Because like all competitions, I want it to be extremely easy for me and very hard for others. I want to ‘win’ with as little effort as possible while everyone else fails. Since I’m much, much better than these dumbasses at academics- this particular competition- I want them to fail. Since writing coherently takes no additional effort on my part, I want it to count for as much as possible.
But why is it a competition for you? Why do you “want them to fail”?
After all, if these guys all get A’s for their crappy writing, it doesn’t change your pay scale, does it? It’s not going to affect how your company sees you, or your prospects for advancement in your work. It’s no skin off your nose if they skate through and continue to be mediocre at this particular skill in their particular jobs.
You said in your OP that the main thing that annoys you is that you have to respond to their work as part of your grade. Well, why don’t you just provide an honest assessment of the work? After all, if this truly is a competition, then surely the best way for you to “win” is to make clear how superior your work is to theirs? Why don’t you, in fact, “go Billy Madison on these people”?
How math-intensive has your program been so far? You’re aware that humans who cannot get math are little better than housebroken animals, aren’t you?
…and my hovercraft is full of eels.
Frankly, I’m surprised it took this long…
How is this a competition?
The more MAs like mine, the less valuable they are. They’re diluting the market. If any ol’ asshat can get a Master’s, then as other posters said, it doesn’t mean much. The competition is in the labor market. So maybe these specific folks aren’t lowering my specific salary today, but in the aggregate over the long run, they are.
ETA: This is awesome, no? “…the United States currently has its hands and money in delved into [ramblings] and maintaining nuclear and nonnuclear deterrent forces against using weapons of mass destruction for countries like North Korea, Iran, China, etc.” I better not post any more, lest somebody go a-Googlin’.
So your real complaint is not that your cohort is full of dumbasses, but rather that you’re not getting an academic advantage from purposely going to a school full of dumbasses?
You two have been here long enough to that unwritten rule of the SDMB, “Anything with grades is a competition.” It is sports for the non-athletic; an opportunity to count coup on the morons around you; a slight (very, very slight) chance to impress the cheerleader in the front row with your intelligence and money-making potential.
Prove me wrong. Tell me you don’t remember your scores on the SAT.
No, you are lying. You do remember. 
I never did impress the cheerleader in the front row. 
Not even with my SAT scores. Which obv. I totally remember.
Wow. One thing we hear from employers is that one reason they’re hesitant to hire anyone who’s coming right out of school (undergrad or grad) is that they’ve been working on their own projects/assignments. And that’s too selfish for the business world, where they’re looking for people who can work together cooperatively. And make each other look good.
Looks like someone didn’t get very good grades in that…
As my tough-as-nails boss used to put it, “I only want team players. Check with their professors and fellow students and make sure you hire people that ‘Play Well With Others’.”
Never sat the SAT. No such thing in Australia.
Yeah, well, I’m obv. totally remembering a number that’s just a wee bit higher than yours.
And, it’s a prime.
Yeah, but presumably the person’s only talking about that one realization. And why can’t a realization happen over the course years? I mean, I guess if you want to be technical, there probably were other realizations. But it seems like a huge stretch to get from here to “retards.”
If you want a valuable degree, you should go to a selective program. There’s really no other way about it.
Ditto! I worked as a TA in my 4th year and I was baffled that some students had been accepted to university, let alone graduated from high school.
I distinctly remember marking a paper that contained the sentence “During the childbirth ritual a child is born.” and she was one of the better students.
I’ve no relevant experience to know whether your complaint is legit or not (my guess, it probably is) but this bit here won my virtual applause.
There’s much more wrong here than simply style. Truman signed the National Security Act in 1947. It created the Central Intelligence Agency.
What happened in 1952 was that Truman issued a classified letter authorizing the creation of the National Security Agency. Saying that he “signed it into effect” is misleading, because it implies that Congress passed legislation authorizing the creation of the N.S.A. and that Truman signed the bill, thereby enacting a statute. That’s not what happened.
Agree x 1,004. I don’t know where the notion of Shared Comments message board style “teaching” started but I wish it had strangled in the crib. They seem to try and fuse “online comments section” with “intellectual informed repartee” and end up getting extremely watered down repartee with only slightly elevated comments sections.
Why “x 1004,” particularly? Because it’s the product of a square and a prime?
No. That can’t be it…
Are you trying to induce a bout of over-analysis in those prone to the affliction?
Am I the only one to see irony in this Very Elegant Rant, clearly demonstrating the poster’s superior ability to express himself via the written word, opening with a sentence calling people “Retards”?
Yeah, it’s probably just me…