Cardinal Rule Broken by Our Greek Advisor ;-(

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by SoCalGirl

We learned about first world vs developing nations / 2nd world vs third world in one of my economics classes. [/URL]

Ditto

/onlycontribution

[AlphaFrog]

I would think it less offensive used in a context as it was above (and largely how the meme has been used), because you're acknowledging the fact that you have a "problem" that, in comparison to starving children in Africa, is relatively insignificant. You are acknowledging your privilage to dote on frivolous things.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

I would think it less offensive used in a context as it was above (and largely how the meme has been used), because you're acknowledging the fact that you have a "problem" that, in comparison to starving children in Africa, is relatively insignificant. You are acknowledging your privilage to dote on frivolous things.

You are acknowledging your privilege all while perpetuating such privileges.

I know there are disciplines and people who find nothing wrong with it. That is absolutely fine despite the tone of my first post. However, there are also disciplines and people who find something wrong with it. I have been spoiled by people (personally and professionally--including some economists) who consider it archaic. My bad for allowing that to become my reality. LOL.

Back to the regular thread.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

I would think it less offensive used in a context as it was above (and largely how the meme has been used), because you're acknowledging the fact that you have a "problem" that, in comparison to starving children in Africa, is relatively insignificant. You are acknowledging your privilage to dote on frivolous things.

Yeah, this is actually the reason why some find it offensive - it's an implicit value statement.

[adpiucf]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Yeah, this is actually the reason why some find it offensive - it's an implicit value statement.

Seeing as my intention was to offend the OP, I think I have achieved my objectives. You don't make that statement without the intent to be derisive.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by adpiucf

Seeing as my intention was to offend the OP, I think I have achieved my objectives. You don't make that statement without the intent to be derisive.

Your intent was to offend the OP which may not have happened because the OP may find it funny or not care anymore.

Was your intent to potentially be nationally, culturally, racially, ethnically, or socioeconomically offensive to those who consider it such?

If not, there are other (sometimes crass) ways to tell someone they are being frivolous and/or need to choose a course of action and get over it. Thus is the nature of GC. LOL

[adpiucf]

Nothing would make me happier than to learn the OP doesn't care about this issue anymore. I'd hate to see how she acts in an actual crisis.

[AOII_LB93]

So my question is this...what exactly is it that OP wants to accomplish (in general) with this information if she makes a call, contacts an IHQ/NHQ or whatever? Do we want to see this new dean fired?

So OP, what do you want to see happen? I guess that's the part I missed or wasn't answered.

Is it shady? Yes. I would be pissed, but what do you want done about it?

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by AOII_LB93

So my question is this...what exactly is it that OP wants to accomplish (in general) with this information if she makes a call, contacts an IHQ/NHQ or whatever? Do we want to see this new dean fired?

So OP, what do you want to see happen? I guess that's the part I missed or wasn't answered.

Is it shady? Yes. I would be pissed, but what do you want done about it?

I've been wondering the same thing

[gee_ess]

Based on how intense the discussion became on this thread, I think the OP wants to forget she brought it up!

[Kevin]

The intensity of the discussion has more to do with the personalities of GC than the subject itself. We could have a serious heated discussion over Coke vs. Pepsi on GC.

[justgo_withit]

I don't even understand the Coke v. Pepsi debate because they are completely different. Coke is magical and amazing and delicious and addictive and Pepsi is the nastiest thing out there. Don't even get me started on taste tests, what kind of jacked up taste buds do you have that you can't taste the difference?? I can smell the difference from 15 feet away.

()

(except seriously Pepsi is no comparison)

(forreal though)

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Kevin

The intensity of the discussion has more to do with the personalities of GC than the subject itself.

That is not true.

I see nothing "intense" about this discussion. The OP created a sockpuppet so this person knows GC personalities enough to ignore language and tone if necessary. As for the actual topic, some people consider this to be a potentially important issue and some people do not. Simple as that.

[sigmadiva]

Originally Posted by Kevin

The intensity of the discussion has more to do with the personalities of GC than the subject itself. We could have a serious heated discussion over Coke vs. Pepsi on GC.

You're right!

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

That is not true.

I see nothing "intense" about this discussion. The OP created a sockpuppet so this person knows GC personalities enough to ignore language and tone if necessary.

Maybe/maybe not.

As for the actual topic, some people consider this to be a potentially important issue and some people do not. Simple as that.

I'm not sure anyone thinks it's an unimportant topic. I'm still waiting for someone to even say that what this lady did is against any rules. Multiple pages in and that hasn't even been concretely addressed.

I'll withhold my shock and outrage until that little issue is put to bed.

That said, your post here, as to my proposal re: Coke v. Pepsi is Exhibit A. This post is Exhibit B.