Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: Generational Boundaries - Page 74







Post#1826 at 05-09-2003 09:40 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
05-09-2003, 09:40 PM #1826
Guest

Quote Originally Posted by Mark Y
Interesting article...notice that Tulgan & Martin extended their Gen "Y" to 1988 (from 1984 and later 1986)

http://www.brandchannel.com/features...id=156#archive


What do these new trends mean for brand owners trying to reach the youth market? And what can other markets learn from these US trends?
Stung by their failure to recognize the unique features of then twenty-something X-ers, brand owners embraced Gen-Y as the next youth generation in the early 1990s. Gen-Y was identified at that time as the current crop of teenagers born between 1974 and 1980.
74 and 80? I thought it was 77 and 85!

Gen-Y was defined through a linear extension of trends noted for X-ers. During the early 1990s teen crime, drug use and other negative youth trends were on the upswing. Popular culture continued a decade-long trend embracing the cynical, ironic, and apolitical. Children were said to be growing up too soon, and prophets of doom predicted a coming wave of teen super-predators.

Today, Gen-Y continues to be characterized by many as a sort of super-sized Gen-X -- larger in number and more diverse, individualistic, pierced, skateboarding and in-your-face than Gen-X. Marketers aiming at Gen-Y frequently assume they respond to brands with hip, edgy statements that cut through media clutter and push the boundaries of style and taste. Growing up with no memory of the economic malaise of the 1970s, Gen-Y is a marketer's dream -- they'll buy simply because it is cool to do so.



If this "edgy" Gen-Y is an adequate description of youth in 2003; kids today should be more 'tude-laced and purchase-happy than ever before. But US teens and college students have switched directions to a very un-Y path. It's not that the edginess of Y-style isn't out there, but as Dr. Carolyn Martin of Rainmaker Thinking, an authority on young people in the workplace, says "there are broader truths that need to be articulated" about teens and young adults.
These truths include unexpected trends among US youth, such as:


Violent crime by 12 to 17-year-olds is down by over 50 percent from its 1992-1993 peak (US Bureau of Justice Statistics).
hmm... while crime by 12 to 17 year olds peaked in 1992 and 1993, crime by 10 to 17 year olds peaked in 1994?
Despite media reports of casual sex "hookups" among college students, the late 1990s saw overall teen sexual activity decline and virginity rise (Centers for Disease Control & Prevention, US).

School shootings were down by more than half in the late 1990s (less than 15 per year) compared to the early 1990s (over 40 per year).
Which generation does the school shootings again?


Smoking, drinking and drug use among 8th, 10th and 12th graders fell simultaneously in 2002 for the first time (University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research).
Just in time for the class of 2001 to miss it!

According to Gallup more than 90 percent of teens report being very close to their parents; in 1974, more than 40 percent of baby boomers said they'd be better off without their parents.

Suicide rates for teens have fallen significantly since their 1988 to 1994 peak (National Center for Health Statistics, US).

Today's kids are more apt to trust parents (86 percent), teachers (86 percent) and the police (83 percent) than music celebrities (35 percent) and athletes (30 percent) (Applied Research & Consulting LLC).
Why would we trust celebrities or athletes? Of course, I don't trust the police either... but how many of them trust themselves?

Volunteerism is up. A University of California (UCLA) survey of college freshmen from fall 2001 showed an all-time high of 86.2 percent of students who reportedly engaged in volunteer work, compared to 66 percent in 1989.

Teens now form the most religious age bracket in the US. Participation in church groups among teens rose from 17 percent to 28 percent between 1995 and 2001 (Roper). In 2002, the UC Berkeley Survey Research Center PACES project reported that 67 percent of teens supported federal aid to religious organizations -- versus 40 percent of adults ages 27 to 59.

Teen marriages rose steadily after a low around 1990 -- a trend running counter to older US generations, which are getting married later (US Census).



Clearly, teens and young adults have reversed many trends that peaked in the early 1990s -- the same time that Gen-Y was defined. Was Gen-Y wrong from the start? It could be that the description of the edgy youth culture of 1993 was a description of the end of a generation, rather than a beginning.
How can this statement be reconciled with standard generational boundaries? Looking at absolute birthrates, Gen-X represents the "baby bust" decline in births in the US after the 1950s boom. Gen-Y is often described as an "echo boom" of rising births after 1975. This definition makes sense for marketers and advertisers, since it focuses on the differential size of their audience in each generation.

However, if one believes that generations are real social entities (in other words, that people born in particular eras of history really share common traits), other indicators become important. If US generations are defined by birth rates, the late 1970s rise in births simply reflects the baby boom entering childbearing age. It wasn't until after 1982 that actual birth rates began to rise.
Actually they fell in 1983, stayed constant in 1984, rose slightly in 1985, and fell again in 1986... the birth RATE was the exact same in 1983, 1984, and 1986 as in 1979 (15.6)

This boom was long lived -- birth rates in the US rose above replacement levels in 1990, fell slightly during the decade, and reached a second peak in 2001. In contrast, Europe and Japan show long-term declines in birthrates. According to Claire Raines, author of Generations at Work, "Culturally, we're much more focused on kids; parents are very involved in their children's lives and vice versa."

Other factors point to the early 1980s forming a natural generation boundary. An unprecedented bull market took hold in the US in 1982 and lasted until 2000. Boomers discovered parenting and promptly created a culture of child protection ranging from no-tolerance schools to standards-based learning. Mainstream moviemaking turned away from Exorcist-style, "devil child" films popular during the 1970s to "beautiful baby" films like Three Men and a Baby, Raising Arizona, Baby Boom and Little Man Tate. This trend continued into the 1990s with Disney's second golden age of animation and the appearance of super-smart movie tweens in Spy Kids and the Harry Potter series.

Based on the evidence, the Gen-Y characterization needs serious revision. One approach is to confine Gen-Y to the late 1970s cohorts responsible for early 1990s youth trends, and define a new, "Millennial" generation with birth dates running from the 1980s to 2000 or 2001. This approach was first developed in the work of William Strauss and Neil Howe, who discussed Millennials in their 1991 book Generations and more recently in Millennials Rising. These authors assign late 1970s cohorts to Gen-X and put the dividing line between generations in 1982. Back when "Gen-Y" and "disturbed" were often said in the same breath, Strauss & Howe predicted that by 2000, "teen pathologies -- truancy, substance abuse, crime, suicide, unwed pregnancy -- will all decline."

More recently, Lynne Lancaster and David Stillman assigned Gen-Y birth years between 1981 to 1999 in their book When Generations Collide. Like Strauss & Howe, these authors noted the close parent-child bonds lacking in the "edgy" Y model. Ron Zemke, Claire Raines and Bob Filipczak defined a similar post-X generation born between 1980 to 2000 in their book Generations at Work.

In contrast, Rainmaker's Martin feels it's necessary to classify the 1978 to 1988 cohorts as a unique, mini Gen-Y. According to Martin, "the problem with longer definitions is that they're too huge" -- in other words, they cover too much societal change. This analysis puts the Gen-Y teens of the early 1990s into a unique buffer zone between X-ers and Millennials.
I'm waiting to see if T&M use 90 as a boundary in a couple of years... while an argument can be made for 78-88 as a cusp zone (with 85-88 or 86-88 being the Millie leaners with the last few residual X traits), it is VERY hard to argue much past that


Whatever the generational division, there is agreement that kids currently entering college are something new. According to Strauss and Howe, Millennials diverge from older Gen-Y models in several key aspects:


Unlike earlier generations, Millennials have a near-zero generation gap, and parent-child co-purchase decisions are common. Martin agrees, saying: "When you ask this generation who their heroes are, the majority say their parents." Brands seeking to appeal to this generation in the name of rebellion will increasingly fall flat.
What about rebellion against other Boomer authority figures?

Millennials are expected to retain close parental bonds even after leaving home, and they are more likely to consult with their parents on major decisions. Marketing aimed at this generation should consider the input of parents on big-ticket purchases.

The "helicopter parents" of Millennials are increasingly found on campus, monitoring any physical or moral threat to their children's progress. Parental input must increasingly be factored into any beliefs about the greater susceptibility of Gen-Y versus Gen-X to marketing messages.

Millennials show greater interest in family, religion, and community -- at the expense of celebrity role models and their associated brands.

Trash-talk pop culture may lose its influence with today's teens. The rise of Avril Lavigne -- an ordinary-looking, midriff-free, non-dancing singer hailed as the "anti-Britney" -- may presage this generation's backlash against over-hyped, X-treme 1990s culture.
Note that Avril's outfits are such that she comes REALLY close to exposing her midriff... a kind of tantalyzing torture that makes people forget that her 'music' sucks goat balls?
Edgy brand associations may fail to appeal to this increasingly conventional generation, which looks for social consensus instead of pushing the limits of taste.
http://www.villagestreetwear.com/pornstartshirt.html

By contrast: "The clothing driven by its shock appeal, non-conformist attitude and controversial name Porn Star is 'alternative' clothing that is in demand amongst today's risk-taking Gen X and Y crowd. "Porn Star is for the rebel in all of us, someone who has a sense of humor but wants to let loose on the weekends and make a statement."
In the words of Generations at Work author Raines, "If the Gen-Y concept is about extra edginess, then, yes, it's got to go. Marketing efforts targeted at today's teens and young adults that are based on that picture will be totally misguided."

Under constant pressure by their parents and society to achieve, Millennials find little common ground with the "slacker" archetype of youth. Advertising lampooning hard work and celebrating the accidental success of airheads does not speak to this generation.

In contrast to ultra-individualist X-ers, Millennials are group-oriented -- meaning that they are less interested in an "army of one" and more interested in the "watch me become we" alternative.
"Watch me become we" sounds nothing like me... but at least it captures what the Army really IS ('army of one' sounds more like 'the trivial group of one element')

Group-oriented concepts such as "leave no one behind" may emerge from the movies (2002 movies Lilo and Stich and Black Hawk Down both used this phrase) and go mainstream.
Leave no child behind? *barfs*

Millennials appear to be using rapid-fire communication via the Internet and other peer-to-peer media to build a newly inclusive "one" from their wildly diverse origins.
"2 = 1. The pope and I are two. Therefore, the pope and I are one."

This may, in the words of Howe, cause Millennials to rally around "a few big, bright and friendly" brands and trigger brand consolidation.

Programs ranging from affirmative action to gender-equity sports-program Title IX reduced cultural and gender gaps during the Millennial childhood -- but the gap between rich and poor steadily widened. Millennials are less hung up on race, gender, or ethnicity than their parents, but may increasingly be moving toward increased sensitivity to economic class.
What does the US experience imply for other countries? During the years of the US echo boom, birthrates in Europe and Japan fell. This implies that the global youth culture in westernized countries may be on the verge of fragmenting. Marketing that appeals to youth in the US may fail elsewhere, while youth campaigns in other countries may appeal to US 30-somethings.

Strauss and Howe predict that an international Millennial generation will emerge in Europe during the next few years, with similar trends appearing in Japan and other parts of Asia by the end of the decade. A Millennial-style breakout may be imminent in your location if the following trends are evident:


An echo boomlet partly reversing trends toward smaller families
A rising obsession with the safety and education of children
Warmer relations between adolescents and their parents
Recent reversals in long-standing, negative social trends among teens
Widespread use of cell phones and the Internet for peer-to-peer communication
Marketers and brand owners targeting youth outside the US have a unique advantage. Unlike their American counterparts, they have time to prepare for the end of Y edginess, and they will be able to pick and choose among successful US strategies speaking to the post-X generation.
Whatever the ultimate outcome of these trends, it is clear that youth marketing needs to be rethought. A Gen-Y archetype may capture the essence of today's 20-somethings -- but a new reality is taking hold among teens, and it doesn't look like 1993. [5-May-2003]
Or 1997







Post#1827 at 05-09-2003 09:52 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
05-09-2003, 09:52 PM #1827
Guest

Quote Originally Posted by mmailliw 8419
Quote Originally Posted by Mark Y
Gen-Y was identified at that time as the current crop of teenagers born between 1974 and 1980.
74 and 80? I thought it was 77 and 85!
William,

(this is a post, Brian Rush-style) No. It appears, while an obvious logical fallacy, you resent being a member of the "Millennial generation." I simply suggest you "get over it." You are what you are: a fascist.

New Deal with it, kid! :wink:







Post#1828 at 05-09-2003 10:44 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
05-09-2003, 10:44 PM #1828
Guest

Quote Originally Posted by ...
Quote Originally Posted by mmailliw 8419
Quote Originally Posted by Mark Y
Gen-Y was identified at that time as the current crop of teenagers born between 1974 and 1980.
74 and 80? I thought it was 77 and 85!
William,

(this is a post, Brian Rush-style) No. It appears, while an obvious logical fallacy, you resent being a member of the "Millennial generation." I simply suggest you "get over it." You are what you are: a fascist.

New Deal with it, kid! :wink:
Or am I a Missionary? Both long generational names that begin with the letter M and are stereotypically 'fascist' (FDR, the Missionary, was the New Deal guy)... or how about simply "Generation M"? We've been called that before...







Post#1829 at 05-10-2003 05:17 AM by Morir [at joined Feb 2003 #posts 1,407]
---
05-10-2003, 05:17 AM #1829
Join Date
Feb 2003
Posts
1,407

How exactly are you a slacking, alienated, drifting, me first Xer again?
Aren't you a math major at Harvard? Won't you be out of school in like 2005, and after that you'll probably go put microchips in chimps brains in grad school until 2007 or 2008?

You aren't exactly slitting your wrists or burying your woes in the pipe are you?







Post#1830 at 05-10-2003 05:19 AM by Morir [at joined Feb 2003 #posts 1,407]
---
05-10-2003, 05:19 AM #1830
Join Date
Feb 2003
Posts
1,407

Isn't it ironic that last week there was a shooting at my former university, and now there has been a stand of at the University of Ohia. Collumbine High School is in lock down.

What is up with that generation?







Post#1831 at 05-10-2003 12:21 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
05-10-2003, 12:21 PM #1831
Guest

Quote Originally Posted by Justin-79
How exactly are you a slacking, alienated, drifting, me first Xer again?
Did I ever claim I was? And how am I NOT alienated?

Aren't you a math major at Harvard?
I am indeed a math concentrator... but then again, my school didn't stop offering the concentration in the 80s or 90s to accommodate for "Generation X"; in fact, in the academic year 1997-1998 (when the school was predominantly 70s cohorts), 101 students (all four years) concentrated exclusively in mathematics, and there were a total of 100 the next year, but after that it's always been in the double digits - so how can you really say mine is a Millie concentration?
Won't you be out of school in like 2005,
Close... 2004 - I thought I told you that I'd be in England for a year - (it's easier to 'study abroad' if you graduate a year early and then do it)
and after that you'll probably go put microchips in chimps brains in grad school until 2007 or 2008?
As I said, I'm a math concentrator, not CS or Bio... you got the years right but math people just sit around, relax, and do math - I don't see any chimps in the math department (unless you're talking about certain people...)

You aren't exactly slitting your wrists or burying your woes in the pipe are you?
The latter sounds awfully tempting... but I'm pretty sure I'm past my adolescent suicidal phase







Post#1832 at 05-10-2003 04:14 PM by Leados [at joined Sep 2002 #posts 217]
---
05-10-2003, 04:14 PM #1832
Join Date
Sep 2002
Posts
217

Justin-79--

While we're not as Extreme in our Slacking as you people are, we're definitely NOT Goody-twoshoes group-oriented people.

I think as a whole, we're ready for major societal change-- whether or not we'll actively pursue this remains to be seen, but with Bush in the White House, I think that possibility is coming closer and closer to reality. The Nomad-Hero cuspers have a unique place (as all cuspers do), and ours is to be Hell-Raisers (not that every gen doesnt have them, but plotting major societal changes isn't the same as smoking weed and drinking a lot (which is what I saw a lot of GenX doing)).

I'm not trying to start an argument with GenX; but I think us people born in 82-84, generally speaking, are in a class of our own as far as generations go.

We're our own people.
My name is John, and I want to be a Chemist When I grow up.







Post#1833 at 05-11-2003 08:16 AM by Morir [at joined Feb 2003 #posts 1,407]
---
05-11-2003, 08:16 AM #1833
Join Date
Feb 2003
Posts
1,407

Settle down children.


I'd extend your category to include 1981 to 1985, and lump you in with all of the first wave. I see plenty of kids born in 1988 or 1990 that don't fit the S and H bill.

You are right. Speaking for my peers on a whole, we generally are the kinds of people who sit around bullshitting about James Joyce and smoking hashish.
Complaining and doing nothing. Hopefully you can channel the skepticism and match it with action.







Post#1834 at 05-12-2003 12:18 AM by Libertine65 [at New Orleans joined Feb 2003 #posts 96]
---
05-12-2003, 12:18 AM #1834
Join Date
Feb 2003
Location
New Orleans
Posts
96

Leados---

What kind of societal change are you ready for? And what does Bush have to do with it? Are you desirous of the government to "change society"? I'm not.There is nothing he can do to change my world,except cut me a bigger check next time he wants to give me a rebate,and fire Ashcroft.And next time he decides to occupy a country,see fit to make provisions where a major museum and library are concerned.Show us he cares about culture and history and not just praying and prosleytyzing.Your group are no more special than the next.I would argue the opposite actually.Gen-X is the next MAJOR voting block,not Millies.And I'm in no mood for any Doris Day types to start pushing me around;I push back. :evil:







Post#1835 at 05-12-2003 12:51 AM by AlexMnWi [at Minneapolis joined Jun 2002 #posts 1,622]
---
05-12-2003, 12:51 AM #1835
Join Date
Jun 2002
Location
Minneapolis
Posts
1,622

I also think that generational boundaries can vary from school to school. Over in the Twin Cities, the 1981-1984 is a good sub-generation, and 1985/1986 and after is Millie. However, at my school, which is messed up, it goes like this: For the classes of 2002-2007: Even numbered classes: Millie. Odd numbered classes: Pure, drunken, pot-smoking X. With some notable exceptions (such as myself).

Have I ever stated that I absolutely loathe underage drinking and would pray thanks for a week if God came down and cast all booze into the pit of hell? God do I hate this state. (sorry kiff)
1987 INTP







Post#1836 at 05-12-2003 12:57 AM by Libertine65 [at New Orleans joined Feb 2003 #posts 96]
---
05-12-2003, 12:57 AM #1836
Join Date
Feb 2003
Location
New Orleans
Posts
96

....and I pray your prayer never comes true. :P ....What is it with this new stereotype of Xers being winos and potheads? This is new to me.







Post#1837 at 05-12-2003 03:47 AM by Morir [at joined Feb 2003 #posts 1,407]
---
05-12-2003, 03:47 AM #1837
Join Date
Feb 2003
Posts
1,407

Libertine65,

I think leados may be right with the stereotype. If you paid a visit to my high school circa 1997-98 you would have found a whole bunch of alcoholics and pot heads. Revolutionary impulse? Maybe among 5 or 6 NERDS (like myself). And you Alex87, what's wrong with underage drinking? How about getting rid of assigning alcohol to an age group.
when I went to Zurich in 1994 it was like an awakening for me.
Kids my age were out in the streets partying, drinking, and there was no law against it. Young people were respected to make their own decisions, and I have to say that for them, it worked.
Much better than the current setup, where the freshman class (like my freshman class) at college, usually sent tons of kids to the emergency room to get their stomachs pumped.
We need to educate people about drugs and alcohol. This "puritannical abstinence" approach, towards anything, is bound to backfire.

Justin







Post#1838 at 05-12-2003 09:57 AM by Child of Socrates [at Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort joined Sep 2001 #posts 14,092]
---
05-12-2003, 09:57 AM #1838
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort
Posts
14,092

Quote Originally Posted by AlexMnWi
Have I ever stated that I absolutely loathe underage drinking and would pray thanks for a week if God came down and cast all booze into the pit of hell? God do I hate this state. (sorry kiff)
Is there that big a difference in drinking habits between WI and MN? :-?







Post#1839 at 05-12-2003 10:58 AM by Libertine65 [at New Orleans joined Feb 2003 #posts 96]
---
05-12-2003, 10:58 AM #1839
Join Date
Feb 2003
Location
New Orleans
Posts
96

Mellow Yellow---

And yet this particular room is about "Generational Boundaries".Someone in High School in 97-98 would have been 16 or 17.....That would make them 22 or 23 today.That would certainly not be Gen-X proper.I've put the younger wave at 1978.And even if time does see fit to put that group "where they belong",that stereotype does not define Gen-X.And anyway,a pothead/wino stereotype has NOTHING to do with any Gen-X archetype.A generational identity is defined by the oldest to mid wave of a demographic,something Leados has no problem claiming for her/him self when wanting to "change society" as a group.Do potheads & alkys exist in my tribe? You bet.They exist in every tribe.The 80's is the decade that defines Gen-X.Decadent though it may have been,it was was one of the most "clean-cut" eras around.I saw more Gen-Xers turn "smoke" down than partake.....Remember,I keep emphasizing that there was a youth-Cult going on at the time.There was no real movement to "change society" at the time,except to maybe bring about more *individualism*;Teetotaling(sp?) was not the rage.







Post#1840 at 05-12-2003 03:05 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
05-12-2003, 03:05 PM #1840
Guest

Quote Originally Posted by AlexMnWi
I also think that generational boundaries can vary from school to school. Over in the Twin Cities, the 1981-1984 is a good sub-generation, and 1985/1986 and after is Millie. However, at my school, which is messed up, it goes like this: For the classes of 2002-2007: Even numbered classes: Millie. Odd numbered classes: Pure, drunken, pot-smoking X. With some notable exceptions (such as myself).

Have I ever stated that I absolutely loathe underage drinking and would pray thanks for a week if God came down and cast all booze into the pit of hell? God do I hate this state. (sorry kiff)
And I suppose the class of 2001 is off your radar?

Well... at least you're not the worst anti-drug person on the forum :-)







Post#1841 at 05-12-2003 03:07 PM by [at joined #posts ]
---
05-12-2003, 03:07 PM #1841
Guest

Quote Originally Posted by Libertine65
Mellow Yellow---

And yet this particular room is about "Generational Boundaries".Someone in High School in 97-98 would have been 16 or 17.....That would make them 22 or 23 today.That would certainly not be Gen-X proper.I've put the younger wave at 1978.And even if time does see fit to put that group "where they belong",that stereotype does not define Gen-X.And anyway,a pothead/wino stereotype has NOTHING to do with any Gen-X archetype.A generational identity is defined by the oldest to mid wave of a demographic,something Leados has no problem claiming for her/him self when wanting to "change society" as a group.Do potheads & alkys exist in my tribe? You bet.They exist in every tribe.The 80's is the decade that defines Gen-X.Decadent though it may have been,it was was one of the most "clean-cut" eras around.I saw more Gen-Xers turn "smoke" down than partake.....Remember,I keep emphasizing that there was a youth-Cult going on at the time.There was no real movement to "change society" at the time,except to maybe bring about more *individualism*;Teetotaling(sp?) was not the rage.
And what decade would you suppose defined/will define the Millies?







Post#1842 at 05-12-2003 10:32 PM by AlexMnWi [at Minneapolis joined Jun 2002 #posts 1,622]
---
05-12-2003, 10:32 PM #1842
Join Date
Jun 2002
Location
Minneapolis
Posts
1,622

Quote Originally Posted by Mellow Yellow
Kids my age were out in the streets partying, drinking, and there was no law against it.
(vomits)







Post#1843 at 05-12-2003 10:34 PM by AlexMnWi [at Minneapolis joined Jun 2002 #posts 1,622]
---
05-12-2003, 10:34 PM #1843
Join Date
Jun 2002
Location
Minneapolis
Posts
1,622

Quote Originally Posted by Kiff '61
Quote Originally Posted by AlexMnWi
Have I ever stated that I absolutely loathe underage drinking and would pray thanks for a week if God came down and cast all booze into the pit of hell? God do I hate this state. (sorry kiff)
Is there that big a difference in drinking habits between WI and MN? :-?
Well, MN still drinks a lot but not as much as WI (however, Colorado is by far the drunkest state). The thing that made it seem like a sharper difference is that my old town was very "straight arrow" as you would say, and my current town is very drunk. My old school was also much smarter on tests (which some certain posters here would say doesn't matter, but it does to me and I don't care what you think anymore).
1987 INTP







Post#1844 at 05-12-2003 10:35 PM by AlexMnWi [at Minneapolis joined Jun 2002 #posts 1,622]
---
05-12-2003, 10:35 PM #1844
Join Date
Jun 2002
Location
Minneapolis
Posts
1,622

Quote Originally Posted by mmailliw 8419
And I suppose the class of 2001 is off your radar?

Well... at least you're not the worst anti-drug person on the forum :-)
Yeah, the C2001 graduated before I moved here. Who is the most anti-drug person n the forum?
1987 INTP







Post#1845 at 05-12-2003 10:39 PM by Stonewall Patton [at joined Sep 2001 #posts 3,857]
---
05-12-2003, 10:39 PM #1845
Join Date
Sep 2001
Posts
3,857

Quote Originally Posted by AlexMnWi
Well, MN still drinks a lot but not as much as WI (however, Colorado is by far the drunkest state).
All aboard for Colorado! One-way tickets still available.







Post#1846 at 05-13-2003 12:36 AM by Child of Socrates [at Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort joined Sep 2001 #posts 14,092]
---
05-13-2003, 12:36 AM #1846
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
Cybrarian from America's Dairyland, 1961 cohort
Posts
14,092

Quote Originally Posted by AlexMnWi
My old school was also much smarter on tests (which some certain posters here would say doesn't matter, but it does to me and I don't care what you think anymore).
Which tests are you speaking of? SAT's, ACT's or just your garden variety final examinations?

Why should group performance matter so much? Why not just concern yourself with your own performance?

(I do happen to care what you think, btw)







Post#1847 at 05-13-2003 07:19 AM by AlexMnWi [at Minneapolis joined Jun 2002 #posts 1,622]
---
05-13-2003, 07:19 AM #1847
Join Date
Jun 2002
Location
Minneapolis
Posts
1,622

Quote Originally Posted by Kiff '61
Quote Originally Posted by AlexMnWi
My old school was also much smarter on tests (which some certain posters here would say doesn't matter, but it does to me and I don't care what you think anymore).
Which tests are you speaking of? SAT's, ACT's or just your garden variety final examinations?

Why should group performance matter so much? Why not just concern yourself with your own performance?

(I do happen to care what you think, btw)
I was referring to their performance on the mandatory (not voluntary) state tests. My old town was in the top ten in the state on the Minnesota Graduation Tests. My school now is much lower than many area schools on the WI state tests. The people in my old school also actually tried (and succeded) in getting good grades, while here only a few people get that and the rest are so air headed that they are completely dependent on other people to help them pass the class.
1987 INTP







Post#1848 at 05-13-2003 08:14 AM by Libertine65 [at New Orleans joined Feb 2003 #posts 96]
---
05-13-2003, 08:14 AM #1848
Join Date
Feb 2003
Location
New Orleans
Posts
96

My goodness,Alex.Could it be that you're a puritan? :o







Post#1849 at 05-13-2003 08:14 AM by Libertine65 [at New Orleans joined Feb 2003 #posts 96]
---
05-13-2003, 08:14 AM #1849
Join Date
Feb 2003
Location
New Orleans
Posts
96

My goodness,Alex.Could it be that you're a puritan? :o







Post#1850 at 05-13-2003 08:14 AM by Libertine65 [at New Orleans joined Feb 2003 #posts 96]
---
05-13-2003, 08:14 AM #1850
Join Date
Feb 2003
Location
New Orleans
Posts
96

My goodness,Alex.Could it be that you're a puritan? :o
-----------------------------------------