Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stanford’s war against its own students

thefp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 269 posts

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#131

Post by brhsagain »

tptacek wrote: post #91
Psychlist wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two things: college is supposed to be an opportunity to learn from mistakes so making the normal consequence of any mistake the end of your career goes against that. Historically the decent young men of Stanford were able to get drunk, pull dumb stunts, embarrass themselves, then graduate and join "real life". The recent decision that sexual assault should be taken off the list of allowable "dumb stunts" is still wor…

I don't accept either of these premises. Stanford students are adults (indeed, many of them aren't even young adults). It is not principally the mission of Stanford to insulate its students from consequences. We just had a story here earlier today where HN is up in arms (somewhat reasonably so) because of Stanford's refusal to visit consequences on students who protested an odious speaker. Here the consequences we're…

Wait, I don't think even the article is complaining that students can't host frat parties. It's about students having to deal with months of legal proceedings as a consequence when they potentially break a rule.

Your characterization of frat parties as being an asinine issue is true and exactly the reason for concern here. Legal proceedings are super shitty to go through. Your whole life basically gets mentally put on hold. If the issue in question is such a non-issue, why should it cause students to have to face that?

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#132

Post by fortuna86 »

testfoobar wrote: post #125
tqi wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Attempts to make their world risk free has turned it into "fuck up once and we'll destroy you". TBH I think it is a much bigger problem that low-stakes hyper-local issues have been elevated into proxy battles for national politics. Truly, the fact that anyone who is not either attending or administering this university cares about their party policy at all (let alone enough to write about it professionally) is comp…

Stanford is an elite institution that others watch carefully. Administrators go to conferences & workshops to discuss their practices. They get promoted into positions at other universities. Stanford is a leading indicator of campus life elsewhere.

> Stanford is a leading indicator of campus life elsewhere.

It very much is not. Last party I went to at Stanford had corporate sponsorship.

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#133

Post by shagie »

Lammy wrote: post #52
bennysonething wrote: post #16

"For the past several years, Stanford has required students to adhere to a Student Party Policy, which includes a highly detailed “Harm Reduction Plan” mandating multiple sober monitors and designated alcohol service areas, and prohibiting the serving of any hard liquor. Party hosts must also provide “EANABs,” or Equally Attractive Non-Alcoholic Beverages, to “contribute to an inclusive and inviting experience” for a…

> prohibiting the serving of any hard liquor > Party hosts must also provide “EANABs,” or Equally Attractive Non-Alcoholic Beverages Good time to invest in Liquid Death (water in a tallboy can) if their presence at parties is mandated.

As an aside, the marketplace article on them from a few weeks ago: https://www.marketplace.org/2023/01/25/liquid-death-is-an-en...

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#134

Post by dahwolf »

verall wrote: post #122
dahwolf wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Way to argue against intellectual curiosity. If anything, "The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling" is intellectually rich and fascinating. Almost everybody who bothered to open their minds and actually listen to it is incredibly positive about it. It's incredibly thorough. Not only does it discuss the controversy from different angles, it also does a deep dive on the roots of online activism. It's near impossible to not le…

It's not against intellectual curiosity to avoid flamebait. Based on your recommendation I wanted to give this a chance, but as it's hours of podcast without transcript that's unlikely. "The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling" seems to qualify as clickbait, it's title is intended to provoke, while reading the podcast episode summaries it seems to be well researched and interesting. I admit, I did not research it beyond the…

Thanks for admitting that you had not even bothered to listen to it yet confidently labelled it as ideological flamebait regardless, and then used this made-up assessment in a discussion with this site's admin to suppress another article.

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#135

Post by Symbiote »

woodruffw wrote: post #79
aidenn0 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This looks to apply to on-campus parties only? If so, it's more liberal, if also more complicated, than the university I went to where the policy for alcohol on-campus was "No." Granted you could find dozens of parties within a mile of campus there; I don't know the geography of Stanford.

Right. The article bends over backwards to make this sound like a repressive policy, but it's significantly more permissive than most campuses' alcohol rules. My campus didn't allow alcohol at campus parties, full stop[1]. It was nominally allowed at individually approved events, of which I never observed any (besides perhaps a football game?). [1]: https://health.umd.edu/wellness-advocacy-alcohol-and-other-d...

In my first week of university in London there was an official Maths Department party for new students. There was so much wine the head of department asked me and several others to take a box of 6 bottles home (each!) so it would be less obvious that she's ordered too much.

There are at least 4 bars on the main campus, and several pubs just outside it.

They do have a policy:

> The licensed premises in the College are normally open at lunchtime and in the evening, with regular extensions during term-time for the Union bar until midnight on Wednesdays and 1.00 am on Saturdays (i.e. extended from Friday evening). It is College policy that sales of alcohol must not be promoted at lunchtime

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#136

Post by karaterobot »

consumer451 wrote: post #19

Pure politics, nothing technology related.

Ironically, the guidelines specifically allow non-technology stories, but advise against complaining about non-technology submissions. So, if you want to be a stickler about the rules, check out the guidelines document, already linked.

> On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.

> Please don't complain that a submission is inappropriate. If a story is spam or off-topic, flag it.

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#140

Post by paulcole »

bennysonething wrote: post #105
glonq wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Everyone I grew up with was underage drinking none of these things you've listed happened to anyone I know. Regulating parties might be one way to lessen the chances. But I'm not sure that price is worth it.

In the US, something like 1 in 6 women have been a victim of sexual assault and only about 1 in 5 of those report the assault. It’s very likely that if you were a regular attendee of parties among teenagers where people were drinking heavily then someone was sexually assaulted. You can think nothing bad happened to anyone, but it’s just unlikely.

And what “price” are you talking about exactly?

Post reply on HN