ADVERTISEMENT

Looks like Missouri needs a new professor.

Why you hating? Everybody should get equal chances, and an equal share. Everything equal.
That's actually true. Do you feel you should be given an advantage because your dad was a douchebag banker? I also know you talk a lot. Back up said talk? Not at all.
 
Last edited:
Why you hating? Everybody should get equal chances, and an equal share. Everything equal.

You are making me uncomfortable right now. Being exposed to any discomfort or things I do not like makes me desire my own personal safe space in which to express this. Mods can I please have my own board up here?
 
You are making me uncomfortable right now. Being exposed to any discomfort or things I do not like makes me desire my own personal safe space in which to express this. Mods can I please have my own board up here?
I support this. If not I will need someone to make things violent to make me feel protected.
 
  • Like
Reactions: canaham
Really doubt she'll be missed.

Check what she brings to the University for research projects : (no, not making it up)

https://communication.missouri.edu/faculty/click

Ha, I'm sure the taxpayers of Missouri are thrilled to be funding this groundbreaking research:

"Current research projects involve 50 Shades of Grey readers, the impact of social media in fans’ relationship with Lady Gaga, masculinity and male fans, messages about class and food in reality television programming, and messages about work in children's television programs"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jimmy Frank
Ha, I'm sure the taxpayers of Missouri are thrilled to be funding this groundbreaking research:

"Current research projects involve 50 Shades of Grey readers, the impact of social media in fans’ relationship with Lady Gaga, masculinity and male fans, messages about class and food in reality television programming, and messages about work in children's television programs"
The vitriol is nauseating. I am not innocent, but it is endless.
Equality!!!
 
Ha, I'm sure the taxpayers of Missouri are thrilled to be funding this groundbreaking research:

"Current research projects involve 50 Shades of Grey readers, the impact of social media in fans’ relationship with Lady Gaga, masculinity and male fans, messages about class and food in reality television programming, and messages about work in children's television programs"

I am somewhat sympathetic to the point you're making, as it's not the sort of research I'd be terribly interested in reading either. But the average citizen and taxpayer does not - and should not - decide which disciplines and research projects have value and those that don't. We aren't qualified. This is why universities have a hierarchy. Neither I or nor you can speak to the value of her research by reading a blurb on the school's website, but her department and students can, and the college of humanities can speak to the value of the department, and the university to the value of the college.

Also, if you broke down the percentages, the taxpayers are funding very little of her research anyway (tuition, ya know).

Some people seem to be for funding only math and the sciences, but that relies on a terribly myopic conception of value in which anything fails to be except for those things and activities that have practical and material value (Rubio appeared to commit such an error earlier in the Republican debate). No one who has ever enjoyed or found meaning in literature, art, music, or religion actually believes that. What human being doesn't care about such things?

(None of this should be taken as a defense of her or her actions).
 
Last edited:



Click’s employment has become a political liability for the university. The House Budget Committee will consider a spending bill next week that cuts $402,000 from the Columbia campus budget — the amount of Click’s salary as well as that of her department chair and the dean of the College of Arts and Science — and $7.6 million from the UM System’s administrative budget. So long bitch.
 
I am somewhat sympathetic to the point you're making, as it's not the sort of research I'd be terribly interested in reading either. But the average citizen and taxpayer does not - and should not - decide which disciplines and research projects have value and those that don't. We aren't qualified. This is why universities have a hierarchy. Neither I or nor you can speak to the value of her research by reading a blurb on the school's website, but her department and students can, and the college of humanities can speak to the value of the department, and the university to the value of the college.

Also, if you broke down the percentages, the taxpayers are funding very little of her research anyway (tuition, ya know).

Some people seem to be for funding only math and the sciences, but that relies on a terribly myopic conception of value in which anything fails to be except for those things and activities that have practical and material value (Rubio appeared to commit such an error earlier in the Republican debate). No one who has ever enjoyed or found meaning in literature, art, music, or religion actually believes that. What human being doesn't care about such things?

(None of this should be taken as a defense of her or her actions).

Her research is just as absurd as the blurb makes it sound. You can read more detail here: Link.

I'm all for funding and supporting the arts, but I'm not sure I'd refer to My Big Redneck Wedding, 50 Shades of Grey, Martha Stewart, and Twilight as "art". With student loan and government debt at the levels they are, I just don't think her specific research is wise use of tuition and grant money.

The whole "university heirarchy" thing is another reason college costs are ridiculous. How many "associate deans" and "assistant directors" and "vice presidents" do they really need? My brother works in higher education and has applied for many jobs, and some schools had like 5 different departments of inclusion/diversity/etc. that would have to give their approval before they could hire somebody for an entry-level position. It's ridiculous.
 
Her research is just as absurd as the blurb makes it sound. You can read more detail here: Link.

I'm all for funding and supporting the arts, but I'm not sure I'd refer to My Big Redneck Wedding, 50 Shades of Grey, Martha Stewart, and Twilight as "art". With student loan and government debt at the levels they are, I just don't think her specific research is wise use of tuition and grant money.

The whole "university heirarchy" thing is another reason college costs are ridiculous. How many "associate deans" and "assistant directors" and "vice presidents" do they really need? My brother works in higher education and has applied for many jobs, and some schools had like 5 different departments of inclusion/diversity/etc. that would have to give their approval before they could hire somebody for an entry-level position. It's ridiculous.

It sounds like we are mostly in agreement about the value of her research. Certain disciplines in the humanities are facing a value problem, and I'm with you in that I would find it hard to defend her research as a good use of resources. I am not willing to render an ultimate judgment concerning the value of her research without actually reading it, however, without knowing things like the type of methodology involved and what types of conclusions they draw in that literature. I will say that in general I do not have a high opinion of that side of communications or literature, and usually because it's just bad philosophy.

And we are in complete agreement about the problem that is the ballooning bureaucracy at universities.
 
Am I the only one who believes that all the practical knowledge I took out of the college classroom could have been accomplished in way less time than the credits those money hungry bastards made me accumulate?

Surely not, but it all depends on what you hoped to get out of college and what you actually did. Plenty of students are happy to get their degree in, say, accounting and take a class in literature or philosophy. I have a good friend from college who became a programmer, and he frequently remarks about how the existentialism class we took together was the best and most meaningful one he took in college. Other students want only to get their degree in chemistry so they can go on and be a pharmacist. They're certainly not the norm, as 18 year olds very rarely have a set path in mind. They probably didn't like the fact that they had to take gen ed courses, a course in Christian history perhaps, but they have a less than ideal attitude towards college. Universities are institutions of higher learning that provide necessary skills to specialize in any given field, yes, but they are also historically aimed at creating more well-rounded, critical, and conscientious citizens.

Of course, the vocational school path, when an option, is a much better alternative for some.
 
I am somewhat sympathetic to the point you're making, as it's not the sort of research I'd be terribly interested in reading either. But the average citizen and taxpayer does not - and should not - decide which disciplines and research projects have value and those that don't. We aren't qualified. This is why universities have a hierarchy. Neither I or nor you can speak to the value of her research by reading a blurb on the school's website, but her department and students can, and the college of humanities can speak to the value of the department, and the university to the value of the college.

Also, if you broke down the percentages, the taxpayers are funding very little of her research anyway (tuition, ya know).

Some people seem to be for funding only math and the sciences, but that relies on a terribly myopic conception of value in which anything fails to be except for those things and activities that have practical and material value (Rubio appeared to commit such an error earlier in the Republican debate). No one who has ever enjoyed or found meaning in literature, art, music, or religion actually believes that. What human being doesn't care about such things?

(None of this should be taken as a defense of her or her actions).
You are such an arrogant douchebag it's amazing.
 
Surely not, but it all depends on what you hoped to get out of college and what you actually did. Plenty of students are happy to get their degree in, say, accounting and take a class in literature or philosophy. I have a good friend from college who became a programmer, and he frequently remarks about how the existentialism class we took together was the best and most meaningful one he took in college. Other students want only to get their degree in chemistry so they can go on and be a pharmacist. They're certainly not the norm, as 18 year olds very rarely have a set path in mind. They probably didn't like the fact that they had to take gen ed courses, a course in Christian history perhaps, but they have a less than ideal attitude towards college. Universities are institutions of higher learning that provide necessary skills to specialize in any given field, yes, but they are also historically aimed at creating more well-rounded, critical, and conscientious citizens.

Of course, the vocational school path, when an option, is a much better alternative for some.[/QUOTE]

For me, this is what college should be. College shouldn't be for everyone, and not everyone should get in. It also pisses me off that people who shouldn't get in, end up getting in and receive more aid than a young person who has done all of the right things, but they get in because of multitudes of reasons (child of single parent, ethnicity, income level, etc.) Once you get in, college needs to go back to being a struggle. There are some great instructors, but it is my belief that you go to college to better yourself and gain the knowledge, not take shit classes just to get through. Anywhoooo.. Good topic of discussion.
 
How is this not locked yet?

That being said, I'm glad I got in before it did!!! RollingLaughSmokin:p:eek:o_OEek;):confused::mad::)
 
That's actually true. Do you feel you should be given an advantage because your dad was a douchebag banker? I also know you talk a lot. Back up said talk? Not at all.

Do you feel that if you become successful that you should be able to give your children opportunities that you didn't have?
 
Upon further review, I predict a WHOLE LOT of cats in this woman's future. She's thoroughly weird for sure.

That said, he's my impression of how quickly and gleefully you two stapled your political opinions to the back of the story and also just of how you act on the internet in general:

DSC00949.JPG
 
  • Like
Reactions: CC_Lemming
I think you meant "drivel." Perhaps it is not I who would benefit from more reading...
No I meant dribble. Its what I imagine running out of the side of your mouth, while searching the internets looking for reasons to be offended for other people you have absolutely zero attachment to. Most likely while dressed in man-capris and a designer t-shirt.
 
Upon further review, I predict a WHOLE LOT of cats in this woman's future. She's thoroughly weird for sure.

That said, he's my impression of how quickly and gleefully you two stapled your political opinions to the back of the story and also just of how you act on the internet in general:


Could you please clarify if I am one of the "two", so then I'll know if I should be offended or not, and then of course demand that something be done about my hurt feelings?
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
No I meant dribble. Its what I imagine running out of the side of your mouth, while searching the internets looking for reasons to be offended for other people you have absolutely zero attachment to. Most likely while dressed in man-capris and a designer t-shirt.
You sure you want to set yourself up for jokes about what I imagine runs out of the side of your mouth? You know what, I take that back. Spitters are quitters, and you're just a feisty little fighter. You wouldn't spill a drop.
 
Aww Beav. Don't get so upset. We all know your dynamite life theories. You know "let people life life how they want".. unless it differs from your libtarded line of thinking, then get offended quick!!!! You don't have to be so feminibe, no matter how cool your cosmo mag tells you it is.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT