posted
Hello everyone, I suppose that I'm opening up a old wound here, but I'd be intersted to see what everyone thinks about affirmative action. Are you for it? Do you think it should exisit but more mildly, or perhaps to have a diffrent system? Or should it just be exterminated completely? Just curious to find out what people think and why.
P.S. - If this has been posted and I do not know it, forgive me, I haven't yet explored the entire site.
Posts: 43 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
We are led by an Affirmative Action President. Yale, as well as other educational institutions, has policies that grant admission to legacy students, in this case GWB's father was an alumni. GWB would never have gotten into Yale based on his grades alone.
Race-based Affirmative Action is discriminatory. It does give a person preference over another, simply based on skin color. There is a recent study (trying to find it on www.npr.org) that found that in 25-30 years, race based preference in upper education will not be needed if today's programs are retained or strengthened, but double that if all programs are halted; the goal is to get the student body to generally represent the poplulation as a whole.
While I don't support anyone gaining advantage through any mechanism other than their ability, I see great value in Affirmative Action on a limited basis to fix a problem. You have to remember that a person of color (white boy here) is judged and affected by their color at every intersection and meeting, so why should education or job placement be any different if the goal is parity?
I look forward to the day when generally we can celebrate our differences instead of being tied to a centuries-old tradition of exploiting them.
Posts: 86 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Very interesting post. So it is possible that affirmitve action could end up rooting out the problem so that in later years (much later) something like affirimtive action wouldn't exisit. Atleast that's my understanding of what your saying in a nutshell. My only question is, if there is a non-minority child that has been wishing to go to a specific college all his/her life, works hard in school and gets good enough grades to be in the lower percentile at that school, but still get in pretty easy. And there is a minority student who has had less oppurutnity and/or hasn't put forth effort and they get in stead. What about that person who would have gotten in? Is it fair to her? Part of me thinks that it is a necessary evil, and part of me says no.
quote: So it is possible that affirmitve action could end up rooting out the problem so that in later years (much later) something like affirimtive action wouldn't exisit
Is there any other reason for such a government sponsored inequity to exist? AFAIK it was always intended to be a shot-in-the-arm, not a permanent policy. Ignoring the issue hasn't exactly improved the situation, even as slowly, very slowly, the economic position of minorities are improving (the economic divide between rich and poor is undeniably getting worse for all of us across the board).
IMO, stories about vast numbers of qualified white kids not being admitted to a particular college while vast numbers of unqualified black kids are ushered in are apocryphal.
Most colleges have good reasons for acquiring a diverse student body, and I agree that a diverse student body makes for a better education for each student. Racism is just plain bad for all of us, and the worst offenders, white or black, that I have known are the people who have just never gotten off the farm, out of the ghetto, or out of the suburbs.
Posts: 86 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, there's a mode of thought that intellectuals in an effort to promote equality actually look down upon those they seek to promote.
It basically boils down to a leveling of the playing field, or a proposed leveling. An example of this would be the attempt to reword standardized tests because inner city youths couldn't easily understand the word choices. It was suggested that the tests be re-geared to meet the diction and vocabulary of those taking the tests rather than promoting proper English among those students.
It's also been alleged that in ESL classes, many teachers actually spend most of their class time teaching in Spanish in an attempt to reach the kids because it is easier, rather than to work harder on improving their English skills. In some cases it has been so bad that students from non-Spanish speaking groups (say those speaking Vietnamese, Chinese, Arabic, etc...) are literally caught floundering because they aren't learning English and don't know Spanish. For the Spanish-speaking students, it's often encouraged as the only way to reach them because they simply can't learn English. The students could and need to learn English, though, no matter the effort necessary if they are to enjoy full opportunity in this nation. And that includes full educational opportunities as well. There are very few college level courses that I know of that are taught in the Spanish language (unless that is the case of study).
Those are just a couple of Ivory Tower examples of racism. Lower scoring standards that were institutionalized at one time in an effort to meet Affirmative Action goals also were a smack in the face of minority students who had worked hard and made good grades in high school. On entrance into college, no matter their grades, they could be seen as being subpar and having to meet lower standards while they may have exceeded the standards for any student enrollee.
Personally, I believe in Affirmative Action, especially when taken from the original ideas. It was not about leveling a playing field, it was about making sure that all doors would be open regardless of race. It was meant to snuff out racist practices, punish those who would descirminate and offer opportunity to those who had so recently been held back on things as irrelevant as the color of their skin.
Affirmative Action works today, but in these times of polarized politics, it's hard to see the engine working amid all the worst case scenarios lobbed in by both sides.
posted
I am a six-foot-tall middle class (barely, to LA standards) white male.
I fully appreciate the doors that are open for me, and the benefits I get, just by accident of birth. I don't stop myself from walking through these doors that are more easily opened for me that for others
I often wonder why richer, more powerful white males don't sense this more clearly than I do... but then I remember the power thing.
Posts: 86 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I often wonder why richer, more powerful white males don't sense this more clearly than I do...
Some do, and don't want to give up this power.
Some do, but think they would have succeeded anyway, because they are somehow harder-working, or more intelligent than others of "lower-class" (of all races).
Some don't. As Ann Richards says, they were born on third base and think they hit a homerun.
I approve of affirmative action in colleges, because there are so many colleges and universities that no one can seriously say they would be denied an education because of affirmative action.
I am not so much in favor of straight affirmative action in areas where public safety is at risk. For example, I think all firefighters, police, and soldiers should have to meet rigorous minimum standards regardless of race or gender.
In all other areas, I think affirmative action should be rigorously and ruthlessly enforced across the board. In fact, I think I'll go demand that I be allowed to be Karl Malone's newest teammate. Every team needs a fat white guy, right? Just like Playgirl always needs a fat, whiteguy centerfold. Posts: 524 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Affirmative action is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard of. So what if your great-grandfather was opressed by "the white man," or your great uncle was nuked by the "dirty white devils?" That doesn't mean you should be allowed first dibs on college positions. I can't even understand why anyone would aquait unfortunate incidents that happened 150 years ago with today's college-bound ethnics.
posted
People always say that about George W's grades. I would like to see proof of this. Some sort of link that shows his GPA and Yales particular standards at the time.
Posts: 473 | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've been trying to avoid this thread like plague but I always get sucked in...
quote: Personally, I believe in Affirmative Action, especially when taken from the original ideas. It was not about leveling a playing field, it was about making sure that all doors would be open regardless of race.
I'm sorry Sopwith, I don't understand that at all. Despite the whatever good intentions there were in the beginning, (seeing as how the road to Hell is paved with them ) it is irrelevent. Affirmative Action isn't opening doors to people of all races, especially not today. There are only so many doors that can be opened and A.A. just forcibly keeps certain students out of one door while allowing another student through by virtue of their race.
I agree with you about the ivory tower behavior smacking of racism, but A.A. isn't any better. I fail to comprhend how anyone can say distinguishing any type of recognition or admission by race is not racism; even if it is governemnt sanctioned racism.
Posts: 183 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: I approve of affirmative action in colleges, because there are so many colleges and universities that no one can seriously say they would be denied an education because of affirmative action.
Couldn't this be used as an argument against affirmative action? After all, there are so many colleges and universities that no one can seriously say a minority would be denied an education because of being a minority. Is this not true?
Posts: 183 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:On entrance into college, no matter their grades, they could be seen as being [b]subpar[/p] and having to meet lower standards while they may have exceeded the standards for any student enrollee.
Ever wondered about the word "subpar"? It comes from golf, where is what you should be getting if you're good, and if you're really good, you'll end up with a number of strokes lower than par. So being lower than par, i.e. subpar, is a good thing. So I find it interesting that "subpar" means "bad."
Posts: 4534 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Affirmative action is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard of. So what if your great-grandfather was opressed by "the white man," or your great uncle was nuked by the "dirty white devils?" That doesn't mean you should be allowed first dibs on college positions. I can't even understand why anyone would aquait unfortunate incidents that happened 150 years ago with today's college-bound ethnics.
The problem is that every interaction today (not three hundred years ago), with a black person, for example, his or her skin color affects that interaction, and the black person almost always loses.
Within the lifetimes of many of us here, there have been actual laws on the federal, state, and local levels that made people with dark skin second class citizens. This makes it IMO appropriate to have appropriate federal, state, and local affirmative action, on a limited basis, to counteract the evils of racism that have been institutionalized in recent history, and that continue on a social level today.
I'm not contending that it isn't a form of discrimination on its own.
I'm certainly not arguing for reparations for things that happened three hundred years ago, even though those actions still affect the behvior and status of people of light skin color and people of dark skin color today.
Posts: 86 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Cavalier, in a perfect world, AA wouldn't keep anyone out of college. In a perfect world Affirmative Action would never be needed.
Personally, I'm of a mind that college entrance applications should not include the person's race anywhere on the forms. And when brought before the acceptance committee, the names should be left off as well, perhaps just using Social Security numbers.
But honestly, can you make a guarantee that someone didn't get enrolled into a university just because a minority person with lower grades/scores got the spot to fulfill a quota?
I'm sure it would be easier to find a case where a minority student was once barred from attending an institute of higher learning because of their race, even though they met or exceeded other criteria.
This often gets dragged out as a "college thing" when, in fact, Affirmative Action is more a necessity in the workforce. Universities, especially those with some form of government funding, are more regulated and generally fairer in their admissions. Businesses however, big and small, have often times been anything but fair and unbiased towards race/gender/religion.
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Melchior your missing one of the points. Yes perhaps they should not be given extra chances because their grandfathers and grandmothers were oppressed. However, these people are living in places that are limiting there oppurutnity. And as stated in previous posts, it is possible that something like affirmtive action could in time end such a problem. Why continue to allow "minorities" to exist in ghetto's and projects if there is something that we can do to try and give them equal oppurtunity. There must be some brilliant minds that have been wasted simply because he was born into a ghetto, not even because of his skin.
his or her, excuse me ladies.
Edit: <-- SweetWilliams
[ August 14, 2003, 04:22 PM: Message edited by: Jimmy ]
Posts: 43 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ouch, I suppose I deserve that however. It looks like it doesn't matter whether I'm from the ghetto or not, I will need that extra help getting into college. I'll write to the congress about making a speciel section of affirmitve action laws for children that can't spell.
Don't worry I'll misspell again soon, or have I already?
[ August 14, 2003, 04:33 PM: Message edited by: Jimmy ]
Posts: 43 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
*ALERT...I'm expecting everyone to hate what I'm about to say.
I'm a woman, and in the workforce I have encountered discrimination. But I will say that what I had to do was be serious and work hard to get the recognition I deserved. I'm so glad that it wasn't just handed to me because I'm a woman, rather, I'm now a stronger and better person because of those challenges.
I believe that affirmative action takes that chance AWAY from minorities. Granted, one may argue: "Why should the minorities have to struggle when the majorities do not? That's not fair!" Well big, fat, hairy deal. No one ever became a better person WITHOUT struggles, that's for sure. Don't get me wrong, I think the white people should have to struggle, too, and they will when they see that the minorities are getting in instead of them because of THEIR SKILLS and HARD WORK. No matter what it sounds like, in the end everyone would be better off if they had to actually COMPETE for jobs and positions, rather than getting in for some other reason. We should definitely "level the playing field", but level it up, not down.
Keep in mind: The people who have to work the hardest to get what they want are the ones who learn the most and can be the most proud of themselves.
posted
I kind of agree with you Paula, but not completely. I don't think it should be handed to them, but I'm not sure helping them is a slap in the face, or makes them worse off. Have you ever seen Emperor's Club? This is a bad example but it's the first one I think of. Remember when he decided to give that child a A+ instead of an A in order to put him ahead of the other child? Well it turns out he should have given it to the original one. But the point is that maybe everyonce in a while, all someone needs is a chance. And perhaps giving this people alittle more oppurtunity will not make them less strong, but actually give them a chance to be strong. And become what they are really capable of. And to become a strong independent woman and/or man like you. Perhaps that's too extreme I don't know. Just a thought.
Edit: I forgot to explain that the child needed to be ahead of the other one in order to participate in a contest.
[ August 14, 2003, 04:45 PM: Message edited by: Jimmy ]
Posts: 43 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Trust me Twosons, the world couldn't take much more of me. Besides, if I have any more "struggles" I'll be dead. It's amazing I'm as nice as I am to begin with. Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Well big, fat, hairy deal. No one ever became a better person WITHOUT struggles, that's for sure.
I'm just thinking about all of the teenage parents, addicts, fat people, mortgages, folks with debt--college loans or credit cards-- whose life would not only be easier, but would act actually be better, if they could just write a check and fix it, or call someone who can write them a check to fix it. There are so many excruciating, life destroying problems can be fixed with just a little extra money or the right connections. The difference between someone who can afford to go to a high class rehab and someone who can't is the difference between a career criminal, in and out of prison, and the President of the United States.
Life is hard enough to figure out when all of the information is put out plainly in front of you, I don't need any more "struggles." It's not as if I'm bored.
In terms of education, we are teaching the highest levels of problem-solving skills and virtue to those whose who need it the most. I'm thinking about that kid in Spellbound whose parent was plastered while talking in the interview. Yeah, that twelve year old just needs more struggles.
I don't need any more struggles. I need more time to read good books and write.
quote: Cavalier, in a perfect world, AA wouldn't keep anyone out of college. In a perfect world Affirmative Action would never be needed.
Yeah, no kidding. But it's not a perfect world and AA will keep qualified students out of college because of their race. That's the long and short of it.
quote: Personally, I'm of a mind that college entrance applications should not include the person's race anywhere on the forms.
That's good, that's what I think too. Though, I don't see how you can say you believe in AA and have this position. Unless you don't believe AA should be applied to higher education (which I think you hint at at the bottom of your post but I'm not sure).
quote: But honestly, can you make a guarantee that someone didn't get enrolled into a university just because a minority person with lower grades/scores got the spot to fulfill a quota?
I'm sure it would be easier to find a case where a minority student was once barred from attending an institute of higher learning because of their race, even though they met or exceeded other criteria.
I don't understand how one of these examples can be hard to find evidence for and the other's evidence easy to find. I could be missing something, but it seems like you're saying it's easy to find evidence of a minority being denied admission based on their race but finding any evidence of a white person being denied admission because of their race is harder.
Off the top of my head I can think of one case where AA was used to keep a qualified student out of school. Granted, it was a high school (Boston Latin), but it was painfully obvious that the student in question was more qualified than some others who had been admitted to fill quotas. It was rather clear cut and I can get into the details more if you need me to.
quote: This often gets dragged out as a "college thing"
Yes, because us middle class, white, high school senior, males don't like getting denied admissions and financial aid by virtue of our race and social status. We work just as hard to get a good education and we're penalized because of how we were born. So, yeah, we do drag this out as a "college thing".
quote: Universities, especially those with some form of government funding, are more regulated and generally fairer in their admissions.
What exactly does "fair" mean here?
quote: Businesses however, big and small, have often times been anything but fair and unbiased towards race/gender/religion.
I've always wanted to know where the justification for government regulation of who a private company hires comes from. Morally they should get diverse companies, but there really isn't any provision to force them to. However, this doesn't really pertain to me so I won't comment further.
quote: I've always wanted to know where the justification for government regulation of who a private company hires comes from.
Private companies sometimes have government contracts. It is reasonable to expect a company we give our tax dollars to conforms to reasonable societal standards for health, safety, and for this argument, fairness. These are all arguably good for us all.
Universities have chosen to receive government acreditation (SP? don't hit me). Without this, they wouldn't be able to market their service to as broad a range of customers (students), and again it's a fair trade off to conform to reasonable societal standards; OK maybe we should entrust the federal government with this standard-bearing, but it's the best system we have.
I can think of situations where affirmative action does get implemented with true color blind process. In hiring for symphony orchestras, especially in Europe, it has been found that hiring of women and minorities doubles when the audition takes place behind a screen. Without this physical blind, orchestra administrators still doggedly stick to the old boys network, but with it, they choose as they should on the basis of talent and ability. Its end result is diversity, and it is affirmative action.
Posts: 86 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
Ahhhh, yeah, having someone to pay their bills might help addicts and people in debt. That's what we call "enabling."
(Just to point out, I'm not opposed to programs that help people in need. UNLESS they're in need because of their reckless use of their resources. Paying those people's bills just allows them to keep living that way.)
quote:Granted, it was a high school (Boston Latin), but it was painfully obvious that the student in question was more qualified than some others who had been admitted to fill quotas. It was rather clear cut and I can get into the details more if you need me to.
The tricky part is know that that student was the absolute next person in line, with the assumption that Boston Latin's requirements were rigorous enough to deliniate. I'm going to dumb down the issue and make it black and white.
Sure, it's probable that had the student been of an underrepresented group, he or she would have been accepted, but it's a leap to say that his/her spot was taken until you look at every single person in the pool.
A lot of people are unable or unwilling to understand this point, as well as the fact that very few schools work on a zero sum scale in terms of admittance for an entire class. For example, if you have a class of 800 students, and the school looks at the statistics and they want around 40 black kids in the class, someone has to be in the pictures, and 30 of them were not admitted in the initial 800, many schools will just up the number to 820. But the result is ten spots were "taken away," though it is dubious if they ever existed, 500 white kids will complain that their spot was taken. Now ten of them will be right, and the other 490 will get some sort of solace from their righteous indignation and tell all of their friends that they were held out because of Affirmative Action.
It's one of those issues where we give the kids who would most likely not receive the education at home in the world a chance at some of the best schools.
Now let's take the "poor white kid" who won't get in. Most schools that are race concious are also economically conscious so if five of those kids who fall into "poor white kid" catagory, three or four will get in because of their good scores and low economic status. So now we are talking about one or two smart poor white kids whose spots were used to help 30 black kids, and of course, the principle of the matter.
See, the problem with every one quoting MLK's speech is that the US is not colorblind, it's not even close, so why should the government pretend it is? By and large, white people have white friends and like giving jobs to white people, all you have to do is go on friendster and play around to see that most people's friends look like them, this doesn't matter until twenty years later when they are teachers and employers and parents. If you look at a high school latin class, most of the kids are going to be white, so when those kids do better on the SAT because they happen to know what the words mean, don't pretend it's a coincidence. My solution would be to get black kids taking latin, because it's good for everone to know what words mean, now they just have to get in the class and have someone they trust tell them that it's important. Yep, that's means the way to solve the problem is to get these kids in Boston Latin. We are growing a new generation of black professionals and parents. When my mom was in school, the smartest black women became nurses. I think we can and we should do better, but first we have to raise a new generation of black professionals and parents with loftier ideals and they need to be reared in the finest educational institutions in the land.
Look it's no picnic being the only black person in the room. First off, while kat can pass of the any LDS questions to the gaggle of articulate and knowledgable believers on the forum, I'm the show here. I don't think Nadeldge posts, and I have a feeling that everyone on hatrack comes closer to the nearsighted softish white variety, with a smattering of asians and indians, but mostly white.
quote:Ahhhh, yeah, having someone to pay their bills might help addicts and people in debt. That's what we call "enabling."
Lord, I don't think my college loans are character-building as much as I think they are keep me checking groceries when I should be reading.
posted
No, I'm fine, but I resent you insinuating that my debt is helping build my character, when debt has a longer track record of breaking up marriages, keeping kids out of school, and ruining sleep.
posted
I've had debt too, Irami. My fam and I have been so far in debt that we thought the only thing we could do was file bankruptcy. We've lived on chili beans. But we paid it off ourselves and I'm darn glad looking back on it that we did. Yes, it's true that debt can cause a lot of problems in families. But it's your own choice to get into debt, in many situations. It was my choice to get into debt and I wouldn't have dreamed of asking the US to pay it off for me. And you know what? I'll never get into debt again, of my own free will. The reason is because I had to suffer through it, and I didn't have anyone making it better for me.
Now let's talk about widows. THEY are a different story all together.
Posts: 6367 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Irami, at Latin they *used to* (I'm not sure they do now because of the legal snafu over this incident) use an entrance exam as the primary mode of admission, as most of the kids are not old enough to have their grades be meaningful. It's virtually the only standard for admission. For anyone who doesn't know, Latin is a Boston public school but is very prestigous and difficult to get into. The white girl did extremely well on her test but a large number of minority students, with lower scores on the exam, were admitted over her because of their race. She had no dicplinary problems or devesatingly poor grades that would have held her back. The school even admitted it was an affirmative action issue. The school lost the ensuing court case and she was admitted, though I'm not sure they had to change their overall policy but I suspect they did. Like I said, it was very clear cut.
Irami, I'm not talking about "poor white kids" I'm talking about "middle class white kids". We're the ones who get screwed by the whole situation. We aren't rich enough to be admitted as legacies (buying in); we aren't a different race, so AA doesn't help us; and we aren't poor enough to get need based financial aid or a "pity admission". Unless you're an astounding athlete, nobody wants you because you can't make them rich or look good to the media so we end up shunned.
I actually agree with most of that 6th paragraph (mentions MLK). People aren't colorblind and I'm not saying they are. My issue is that you ask "...why should the government pretend it is?" I ask why the governemnt should even be contemplating the race question. It isn't its place to pick out favorite races and give them a hand. I would say it's supposed to be impartial, and necesarily colorblind because otherwise it's been railroaded by a special interest (I know this happens but we all know it shouldn't, morally).
I agree with the idea that "getting the black student into latin class" is the best way to help them. However, this doesn't apply to Latin because admissions is a very straightforward process (take exam, look at grades). They don't have to go to Latin to take a latin class anyway, I'm sure they have them in the publics too (they have a latin clas in mine). I'm not sure dumping a minority student who didn't do as well on an entrance exam into a highly academic environment with people who passed the exam with flying colors will help either pair of students. That's like saying if you put a kid from a regular course into an honors or AP course that automatically makes their life better. Not so I say. For that to be true (making their life better)you have to assume they deserved to be there in the first place, which isn't the case with people who did poorly on an entrance ecxam.
I'd like to point out at this juncture that there are many Asian students at Latin who get in without AA (by virtue of testing). I'm not sure what the signifigance (if any) of this is. Honestly, I have no idea.
posted
Wow. Black people suffered for generations, and your bitching that a few middle class white kids can't get into their first choice college? Give me a break.
posted
Yeah that's right Kayla I am. My family and I had nothing to do with black people suffering AT ALL. Maybe it's okay for KAYLA to feel all guilty for something she had nothing (or maybe your family did but I don't really care) to do with but Cavalier sure as hell won't. So YES I will continue to bitch because for some of us it's not about getting into our first choice, it's about getting accepted AT ALL.
This crap Leonard Pitts is spitting out doesn't apply to me at all thank you very much. Not to say he's right or anything, I'm personally not big into the idea of punishing people for what their ancestors did. I think you need to buy a clue and realize that not all middle class white people deserve to be punished for the sins of a bunch of WASPs more than 150 years ago.
posted
Not really. Truthfully I haven't really given it enough thought to form a really educated opinion. I'm looking into it right now, tho.
Just so you know, I do believe that discrimination is completely unfair and I have done my best not to be discriminating myself. I just think AA is more harmful than helpful to society, in the long run. I mean, isn't that what this is all about? Does it really matter that one guy didn't get a job or something today, when 50 years from now, society cannot support itself because people have become so used to everyone giving them whatever they need? We need to be more farsighted. Plus, I also don't believe we should do everything we can to make people's lives harder. (I'm assuming that's why you think I oppose the repeal.) That just breaks people down. But I DO believe that it's unnecessary to try and take every form of challenge away from a person, just because it's "unfair." The government's job is not to make up for every single obstacle everyone faces. That's ridiculous, and impossible. We should accept that, sometimes, things aren't going to be exactly the way you like it.
Posts: 6367 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[No No]](graemlins/nono.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Just like Playgirl always needs a fat, whiteguy centerfold. ![[Hat]](graemlins/hat.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
