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

261–269 of 269 posts

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#261

Post by pyfi »

woodruffw wrote: post #171
Nevermark wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a bit black and white. And impractical. They are adults, and if there are no reasonable venues for being able to do regular adult things, for intentional reasons or not, they will create venues somehow, someway. If there is anything to be learned from Prohibition, it is if you make rules too strict for the context, either you have to enforce them with unreasonable measures, or people break the rules in ways th…

> They are adults, and if there are no reasonable venues for being able to do regular adult things, for intentional reasons or not, they will create venues somehow, someway. Yes, it's called an off-campus apartment. Students have been drinking in them for centuries . America's pathologies around student drinking are ridiculous. But let's not pretend like the path of least resistance doesn't already exist, and isn't i…

So many takes on here prove that this really should not be elevated to a national discussion. You simply do not understand the context at Stanford.

95% of undergrads live on campus. There is not enough housing for them to live off-campus irrespective of the cost. There is not enough parking for that many students to commute. Freshmen aren’t even allowed to have cars. Off-campus housing is not an option.

At least up until 2016 there was an “open door policy” where underage drinking was not policed when done indoors, ironically for safety, so that students would not be afraid to ask for help or support when necessary.

If you don’t know the context at Stanford, you really can’t understand the “war” aspect and I don’t blame you. That’s why this shouldn’t be national news.

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#262

Post by Manuel_D »

nocoiner wrote: post #218
Manuel_D wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EANABs is fine - I even do this at my parties as adults, it's good to have good non-alcoholic drinks for non-drinkers and for pacing. That said, you're spot on about the ridiculous rules. One of the dumbest alcohol policies was to ban liquor containers over 750ml [1]. But you could still have any number of liquor bottles, as long as they were individually less than 750ml. The rationale is that since two 750ml bot…

This actually doesn’t seem that silly to me. Isn’t this a bog standard Pigouvian tax? And I think it should be fairly uncontroversial that there are definite negative externalities to handles of liquor…

What is the real cost difference between two 750ml vodka bottles and one 1.5L handle? The Piguovian tax is probably on the order of $1-2 per liter of liquor. This is negligible.

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#263

Post by pyfi »

mrkeen wrote: post #80

Sounds completely orthogonal to higher education. > “If I didn’t get into Stanford, I probably wasn’t going to go to college,” he told me. > he returned for his junior year in the fall of 2021 hoping to salvage a sense of community and camaraderie > host a party at his fraternity, Kappa Sigma, where he was now president Is he a student, or is he LARPing some idealised college experience he saw in a movie? > Party hos…

[flagged]

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#264

Post by pyfi »

Balgair wrote: post #207

I promise this gets back around: I've been trying to compare the various football codes (soccer, american, gaelic, australian, etc). Mostly as a way to try to make up new codes. Get a big chart together, find permutations, viola, new game. It's going okay-ish. However, when you start diving into this you run into where these games originated. And they mostly come out of the 'public' schools around London in the later…

Incredible

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#265

Post by ModernMech »

pyfi wrote: post #261
woodruffw wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are adults, and if there are no reasonable venues for being able to do regular adult things, for intentional reasons or not, they will create venues somehow, someway. Yes, it's called an off-campus apartment. Students have been drinking in them for centuries . America's pathologies around student drinking are ridiculous. But let's not pretend like the path of least resistance doesn't already exist, and isn't i…

So many takes on here prove that this really should not be elevated to a national discussion. You simply do not understand the context at Stanford. 95% of undergrads live on campus. There is not enough housing for them to live off-campus irrespective of the cost. There is not enough parking for that many students to commute. Freshmen aren’t even allowed to have cars. Off-campus housing is not an option. At least up u…

> 95% of undergrads live on campus.

Sure, but also most undergrads are not of drinking age, so a no drinking policy is not exactly the end of the world for them. They shouldn’t be drinking anyway.

> underage drinking was not policed

Not policing underage drinking is one thing. But chartered school organizations, throwing school approved events, on school property, with school funds is absolute something Stanford must police. You don’t need to have attended Stanford to understand why.

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#266

Post by gumby »

I can understand how the "Stanford Student Party Policy" emerged and evolved (my own dorm at MIT was summarily shut down by the administration) though I do think it's a shame.

But I've attended several parties at Stanford faculty housing that were ragers, exceeding my own undergraduate memories (except no live bands). These are also on campus in the suburban faculty neighborhoods where tenured profs live. I'm even invited to one tonight that I expect will be lit (though I won't be there).

Yes, they do have "EANABs" but that's just because the hosts are grownups, and have kids so such things are table stakes.

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#267

Post by thaumasiotes »

ben_w wrote: post #221
thaumasiotes wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> published by G?rge Allen Obviously, it says George. (Knowing what an inscription means is actually an important real-world method of being able to read it!) The "Z" used by Tolkien there appears to be his own invention. The whole inscription is something of a mess; a few things are put into runes by sound, but mostly a fairly strict letter-to-letter transcription is used. This is especially bad in "published", whic…

It's also the only time he used that for "e" on that page, everywhere else on that page has "ᛖ" (ehwaz). Quite plausibly because, as you say, it's somewhat phonetic, given that's a silent "e". And yes, it is indeed a mess, the futhark I learned had only "ᚲ" for both "c" and "k", while that text has a different symbol for each in "back".

> It's also the only time he used that for "e" on that page, everywhere else on that page has "ᛖ" (ehwaz).

He isn't using it for "e". He's using it for "eo".

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#268

Post by musicale »

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…

Party and alcohol restrictions have been normal for years for universities that are paranoid about liability - which seems to be most of them in the US. A disconnect is that alcohol is illegal for under-21s, which includes many/most college students.

Then again this is also the school that fired its mascot (a student) for carrying a sign that said "Stanford Hates Fun" - thereby demonstrating the sign's accuracy.

But the greater issue is hostile and punitive policies which exacerbate student stress and depression. The pandemic was handled particularly poorly, and university policies compounded with isolation seem to have greatly harmed student mental health.

A possibly positive change is that universities seem more willing to acknowledge student suicides, and to allow students (and faculty and staff) time to grieve. Perhaps they are worried about potential liability.

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#269

Post by fortuna86 »

red-iron-pine wrote: post #242
randycupertino wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They certainly exist and are fun (as well as playing beer pong in the fountain) but it's nothing as wild as say ... Arizona State. source: went to big state university undergrad then 4 years at Stanford. Miles of difference in the party scenes. Stanford social scene: Beige Toyota Prius Big State U: Lime green Ferrari 250 GTO

U Texas football had tailgate parties that got sponsorship from several big named beer brands, hot dog companies.

Right, the frat party I went to was sponsored by Microsoft and had Xbox stations.

Different.

Post reply on HN