[fullmetal]

I pointed out to a friend that his teachers may have been lukewarm at best in their recommendations, that his essays might have been overly pedantic or pompous, or that maybe he interviewed really poorly.  There's a lot we don't know about this kid, aside from the fact that he's the type of person to sue HYP for not admitting him.  I mean, "should have made him a lock for admission" is the kind of phrase only an entitled person would make.  He'd be marginally competitive among Stanford applicants...but not distinguished.

I've interviewed better candidates who didn't get into Stanford (to my heartfelt dismay).

Okay, maybe "should have made him a lock for admission" is probably a paraphrase by the article author, but that's just a ridiculous statement to make.

But I should also point out that my profile matches his somewhat closely.  I had a handful more noteworthy things...and I think Michael's "noteworthy" accomplishments were fewer in number than the article makes it seem.

[fullmetal]

I pointed out to a friend that his teachers may have been lukewarm at best in their recommendations, that his essays might have been overly pedantic or pompous, or that maybe he interviewed really poorly.  There's a lot we don't know about this kid, aside from the fact that he's the type of person to sue HYP for not admitting him.  I mean, "should have made him a lock for admission" is the kind of phrase only an entitled person would make.  He'd be marginally competitive among Stanford applicants...but not distinguished.

I've interviewed better candidates who didn't get into Stanford (to my heartfelt dismay).

Okay, maybe "should have made him a lock for admission" is probably a paraphrase by the article author, but that's just a ridiculous statement to make.

But I should also point out that my profile matches his somewhat closely.  I had a handful more noteworthy things...and I think Michael's "noteworthy" accomplishments were fewer in number than the article makes it seem.