Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat • Hacker News Board

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#91

Post by throwanem » Mon, Jun 05, 2017, 4:18 PM UTC

JoshTriplett wrote: post #75

metaphorm wrote: post #22

I'm so conflicted right now. On the one hand, yeah, that shit is offensive and I'm not too keen on elevating a person who makes jokes about sexual assault or violence against minorities. On the other hand I'm terrified at the creeping surveillance society that has institutions examining all of our utterances for "wrong speech", which is much too close for comfort to "wrong think", which is much too close for comfort…

Dystopian fiction has given so much terrorizing weight to the concept of "thoughtcrime" and "wrong think" that I think people forget how much positive effect a culture can have on widespread mindsets and stopping ignorance. There are some ignorant thoughts that have almost entirely fallen out of the collective consciousness (in terms of serious belief, not abstract discussion of the past). (As a random example, there…

Punishing speech independent of action isn't a new or controversial concept among certain political strains, most especially among those that also include the conceit of having some special access to virtue beyond that available to others contending for the same power. What you're suggesting here falls right in that line. But it's rarely stated so openly, and while I like nothing else about it, I must admit I like the honesty.

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#92

Post by pvnick » Mon, Jun 05, 2017, 4:18 PM UTC

metaphorm wrote: post #22

I'm so conflicted right now. On the one hand, yeah, that shit is offensive and I'm not too keen on elevating a person who makes jokes about sexual assault or violence against minorities. On the other hand I'm terrified at the creeping surveillance society that has institutions examining all of our utterances for "wrong speech", which is much too close for comfort to "wrong think", which is much too close for comfort…

While it is within Harvard's right as a private institution to dictate which speech it finds acceptable, it is perhaps still a bad idea. In today's culture, those in positions with the authority to moderate speech (e.g. online forums such as Reddit, Youtube, Twitter, etc.) are doing so liberally. I would prefer prestigious institutions of higher learning to specifically allow these kinds of offensive and hateful speech because they are shocking and uncomfortable, and the more ideas to which students are exposed the sharper their minds become.

Not to mention that filth like this serves as a kind of canary in the coalmine - if one can make jokes about violence against minorities without fear of repercussions, then that bodes well for ideas actually intended to be taken seriously.

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#93

Post by anon182429 » Mon, Jun 05, 2017, 4:18 PM UTC

Ivy league is such a joke. Who would go to a place that snoops on your communication, tells you what to think and believe, shames you for expressing yourself through humor, and has such fun policies as segregated graduation while at the same time banning people who are "racist" from attending the school.

These people are insane and I can't believe they run the country.

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#94

Post by rdruxn » Mon, Jun 05, 2017, 4:18 PM UTC

metaphorm wrote: post #22

I'm so conflicted right now. On the one hand, yeah, that shit is offensive and I'm not too keen on elevating a person who makes jokes about sexual assault or violence against minorities. On the other hand I'm terrified at the creeping surveillance society that has institutions examining all of our utterances for "wrong speech", which is much too close for comfort to "wrong think", which is much too close for comfort…

I expected to feel conflicted before reading this article for the exact reasons you outlined. However, this line from the article made a difference:

> "The founders of the messaging group demanded that students post provocative memes in the main group chat to gain admittance to the smaller group."

They were being deliberate shit heads. This wasn't a private chat, this was intentionally sharing offensive content with the explicit purpose of ruffling feathers and pissing people off.

To call this a "private chat" is misleading - this was essentially a public forum for an incoming class to share content and these 10 students should have had zero expectation of privacy. If I were on the AdCom, I wouldn't have kicked them out for posting objectionable content, I would have kicked them out for being sheer, utter morons.

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#95

Post by nxsynonym » Mon, Jun 05, 2017, 4:19 PM UTC

fao_ wrote: post #65

nxsynonym wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because free speech is universal. You can't cherry pick what topics/views/opinions are protected based on your world view.

People protecting the right of racists to spread racism, support racism. It cannot be any other way. You cannot claim that you dislike racism, and and also want to preserve it. Also, "Free speech" refers to the fact that the government cannot bust in to your house with a SWAT team and arrest you for speaking something that they don't like. Private companies can enforce whatever speech rules they like, and that doesn'…

As I said in another comment -

I don't disagree with Harvard's decision, or any decision made by a private institution or person.

I disagree with the notion that certain types of speech or thought are universally wrong. Personally - I believe racism is wrong - but I disagree with the notion that it's "wrong think". It's simply a different world view.

To re-iterate: I don't agree with what the students said or did. I agree with Harvard's decision. I don't agree that protecting someone's right to speak freely and openly supports their agenda.

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#96

Post by metaphorm » Mon, Jun 05, 2017, 4:19 PM UTC

JoshTriplett wrote: post #75

metaphorm wrote: post #22

I'm so conflicted right now. On the one hand, yeah, that shit is offensive and I'm not too keen on elevating a person who makes jokes about sexual assault or violence against minorities. On the other hand I'm terrified at the creeping surveillance society that has institutions examining all of our utterances for "wrong speech", which is much too close for comfort to "wrong think", which is much too close for comfort…

Dystopian fiction has given so much terrorizing weight to the concept of "thoughtcrime" and "wrong think" that I think people forget how much positive effect a culture can have on widespread mindsets and stopping ignorance. There are some ignorant thoughts that have almost entirely fallen out of the collective consciousness (in terms of serious belief, not abstract discussion of the past). (As a random example, there…

> There's no slippery slope here.

I found your argument unconvincing and your conclusion not adequately supported. I have read history and I do not believe your interpretation is correct.

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#97

Post by std_throwaway » Mon, Jun 05, 2017, 4:19 PM UTC

eropple wrote: post #57

std_throwaway wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't care what they said. If it's against the law, let the law deal with it. If it's covered under freedom of speech, let them speak.

They were allowed to speak. They did speak. "Freedom of speech" applies only and strictly to governments, not to a private institution. And that's because the only way "freedom of speech" matters is if others are free to react to you as they please; Harvard might not like you and might tell you to get the hell out of their (and my, as it happens) neighborhood. If you don't like that, then you have options. One, don't…

Cutting down to the point.

* What these students did or didn't do does not matter in this case.

* Harvard can withdraw the acceptance for anyone at any time for any reason.

We don't need to argue about privacy or free speech here. All we can argue about as a first point is if Harvard should have the ability to withdraw their acceptance or not.

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#98

Post by Houshalter » Mon, Jun 05, 2017, 4:19 PM UTC

ziggysak wrote: post #79

I think an article such as this one is a clear example of the generational differences between older and younger people. I'm fairly close to these kids' age and I've browsed memes from /r/dankmemes and enjoyed them. The thing is, is that these memes are supposed to be self-aware of how offensive they are. That's the joke. They're meant to be so offensive and ridiculous that reactions can be drawn from outside spectat…

It's not a new thing. Dead baby jokes have been around forever, and popular comedians often use similar black humor. The article mentions the card game cards against humanity. Which is pretty popular and based on the same premise.

I used to really like black humor. I frequently told dead baby jokes and similar stuff. Thank god that wasn't recorded.

I'm alarmed to see many of the comments here outraged over the stuff the students said. I guarantee most of them have probably told a similarly offensive joke at some point in time, or at the very least have friends who have. Especially when they were younger.

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#99

Post by throwanem » Mon, Jun 05, 2017, 4:19 PM UTC

bradleyjg wrote: post #81

metaphorm wrote: post #22

I'm so conflicted right now. On the one hand, yeah, that shit is offensive and I'm not too keen on elevating a person who makes jokes about sexual assault or violence against minorities. On the other hand I'm terrified at the creeping surveillance society that has institutions examining all of our utterances for "wrong speech", which is much too close for comfort to "wrong think", which is much too close for comfort…

Harvard could admit only valedictorians. It could admit only those with perfect scores on the SAT. It doesn't do either of those things. Rather it spends a lot of time and energy putting together a class that it thinks will be greater than the sum of its parts. As a private organization it is perfectly entitled to pick and choose what matters to it. In that light, why not consider the character of the people it decid…

No, but on the other hand, membership in the priesthood implies a direct responsibility for the wellbeing of those in your pastoral care, and a degree of authority, derived from one's position, which can be abused to do great harm. I'm not really sure what there is about being a freshman at Harvard that merits the same extent of scrutiny.

Re: Harvard withdraws 10 acceptances for ‘offensive’ memes in private group chat

#100

Post by cirgue » Mon, Jun 05, 2017, 4:20 PM UTC

metaphorm wrote: post #22

I'm so conflicted right now. On the one hand, yeah, that shit is offensive and I'm not too keen on elevating a person who makes jokes about sexual assault or violence against minorities. On the other hand I'm terrified at the creeping surveillance society that has institutions examining all of our utterances for "wrong speech", which is much too close for comfort to "wrong think", which is much too close for comfort…

Could you be denied admittance to Harvard because you showed up on campus at some kind of freshman event and started telling extremely offensive jokes in front of the whole gathering? How is a Facebook group full of people you don't know any different?