[flagged]
Stanford’s war against its own students
231–240 of 269 posts
Re: Stanford’s war against its own students
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
Care to back that up with any facts or is it just because you disagree with her? From what I've read she's a pretty run-of-the-mill liberal who's had some disagreements with the current orthodoxy of the left. That doesn't make her a tiki-torch bearing radical.
Since leaving nyt and even shortly before she's been almost completely focused on the censorship-of-conservatives moral panic and the anti trans crusade. Moderate-right and far-right projects respectively. She uses her newsletter to publish and amplify voices of the right, and writes from their perspective about issues they care about.
I think your mistake is thinking in terms of a left-right divide. It's very possible for people to have a mixture of opinions. Dismissing this as moral panic is just silly.
Re: Stanford’s war against its own students
#233Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But an adjudication process doesn't seem like a disproportionate response to an assault, however minor. It’s a cup of coffee that wasn’t hot or scalding and wasn’t reported by the student but by an administrator. It’s a multi month process including outside counsel hired by the university. It sounds entirely disproportionate in the first place. This seems like a stupid and wasteful unjust kangaroo court that was de…
(1) The coffee assault apparently caused a physical injury. (2) If you dumped so much as a cup of cold water on someone in a workplace, you'd be out on your ass that day. I honestly don't understand what we're even debating here. This isn't middle school. These are adults, in one of the most selective institutions on the planet.
The article and references does not describe any injury from the coffee. Not from the football player’s account, nor from any medical treatment.
College isn’t a workplace. And even in a workplace it depends on the circumstances. In my workplace, super regulated, if a third party claimed that someone threw coffee on someone else, no one is getting fired that day. And if they were then it would be a pretty huge wrongful termination lawsuit. The only thing that gets you “out on your ass” is if you are an immediate threat to others. So maybe if it was scalding coffee that resulted in hospitalization and the person was still on the loose throwing coffee.
But like someone else said, throwing coffee is a crime. Let the police do their job. We don’t need extra judicial investigations for reasons.
Re: Stanford’s war against its own students
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
They didn't do this in college 20 years ago, and liability laws have not changed since then.
Well, I didn't say anything about laws. As alcohol-related incidents increase in frequency and severity, and as payouts become bigger, the cost to insure (including self-insure) goes up. This kind of policy existed at my alma mater 30 years ago. Even the alt beverage bit. Can't remember if we just served water or did we actually have punch of some kind. We even had (student) inspectors that went around to registered…
Alcohol incidents are increasing in frequency? Payouts are bigger? You got a source for that?
And student inspectors? I'm sure they enforced rules rather than just partying with everyone else.
Re: Stanford’s war against its own students
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since leaving nyt and even shortly before she's been almost completely focused on the censorship-of-conservatives moral panic and the anti trans crusade. Moderate-right and far-right projects respectively. She uses her newsletter to publish and amplify voices of the right, and writes from their perspective about issues they care about.
I think your mistake is thinking in terms of a left-right divide. It's very possible for people to have a mixture of opinions. Dismissing this as moral panic is just silly.
I'm not trying to ascertain the true politics of her soul or her exact x-coordinate on a political plane or whatever. I'm saying she does a lot of right wing shit so can be reasonably described as right wing regardless of her previous professional affiliations or statements about her political preferences.
Re: Stanford’s war against its own students
#236Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Is this normal!?! I feel sorry for this generation. Attempts to make their world risk free has turned it into "fuck up once and we'll destroy you". If the students would simply stop raping people and dying of fentanyl overdoses which lead to their parents suing the school I'm sure Stanford would not have as many rules for what occurs on campus. Or we can choose as a society to free Stanford of civil liability for th…
> It is normal, typical, common, and expected for universities in the United States to completely prohibit alcohol consumption on campus. My question is: why does this article try so hard to make it seem like it’s not typical?
Because outrage has proven to be a viable business model
Re: Stanford’s war against its own students
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're not requests , they're requirements .
Sorry, I'm not a native speaker. I think I used the word request improperly. I am aware that those conditions must be met. But then again I am not surprised that those were stated as requirements rather than requests. From what I understand a request is just a polite suggestion easily, routinely ignored if it requires additional work or foresight and deviates from pre-estabilished culture.
Your original comment was fine, the person responding to you was being pedantic.
Re: Stanford’s war against its own students
#238The US has such a weird attitude towards alcohol. In my day at Oxford every college had a bar worked by the students. I don't remember if ours was open every evening but it felt often enough.
I think it’s the opposite. Alcohol is one of the most destructive forces in our modern society and we mostly all accept it very casually because a huge proportion of is are in denial about our personal addiction.
Re: Stanford’s war against its own students
#239This is why fraternities need to begin pulling themselves away from these institutions. There is no upside to being affiliated with a university anymore.
Re: Stanford’s war against its own students
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Do you attend college parties, or administer a university?
[deleted]