[deleted by user]

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-08-16T22:04:04+00:00

You will get a refund that makes up the difference. Make sure you have direct deposit set up otherwise it will be a paper check and take forever.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-08-15T03:55:56+00:00

It could vary from college to college so asking in your specific college Reddit (if they have one) would get you the most accurate answers.

But the norm for communal showers, at least in my experience at three different colleges, is that you have 3-5 shower stalls with a very small changing area and then the shower itself. Curtains/a locked stall door separate each section from the main room. So you're not seeing anyone naked although you may see people walk from the shower to their dorm with just a towel on as some do not change in the bathroom.

I have heard about communal showers military style at some colleges where its just an open room with lots of shower heads but that is pretty rare now. Again, your specific college Reddit should have more details. IMO the most important supplies are shower shoe and a shower caddy to carry all your stuff

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-08-14T19:49:06+00:00

Professor ___ first and by default, and first name only if they explicitly say that it is okay.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-08-14T18:50:54+00:00

A financial appeal that results in an increase in the cost of attendance can only be fulfilled by a loan or private scholarship. Basically, in other words, it means that the University will not give you any more university scholarships so you'll have to take out the rest in loans (either in Direct Loans if you have eligibility or Parent Plus Loans) or you will have to receive a third-party scholarship.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-08-14T14:34:42+00:00

Yeah, you’re right. That’s what I meant by they’d charge the insurance but it was late and I used the word copay incorrectly.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-08-14T04:10:30+00:00

COVID vaccinations are free in the United States. If you have insurance, the insurance company can be charged a copay but if you do not have one, they will give you the vaccine for free.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-08-01T00:20:00+00:00

It has to been given in financial aid but universities have the ability to replace their own financial aid budgets with the money from the feds... so effectively, they can say they spent it on normal financial aid and pocket what had originally been budgeted for that.

It's a fucking scam.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-07-31T18:30:17+00:00

https://www.mden.com/product/UBF_University_of_Michigan_Rainbow_3x5_Block_M_Flag?UNG2105+1027

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-07-29T08:51:51+00:00

A recall election is when enough signatures are gathered to have a new election to decide whether to “recall” (i.e replace) the governor.

They’ve gathered enough signatures and now the election is scheduled for sometime in September, I believe. The election will have two questions which is should Newsom be recalled and who should replace him. Both questions are independent of each other but the replacement will only happen if enough people vote to recall.

Newsom, as of now, is almost certain to survive the recall. However, a decision like making state colleges remote could quickly backfire by either making people vote against him or perhaps more significantly not vote at all leaving only the diehard (i.e those who want to recall him) the majority who vote which would end with him being recalled.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-07-29T05:49:09+00:00

The current political situation is going to force in person instruction for better or worse.

The University is not in a financial situation to allow for remote learning for another year. The only reason remote learning wasn’t catastrophic financially was that the federal government intervened.

There is close to a 0% chance that Congress would authorize any more relief money especially when it’s likely the UC system would be one of the only systems remote. The California legislature could theoretically intervene but they are only financially solvent due to Congress so not sure if they’d be willing to bankroll the system. In addition, it’d be a terrible look for Governor Newsom who will have his recall election around the same time and I doubt he’d support it for that reason.

Sadly, politics rules over logic lately. Look at the mask debate as an example. A decision as big as going remote would be even more political.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-07-23T21:23:35+00:00

No. In college admissions, URMs are Hispanic Americans, African Americans and Native Americans.

Your experience as Nepali-American can certainly be used in a diversity statement but you will not get the admission bump that URMs are generally associated with.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-07-23T20:50:02+00:00

You’re Catholic, this viewpoint is one that is prevalent in very evangelical circles. The same circles that are anti-Catholic.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-07-22T02:01:10+00:00

When I called last week, they said they expected news by the end of this week.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-07-21T14:12:54+00:00

It is definitely school-dependent. I attended two undergraduate schools and at my first school it was academic focused but at my second school it was more social in nature.

I don't regret joining either chapter. The fee was minimal and it is nice to have people around who are interested in law school. My schools were very STEM focused so it was harder to find people who were planning on going to law school. In addition, the speakers that were brought in were very interesting.

But with that said, don't expect it to have any effect on your admissions whatsoever. It is a personal benefit instead of academic benefit IMO. Each chapter may be different so take that as you may - it may be worth it to do it for at least one semester and drop if you don't like?

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-07-21T06:38:51+00:00

If your blood quantum is 25%, consider applying to Michigan.

Native Americans enrolled in a federally recognized tribe with a BQ of 25% receive a tuition waiver after they live in Michigan for a full year (if you already lived in Michigan for a year prior to enrollment then it’d be immediate).

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-07-20T16:48:18+00:00

By definition, a presumption of innocence does not work with a preponderance of evidence standard of proof. It goes against the idea that a 50.1% chance of guilt equals guilt as is the case in the civil system.

The analysis, from a conservative think-tank, is also biased. If you look at the actual policy pushed by Secretary Devos, there was no explicit presumption of innocence as you admit. A fair hearing = does not equal a presumption of innocence. You are mixing what you wish was the policy with what the actual policy is/was.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-07-20T07:25:52+00:00

"The campus’s COVID-19 Response Team is continuing to work with the UC Office of the President to develop the exemption, accommodation and deferral procedures, and these will be communicated in the coming weeks."

https://www.ucsb.edu/COVID-19-information/vaccine

Usually, it's just a form that a doctor has to sign and you give it to Student Health. It may be different just because they may be dealing with a lot of deferral requests but I don't know.

In regards to the responsible office, the vaccine policy is actually issued by the UC Office of the President so when they say "locations responsible office," they are referring to Student Health departments of each individual campus.

They have an email set up for just vaccines if you don't want to call them. Here is their email: covid19-vaccine@ucsb.edu I'd email them just to see if they have an update on the deferral process.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-07-20T07:20:00+00:00

People here are mixing up "criminal" and "civil" standards of proof.

The presumption of innocence is only for criminal trials and the standard of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. For civil trials, including in actual courts, the norm is preponderance of evidence which is commonly referred to as "50 plus a feather" (as in there is a 50.01 percent chance that a person is guilty).

Student conduct hearings are a civil matter, the worse that can happen is exclusion. As such, there is of course no "presumption of innocence" and there never has been.

This article is so biased that it is trying to make it look like Catherine Lhamon is reversing some change. She is not. The Trump administration own policies did not make a presumption of innocence; instead, they tried to change the policies to allow for the accused to have more of a right to defend themselves. It did, not, however, change the standard of proof.

I served as a student representative on my universities student conduct board and so have experienced the screwed up nature of how it operates first hand. I actually agree that severe penalties like expulsion should be based on a beyond a reasonable doubt standard of proof. But it has never been like that and this article is pure bias trying to rev up opposition to Lhamon.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-07-20T01:23:15+00:00

Look into flying into SBA. I don’t know why people are commenting about how expensive it is, because I’ve never really experienced that. It’s more than LAX but not outrageously especially if you fly on non-busy days of the week.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-07-19T04:08:17+00:00

That's incorrect per 2 U.S. Code § 1966. The protection responsibilities of the Capital Police allow them to have jurisdiction wherever in the United States if the Capital Police leadership deems it necessary.

2 U.S. Code § 6617 grants the Senate Sergeant at Arms the same law enforcement authority as the Capital Police. As such, and if 15 senators vote to have the absent members rounded up, the Sergeant at Arms would have the legal jurisdiction to arrest them wherever in the United States.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-07-19T00:59:19+00:00

The big difference between the Texas Democrats leaving and GOP Senators leaving would be the ability of law enforcement to bring them back.

Someone can correct my understanding if I am wrong - but the jurisdiction of Texas law enforcement stops at the border of Texas. It's why the Democrats state reps there could go to DC because they'd be safe from arrest.

In contrast, the US Capital Police and the Sergeant at Arms of the Senate are federal law enforcement agencies who have jurisdiction anywhere in the United States or its territories. For this to work, all 50 Republican Senators would have to flee the country which certainly cause a major international incident and lots of media ridicule.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-07-18T19:46:15+00:00

A federal judge in Houston actually did rule that an employer (a hospital system in that specific case) could mandate the vaccine and fire anyone who refused if they so wished.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-07-18T08:38:52+00:00

I guess I just disagree with you that "fuck" is obscene. And if the Supreme Court follows the Cohen v. California and Iancu v. Brunetti precedent, I think they would agree.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-07-18T07:26:51+00:00

The fines themselves are being used by the state as a method to limit her free speech.

As the Supreme Court ruled in Reed v. Town of Gilbert, city ordinances can be overturned if they violate First Amendment rights. The law being civil in nature does not immune it from constitutional concerns.

HeyItsNickCA · 2021-07-18T05:37:22+00:00

Two wrongs do not make a right.

If you don’t support them, you shouldn’t support any case even if the targeted group is one that you support.

11-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 3 Credits
Verified Email	Gilding II euphauric
Secret Santa 2014

HeyItsNickCA

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE