a winning basketball season reduces donations. For women there is no statistically discernible effect of a former team's success on current giving; as is the case for men, the impacts of football and basketball, while statistically significant in some specifications, are not important in magnitude.


It seems fairly unlikely that many athletic departments earn their schools significant money in any form, and quite possible that they take away money from academic programs.

Edited, Nov 14th 2011 11:57pm by Allegory
#87 Nov 15 2011 at 5:00 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,381 posts
Allegory wrote:
It seems fairly unlikely that many athletic departments earn their schools significant money in any form, and quite possible that they take away money from academic programs.
Possible, but probably unlikely. Successful athletic departments also draw more students and sell more paraphernalia, like shirts, shorts, etc...
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#88 Nov 15 2011 at 7:17 AM Rating: Excellent
Annoying Ass
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
12,049 posts
gbaji wrote:
The chain of cause/effect isn't simple, but it doesn't take a degree in psychology to realize that if someone already believes that his sexual desires are sinful/dirty/whatever, that this will increase his likelihood when acting on them to not make distinctions which he might otherwise. If having *** with another man is ok, but having *** with a child is wrong, he's more likely to satisfy himself with adult men and avoid children. But if both are "wrong", he's less likely to limit himself, right?


Jesus, man. Sometimes you say something so off-the-wall, I really do wonder if you're the forum's most successful troll. I am incredibly interested to see your scientific data that men who like men but don't admit it are more likely to rape children, as opposed to men (or women) who are attracted to children of either ***. From what you're saying here, it's clear that you believe (closeted) gays are more likely to be child rapists, which is almost exactly what varus said.
____________________________
Retired News Writer for the ZAM Network
WoW - Aureliano the Insane - level 90 Druid on Sen'Jin
Nanaoki - level 90 Mage on Sen'Jin
#89 Nov 15 2011 at 8:05 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Except it's also the *** community's fault because they're pressuring everyone to be Hard *** and poor souls like Sandusky* were too scared to come out and had to rape little boys instead!



*Of course, just saying he's a "homosexual" would make more sense if there was evidence of him even hitting on post-pubescent teens. He's just a pedophile and a child predator and it's fucking repulsive that people like Gbaji would use this to try and school us all on the giant *** conspiracy or whatever.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#90 Nov 15 2011 at 8:12 AM Rating: Excellent
******
49,896 posts
Not *** conspiracy; Liberal conspiracy.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#91 Nov 15 2011 at 8:13 AM Rating: Excellent
Gbaji wrote:
Because IMO we tend to over focus on the simple and easy positions to take, and a lot of times some equally important parts get lost in the discussion.


Like the fact that pedophiles whom attack children of the same *** don't usually view themselves as *** & there's no correlation between homosexuals & pedophiles. Much like in prison, where only the victim is considered "***"; even though the only person choosing to have homosexual *** is the attacker.
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#92 Nov 15 2011 at 8:16 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
lolgaxe wrote:
Not *** conspiracy; Liberal conspiracy.

Is there a difference?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#93 Nov 15 2011 at 8:18 AM Rating: Excellent
******
49,896 posts
Jophiel wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Not *** conspiracy; Liberal conspiracy.
Is there a difference?
*** conspiracy has more show tunes.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#94 Nov 15 2011 at 8:20 AM Rating: Excellent
lolgaxe wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Not *** conspiracy; Liberal conspiracy.
Is there a difference?
*** conspiracy has more show tunes.
This is a thread about Guys and Dolls now!
____________________________
Edited, Mar 21st 2011 2:14pm by Darqflame Lock Thread: Because Lubriderm is silly... ~ de geso

Almalieque wrote:
I know what a glory hole is, but I wasn't sure what the business part was in reference to.

My Anime List
#95 Nov 15 2011 at 8:27 AM Rating: Excellent
Annoying Ass
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
12,049 posts
Duke Lubriderm wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Not *** conspiracy; Liberal conspiracy.
Is there a difference?
*** conspiracy has more show tunes.
This is a thread about Guys and Dolls now!

True story; the first time I visited Provincetown on Cape Cod, I saw a flyer for a musical called "Guys As Dolls."

Edit: I was too young at the time to get it, but my parents were amused when I asked what it was about.

Edited, Nov 15th 2011 9:27am by LockeColeMA
____________________________
Retired News Writer for the ZAM Network
WoW - Aureliano the Insane - level 90 Druid on Sen'Jin
Nanaoki - level 90 Mage on Sen'Jin
#96 Nov 15 2011 at 8:29 AM Rating: Excellent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,595 posts
Message has high abuse count and will not be displayed.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#97 Nov 15 2011 at 8:32 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
the saddest thing (about this thread, not the situation) is the absolute certainty that Gbaji is going to double down and continue to spout his shit, saying "You guys just don't want to hear it!"
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#98 Nov 15 2011 at 8:34 AM Rating: Excellent
****
6,471 posts
Did anyone hear the interview Costas did with Sandusky? Positively creepy. The most damning part (to the best of my recollection):

Costas: "Are you sexually attracted to young boys?"

Sandusky: [long pause]

....

"Sexually attracted?"

....

"No, I'm not sexually attracted to them..."

Smiley: um
#99 Nov 15 2011 at 8:34 AM Rating: Excellent
Ahh, Provincetown, home of my uncle.

This is his claim to fame.
____________________________
Edited, Mar 21st 2011 2:14pm by Darqflame Lock Thread: Because Lubriderm is silly... ~ de geso

Almalieque wrote:
I know what a glory hole is, but I wasn't sure what the business part was in reference to.

My Anime List
#100 Nov 15 2011 at 8:47 AM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
Did anyone hear the interview Costas did with Sandusky? Positively creepy. The most damning part (to the best of my recollection):

Costas: "Are you sexually attracted to young boys?"

Sandusky: [long pause]

....

"Sexually attracted?"

....

"No, I'm not sexually attracted to them..."

Smiley: um

Yeah, I heard that part and had the same reaction. This guy is really scary.
#101 Nov 15 2011 at 8:51 AM Rating: Excellent
Annoying Ass
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
12,049 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
Did anyone hear the interview Costas did with Sandusky? Positively creepy. The most damning part (to the best of my recollection):

Costas: "Are you sexually attracted to young boys?"

Sandusky: [long pause]

....

"Sexually attracted?"

....

"No, I'm not sexually attracted to them..."

Smiley: um

I just found it hilariously horrific that his autobiography is called "Touched."
____________________________
Retired News Writer for the ZAM Network
WoW - Aureliano the Insane - level 90 Druid on Sen'Jin
Nanaoki - level 90 Mage on Sen'Jin
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 60 All times are in CST
Xsarus, Anonymous Guests (59)