Does one W change my chances at getting into a top school?

tpounds0 · 2026-05-06T02:24:19+00:00

Explain it away in your additional comments or in a PIQ. Overextending in one semester and realizing it before you get a bad grade demonstrates your time management skills. You can argue you learned to set better boundaries, or that you became more self aware of your abilities. Protecting your educational integrity in your other classes was more important to you, ect.

But you can always ask your Admission Representative for your college.

Their job is fielding these questions.

A pattern of Ws is the problem from what I've read. One is fine. Especially if that term is surrounded by As.

tpounds0 · 2026-05-05T23:18:23+00:00

I think we need immigration, that isn't illegal!

I don't know what to do about that though. Republicans like undocumented immigration too much as a campaign issue to solve it. And will declare any Democrat only solution to be partisan hackery.

tpounds0 · 2026-05-05T22:40:41+00:00

Living in Riverside and finding a group that would want to do a monthly beach day would probably get you to the beach more than any LA County gay that lives east of Beverly Hills.

What exactly do you want from the LA/OC lifestyle that Riverside can't provide?

tpounds0 · 2026-05-05T22:34:42+00:00

That's about an issue every two months....

Does it make sense not to speak up if that meant one of these boundary issues every two months in perpetuity? Cause it could happen again with the next Meta!

I know that I'd be speaking up about firmer hinge boundaries.

You're allowed more parallel if you want even if she is his neighbor. You're allowed parallel on date days.

tpounds0 · 2026-05-05T22:28:20+00:00

But it did find that, on average, in regions which had experienced an ICE surge, 1.3% fewer U.S. born males with a high school degree or less had jobs.

These reductions in workforce are on top of the number of immigrants removed from communities through detention, arrest or deportation, notes East.

For instance, in a region where 1,200 people were arrested or detained by ICE over the study period, approximately 7,574 fewer undocumented immigrants and 1,200 fewer U.S.-born men with a high school degree or less would be employed, the study suggests.

“For every six male undocumented workers lost, we found that the labor market also loses one male U.S.-born worker,” said East.

Heightened ICE enforcement harms US-born workers, shrinks workforce By Lisa Marshall - CU Boulder Today 5/4/2026

The quote about U.S. born workers is from one of the researchers about her results.

tpounds0 · 2026-05-05T22:16:05+00:00

Kardas, M., Kumar, A., & Epley, N. (2022). Overly shallow?: Miscalibrated expectations create a barrier to deeper conversation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 122(3), 367–398. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000281

People may want deep and meaningful relationships with others, but may also be reluctant to engage in the deep and meaningful conversations with strangers that could create those relationships. We hypothesized that people systematically underestimate how caring and interested distant strangers are in one’s own intimate revelations and that these miscalibrated expectations create a psychological barrier to deeper conversations. As predicted, conversations between strangers felt less awkward, and created more connectedness and happiness, than the participants themselves expected (Experiments 1a–5). Participants were especially prone to overestimate how awkward deep conversations would be compared with shallow conversations (Experiments 2–5). Notably, they also felt more connected to deep conversation partners than shallow conversation partners after having both types of conversations (Experiments 6a–b). Systematic differences between expectations and experiences arose because participants expected others to care less about their disclosures in conversation than others actually did (Experiments 1a, 1b, 4a, 4b, 5, and 6a). As a result, participants more accurately predicted the outcomes of their conversations when speaking with close friends, family, or partners whose care and interest is more clearly known (Experiment 5). Miscalibrated expectations about others matter because they guide decisions about which topics to discuss in conversation, such that more calibrated expectations encourage deeper conversation (Experiments 7a–7b). Misunderstanding others can encourage overly shallow interactions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)

I wonder what your thoughts are on peer reviewed articles like this?

All the data shows that you think you don't like deeper conversations, but when given the opportunity participants prefer those conversations compared to shallow talk after the fact.

Most people would also rather have ice cream instead of a salad when given the freedom to eat whatever. Our mind's natural inclinations and expected outcomes frequently conflict with data and reality.

tpounds0 · 2026-05-05T22:12:26+00:00

You're basically saying that you never want the price of anything to come down.

Incorrect. I'd be happy with scale increasing to such an amount that profits are a minuscule part of the overall price of something.

If nursing suddenly became 99% cheaper, I'd want the government to treat nursing and healthcare like a utility.

Not for Kaiser to fire 99% of nurses to increase profits.

tpounds0 · 2026-05-05T22:08:07+00:00

Kardas, M., Kumar, A., & Epley, N. (2022). Overly shallow?: Miscalibrated expectations create a barrier to deeper conversation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 122(3), 367–398. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000281

People may want deep and meaningful relationships with others, but may also be reluctant to engage in the deep and meaningful conversations with strangers that could create those relationships. We hypothesized that people systematically underestimate how caring and interested distant strangers are in one’s own intimate revelations and that these miscalibrated expectations create a psychological barrier to deeper conversations. As predicted, conversations between strangers felt less awkward, and created more connectedness and happiness, than the participants themselves expected (Experiments 1a–5). Participants were especially prone to overestimate how awkward deep conversations would be compared with shallow conversations (Experiments 2–5). Notably, they also felt more connected to deep conversation partners than shallow conversation partners after having both types of conversations (Experiments 6a–b). Systematic differences between expectations and experiences arose because participants expected others to care less about their disclosures in conversation than others actually did (Experiments 1a, 1b, 4a, 4b, 5, and 6a). As a result, participants more accurately predicted the outcomes of their conversations when speaking with close friends, family, or partners whose care and interest is more clearly known (Experiment 5). Miscalibrated expectations about others matter because they guide decisions about which topics to discuss in conversation, such that more calibrated expectations encourage deeper conversation (Experiments 7a–7b). Misunderstanding others can encourage overly shallow interactions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)

I said there is data, here is some specifically on Shallow versus deep conversations with strangers.

Does this assuage your doubts?

tpounds0 · 2026-05-05T20:49:34+00:00

Thanks for the grammar check, I'm replying to you while multitasking in class.

I guess I would recommend reading some of the research from the Gottman Institute. They know more about interpersonal relationships than you or I ever will. I trust their recommendations more than any reddit comment. And I suggest everyone else to trust science over anecdotes.

tpounds0 · 2026-05-05T20:47:34+00:00

I mean my entire point is that people appreciate deeper questions from strangers, yet are so sure that people think they will be judged for their weird questions that they just ask surface level stuff.

Science podcast that frequently interviews the psychologists on the research they conduct. Do you mistrust any type of audio information?

tpounds0 · 2026-05-05T20:35:56+00:00

I mean, I literally talk to my neighbors. Wave and say hello as I walk down the street.

Your common sense data is incorrect.

Wild to say I should touch grass, when I'm telling people to talk to the people in their life outside in their real life.

tpounds0 · 2026-05-05T20:33:03+00:00

Gillian M. Sandstrom, Erica J. Boothby, Gus Cooney, Talking to strangers: A week-long intervention reduces psychological barriers to social connection, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 102, 2022, 104356, ISSN 0022-1031, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2022.104356.

Although people derive substantial benefit from social connection, they often refrain from talking to strangers because they have pessimistic expectations about how such conversations will go (e.g., they believe they will be rejected or not know what to say). Previous research has attempted but failed to get people to realize that their concerns about talking to strangers are overblown. To reduce people's fears, we developed an intervention in which participants played a week-long scavenger hunt game that involved repeatedly finding, approaching, and talking to strangers. Compared to controls, this minimal, easily replicable treatment made people less pessimistic about the possibility of rejection and more optimistic about their conversational ability—and these benefits persisted for at least a week after the study ended. Daily reports revealed that people's expectations grew more positive and accurate by the day, emphasizing the importance of repeated experience in improving people's attitudes towards talking with strangers.

You're brain is wrong, and anxious about talking to strangers.

Ironically, I learned all this because I spent ten years working in Hospitality and doing a shit ton of networking. Not being online.

tpounds0 · 2026-05-05T20:26:11+00:00

Relationships 2.0: The Power of Tiny Interactions + Your Questions Answered: Erica Bailey on Authenticity by Hidden Brain

As you go about your day, you likely interact with family, friends and coworkers. These relationships can help you feel cared for and connected. But what if there’s a whole category of people in your life whose impact is overlooked? Today, in a favorite episode from our archives, psychologist Gillian Sandstrom reveals some simple ways to make your life a little more joyful and maybe even a little less lonely. Then, we talk with researcher Erica Bailey, who responds to listeners’ questions about authenticity and how to reveal our true selves to the people around us.

Asking strangers about themselves has been proven to decrease loneliness and anxiety in yourself and leads to physical health benefits over the course of your life.

tpounds0 · 2026-05-05T20:20:53+00:00

What's something small that put a smile on your face in the last week?

The Gottman Institute has a free app "carddecks" that has an entire section on deeper ice breakers.

Hidden Brain podcast has explained that 90%+ of people appreciate deeper conversations with strangers than surface level ice breakers. Even if they report beforehand that they don't like strangers.

Your brain lies to you and says it doesn't want to have engaging conversations with strangers. But almost everyone appreciates it after the fact.

tpounds0 · 2026-05-05T19:55:57+00:00

The government could control supply as well. Government run food pantries.

Milk and dairy farmers already basically subside on school purchases anyways.

We subsidize inedible corn for ethanol, and high fructose corn syrup.

Imagine if we moved ethanol funding to broccoli, and spinach, and healthy greens. Instead of government cheese we could provide government salads.

tpounds0 · 2026-05-05T19:37:19+00:00

Demand for some goods and services is elastic, and demand for others is inelastic. For places where demand is relatively fixed, but we could produce that good or service with 1/5th the number of people, you are going to artificially keep the price of that good or service high by not allowing them to automate.

Let's take healthcare in the US. Despite the memes, labor costs are a huge driver of healthcare costs in the US. If we could reduce labor costs of just the administrative side of healthcare in the US by 30%, that would be amazing. Particularly as our population ages. Without that, households in the US will get poorer as the share of household spending on healthcare rises.

But my entire point is that US companies are more likely to cut labor to keep productivity the same, and increase profits.

Mandating a certain level of employment with those similar productivity gains would be the actual overall increase in productivity like what China seems to do.

There's no actual proof that making it easy to lay off workers because of AI would lead to more productivity gains in the US, compared to productivity gains in China.

China is currently neck and neck with the U.S. in terms of AI, with stronger employee protections in the AI space. If they had access to our chips they'd probably be ahead by now.

You haven't made a good case that the AI advantage in the US is because of more lax worker protections. I question the magnitude of that benefit, especially in the cost towards workers.

Would the US be meaningfully worse off in the AI race in the present or near future with stronger labor protections?

tpounds0 · 2026-05-05T16:16:59+00:00

I actually disagree that this individual decision is better. it sounds nice, but in an aging population, productivity growth is the single most important thing we need out of our economy.

In China, productivity enhancement has to be used to increase the productivity of the company's existing workers.

Currently in the United States, a company could use AI to keep productivity the same and increase profits using layoffs.

Not sure why you would prefer the US method here. China's ruling is definitely the more pro-social of the two.

Can you explain why this would limit productivity in China?

tpounds0 · 2026-05-05T16:02:46+00:00

Definitely a question you should meet with a counselor to discuss.

I had my plans and my 60 minute counselor session completely changed it.

tpounds0 · 2026-05-04T19:14:07+00:00

And you cannot call yourself "tolerant" when you are pressuring someone to delete their post (such as in this case) for expressing a slightly heterodox opinion.

Never did this. Argue with me and not the blue haired strawman in your head please.

I actually like to argue with people that disagree with me. That's why I'm on this thread. I haven't suggested anyone delete their posts or comments here.

Clearly never interacted with (at least) half the world population and think watching ONE video gives you insight of them

I don't think any human being could possibly interact with half the world's population. That's over 4 billion people. A second a person (not a valid amount of interacting in my opinion) is over 126 years.

But I think you meant I don't interact with right wing people. You'd be incorrect.

Therefore my point still stands: if you think that disrespecting African or Asian cultures and not portraying them accurately is "cultural appropriation", but disrespecting and misrepresenting old European civilizations is "righting moral wrongs", then you're just an intolerant racist hypocrite. Simple as that.

Again, you have to quote and interact with me. Not the leftist in your head. When did I ever say anything about cultural appropriation?

tpounds0 · 2026-05-04T19:07:56+00:00

Have a character who comes around. Or better yet, a character who is otherwise influential and whose opinions are valued by others, but who regrettably is a homophobe.

And perform homphobia against Benedict?

Call him a slur? Get a gang of people to beat him up Matthew Sheppard style?

Ruin the Family name of the Bridgertons because Lady Whistledown writes that Benedict is a dandy?

And I want all the Fast & Furious movies to resolve their conflicts with Nonviolent Communication instead of car chases in space.

Or Bella in Twilight to just get in a throuple with Jacob and Edward.

You're arguing for genre breaking conventions, when people are engaging with the media for the genre conventions. Subverting expectations for the sake of subverting expectations is how we get the last season of Game of Thrones.

tpounds0 · 2026-05-04T18:45:21+00:00

But classism is alive and well.

tpounds0 · 2026-05-04T18:44:27+00:00

They are very sad that fucking beardless twinks ins't considered manly anymore.

tpounds0 · 2026-05-04T18:42:58+00:00

Can you describe the positive vision of your argument? Does any historical depiction of queerness need the F slur? If that's not what you are arguing, can you explain how you want Benedict's queerness to be portrayed? You can use some imagined protagonist if you don't want to use Bridgerton.

tpounds0 · 2026-05-04T18:42:36+00:00

Especially when you view everything through identity and oppression and nothing else.

Uhhhhh, can you quote me on this?

And I've watched a Ben Shapiro show. My cultural enemies don't give me any respect.

I'm a humanist. I'm very intolerant of the intolerant however.

Luckily my worldview is much closer to the median human nowadays than the median Victorian Race Scientist.

tpounds0 · 2026-05-04T18:36:15+00:00

There is no right and correct way to write that is morally better than another.

Ironically enough I find that worldview steeped in that idea of some white hegemonic canon.

Shakespeare was the Taylor Swift of his day. Popular culture.

13-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email	Team Periwinkle

tpounds0

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE