6 ms·

It would be wonderful if we could, just once, have a conversation about something happening outside the US without bringing in US culture war talking points.

TMWNN 1y ago
Publicly cheering Kirk's murder is what made Abaraonye notable. I provided a citation for the ABB grades, which is relevant to the comment I replied to.
- afavour 1y ago
  > I provided a citation for the ABB grades, which is relevant to the comment I replied to. An extremely tenuous connection. Abaraonye (and even less his words on Kirk) had absolutely no relevance to the criteria by which the Times assesses universities, thus had no impact on Oxfords placement, thus has no relevance to the conversation.
  - TMWNN 1y ago
    Patanegra wrote: > To get in, you need 4 A* from an independent schools, or just 3 As from state schools. In reply, I provided a recently prominent example of someone recently admitted to Oxford with lower than 3 A grades on the A-Levels. I only mentioned Kirk's murder as context because, as I keep repeating, the person a) only became prominent because b) he publicly cheered said murder c) after debating Kirk in person. I don't know what else you can ask for here.
    - afavour 1y ago
      > I don't know what else you can ask for here. Perhaps a demonstration of any kind of connection between his grades and his views on Kirk? The implication in what you're saying is that an ABB student is saying bad things than a 4 A* student would never say. I'd love to see anything backing that up. There are plenty of ABB students who said nothing of that nature and I'd wager you could find 4 A* students (albeit with a lower profile) who did. Absent that connection it just looks very much like you're using the person's grades as a tenuous excuse to bring them up.
      - programjames 1y ago
        I believe you're being purposefully dense here. I get it, and probably do the same sometimes, but the connection is pretty obvious: someone gets in (allegedly) due to ideological fit instead of merit, and then becomes one of the most prominent voices for that ideology at the campus. It shows "wokism" has finally solved the reproduction crisis, and for people opposed to certain aspects (like affirmative action), that's pretty worrying.
        afavour 1y ago
        But that isn’t a connection. It’s a coincidence. Where is the evidence that an Oxford with only 4 A* students would not have any such language on its campus? There is none. If I argued that his comments were an obvious sign that Oxford needs to stop admitting people whose last name starts with A you’d rightly say I was being absurd. But basing the argument around his grades is no more valid. “allegedly due to ideological fit” says it all. We’re just making stuff up to fit preconceived notions.
        programjames 1y ago
        If you already believe he got in on merits, then obviously this is all a coincidence. But obviously the other guy you're arguing with believes he got in due to ideological fit, so it's no coincidence he espouses the ideology. You're dismissing your antagonist's cruxes as if they never existed. That's so rude.
        afavour 1y ago
        > You're dismissing your antagonist's cruxes as if they never existed Because there’s no evidence for them! They themselves used the word “allegedly”. Asking for evidence to back up an assertion is not rude, it’s table stakes for any kind of debate.
        programjames 1y ago
        No? That was me. Also, it's very strange to say, "there's just no connection at all," instead of, "I don't think his lower offer letter was due to affirmative action, but probably due to skills in other areas (heck, he's the president-elect of the Oxford Union!)."
ralusek 1y ago
> incoming president of Oxford Union > debated Kirk [at Oxford] > cheered assassination of Kirk, which happened within months of debate Is this really dragging American culture war into things? This is clearly relevant to Oxford
- mensetmanusman 1y ago
  Anyone logical knows it’s relevant, but people putting their head in the sand about the most significant political assassination in over 50 years isn’t a surprise.
znpy 1y ago
As somebody that's not from the UK and not from the US, knowing this guy cheered the murder of Charlie Kirk gives me a strong hint about the kind of person it's being talked about. So yes, in that sense it's an useful piece of information.
- croes 1y ago
  Given the violence Kirk paved the way and how he shrugged off gun related deaths as necessary evil for the 2nd amendment, I see no great difference in unsympathetic behavior of both.
- afavour 1y ago
  > gives me a strong hint about the kind of person it's being talked about. There was no person being talked about, though. This is a discussion about Oxford's university ranking. The GP brought up a person entirely irrelevant to that discussion and informed us of his views on a topic that's also irrelevant to the discussion.
  - cvwright 1y ago
    How are the grades of a student in a prestigious position at Oxford not relevant to the academic reputation of Oxford?
    - afavour 1y ago
      My objection was not the student in question being mentioned. It was why he was mentioned: his views on Charlie Kirk, a US culture war topic that has nothing to do with the discussion and nothing to do with the student’s admission grades.
      - mensetmanusman 1y ago
        Oxfords name is currently being trashed globally because of this though. It sucks, but it must be dealt with. Celebrating violence against free speech doesn’t make sense for Oxford’s name to stand behind.
mensetmanusman 1y ago
The current president of a verbal debate club representing Oxford cheering political violence against someone he just debated is actually quite relevant. The society leaders decided it’s okay for him to do that because of racism based on their most recent response.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]

TMWNN 1y ago

Publicly cheering Kirk's murder is what made Abaraonye notable. I provided a citation for the ABB grades, which is relevant to the comment I replied to.

afavour 1y ago
> I provided a citation for the ABB grades, which is relevant to the comment I replied to. An extremely tenuous connection. Abaraonye (and even less his words on Kirk) had absolutely no relevance to the criteria by which the Times assesses universities, thus had no impact on Oxfords placement, thus has no relevance to the conversation.
- TMWNN 1y ago
  Patanegra wrote: > To get in, you need 4 A* from an independent schools, or just 3 As from state schools. In reply, I provided a recently prominent example of someone recently admitted to Oxford with lower than 3 A grades on the A-Levels. I only mentioned Kirk's murder as context because, as I keep repeating, the person a) only became prominent because b) he publicly cheered said murder c) after debating Kirk in person. I don't know what else you can ask for here.
  - afavour 1y ago
    > I don't know what else you can ask for here. Perhaps a demonstration of any kind of connection between his grades and his views on Kirk? The implication in what you're saying is that an ABB student is saying bad things than a 4 A* student would never say. I'd love to see anything backing that up. There are plenty of ABB students who said nothing of that nature and I'd wager you could find 4 A* students (albeit with a lower profile) who did. Absent that connection it just looks very much like you're using the person's grades as a tenuous excuse to bring them up.
    - programjames 1y ago
      I believe you're being purposefully dense here. I get it, and probably do the same sometimes, but the connection is pretty obvious: someone gets in (allegedly) due to ideological fit instead of merit, and then becomes one of the most prominent voices for that ideology at the campus. It shows "wokism" has finally solved the reproduction crisis, and for people opposed to certain aspects (like affirmative action), that's pretty worrying.
      - afavour 1y ago
        But that isn’t a connection. It’s a coincidence. Where is the evidence that an Oxford with only 4 A* students would not have any such language on its campus? There is none. If I argued that his comments were an obvious sign that Oxford needs to stop admitting people whose last name starts with A you’d rightly say I was being absurd. But basing the argument around his grades is no more valid. “allegedly due to ideological fit” says it all. We’re just making stuff up to fit preconceived notions.
        programjames 1y ago
        If you already believe he got in on merits, then obviously this is all a coincidence. But obviously the other guy you're arguing with believes he got in due to ideological fit, so it's no coincidence he espouses the ideology. You're dismissing your antagonist's cruxes as if they never existed. That's so rude.
        afavour 1y ago
        > You're dismissing your antagonist's cruxes as if they never existed Because there’s no evidence for them! They themselves used the word “allegedly”. Asking for evidence to back up an assertion is not rude, it’s table stakes for any kind of debate.
        programjames 1y ago
        No? That was me. Also, it's very strange to say, "there's just no connection at all," instead of, "I don't think his lower offer letter was due to affirmative action, but probably due to skills in other areas (heck, he's the president-elect of the Oxford Union!)."

ralusek 1y ago

> incoming president of Oxford Union > debated Kirk [at Oxford] > cheered assassination of Kirk, which happened within months of debate Is this really dragging American culture war into things? This is clearly relevant to Oxford

mensetmanusman 1y ago
Anyone logical knows it’s relevant, but people putting their head in the sand about the most significant political assassination in over 50 years isn’t a surprise.

znpy 1y ago

As somebody that's not from the UK and not from the US, knowing this guy cheered the murder of Charlie Kirk gives me a strong hint about the kind of person it's being talked about. So yes, in that sense it's an useful piece of information.

croes 1y ago
Given the violence Kirk paved the way and how he shrugged off gun related deaths as necessary evil for the 2nd amendment, I see no great difference in unsympathetic behavior of both.
afavour 1y ago
> gives me a strong hint about the kind of person it's being talked about. There was no person being talked about, though. This is a discussion about Oxford's university ranking. The GP brought up a person entirely irrelevant to that discussion and informed us of his views on a topic that's also irrelevant to the discussion.
- cvwright 1y ago
  How are the grades of a student in a prestigious position at Oxford not relevant to the academic reputation of Oxford?
  - afavour 1y ago
    My objection was not the student in question being mentioned. It was why he was mentioned: his views on Charlie Kirk, a US culture war topic that has nothing to do with the discussion and nothing to do with the student’s admission grades.
    - mensetmanusman 1y ago
      Oxfords name is currently being trashed globally because of this though. It sucks, but it must be dealt with. Celebrating violence against free speech doesn’t make sense for Oxford’s name to stand behind.

mensetmanusman 1y ago

The current president of a verbal debate club representing Oxford cheering political violence against someone he just debated is actually quite relevant. The society leaders decided it’s okay for him to do that because of racism based on their most recent response.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]