I understand that donors/alumni want their kids to have tiebreaker rights. But it should have been banned the moment the DEI considerations were outright banned.
this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2024
293 points (99.7% liked)
News
23376 readers
2560 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Not sure on all the specifics of CA's admittance structure, beyond they banned race base admission in the '90s in favor of a system that guaranteed admissions to top percentile students.
But post Students for Fair Admissions DEI measures are still ok. Schools can't use race alone as a plus or minus but they may choose to favor those from disadvantaged neighborhoods, 1st generation college students, and even good essays that share someone's experience being a race.
BUT THE PRODUCT OF MY SPERM!!!
Good. Now we should also stop giving free tuition to faculties children. But maybe that's just my opinion.
I’ve heard supposedly those people got severely taxed for doing that.
Like other states, California won’t financially penalize violators, but it will post the names of violators on the state Department of Justice’s website.
Sounds like the state is just giving the violators free advertising to potential donors who want to exploit the practice.
Perhaps, or I wonder if it might lead to lawsuits in regard to the fairness of the practice.
Yeah, this seems like, "we don't care unless you care; we're just giving you information so you know whether or not you care"
Wait but I was told that rich white people didn’t have special privilege and that we had solved racism! I thought generational wealth had nothing to do with anything!
Christ the fact that that’s only being addressed now is insane to me. I thought it was just done quitely, I didn’t realize it was actually fully allowed.
How was this not illegal already?
There was nothing prohibiting it.
Taxes? I don’t know full details or if this is even tangentially related (or maybe it is the same thing). There is a supposed practice as some universities (maybe just the non-UC’s and Cal State’s) that if you were a relative (I’m assuming immediate family only) working at say USC for example, you could get accepted into the university without paying tuition. The only catch was you got severely taxed (something like 30%; of what, I don’t know) for attending tuition-free.
You can get a discount from universities if a spouse works there, but that's not the same as getting accepted automatically.