Hayden wrote: "My response to question considered what a university would consider worth promoting. I sorta doubt that Georgetown (or most other universities) would actively promote success in TRASH on par with success in a more "academic" format. It seems more difficult to justify it to parents of prospective students when questions are posed (you mean that you answer questions about sports and the Brat Pack?)." A win is a win is a win. Who has to tell the administration exactly what the subject matter is? They don't have to know that your winning performance came on identifying Savannah, Hyaptia Lee, and Ginger Thomas (hypothetical stituation). And really, what is better recruitment, in the minds of prospective students at least, than guaranteed exposure to alcohol, sex, and what-not. The question is whether they care about "academic" competition enough to promote either. Knowing school administrations, if they care enough to actually give you any publicity, they'll spin it to make it look as good as possible. A TRASHionals win can be made to look good. " I'll agree that TRASH's changing canon makes success at it quite difficult, but I can't see a university promoting it (especially at the expense of CBI, NAQT, and/or ACF. My response therefore focused on what a university would do if it had a choice. " Choice? What choice? Who realistically has both the ability and the inclination to win at both TRASH and CBI/NAQT/ACF. Well, okay, Michigan, but who else? Anthony, posting from his brother's apartment in Evanston, Illinois, and who may be on-line later tonight. Possibly, but just because he loves you all. Anything he says which appears to defend TRASH should not be seen as neither an official statement from TRASH, nor as an attempt to defend his 1999 TRASHionals win as prestigious.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:42 AM EST EST