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

Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 198 posts

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#151

Post by wutbrodo »

ThrustVectoring wrote: post #85
surge wrote: post #23

I saw it happen first hand once at Guilford College, another small liberal arts college. There was an incident between a group of drunken football students and some kids that were Arabic. The school didn't do its part to encourage rational and cool heads until all the facts were in and there were mobs looking for football players, even those not involved. It wasn't safe for them so had to leave campus. Once the facts…

>Free speech standards in the US requires you have evidence to back up what you're saying if you're going to speak negatively of someone You're free to speak negatively of people, you just can't damage someone's reputation by spreading false facts. I'm allowed to call my neighbor a poopyhead or the like, but I can't tell people that he sexually molests children. Debate is fine, lively discussion is fine, talking nega…

> I'm allowed to call my neighbor a poopyhead or the like

I just want to point out that I'm tickled by the fact that I made a point with the exact same term upthread, a moment before coming across your comment. I like your style

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#152

Post by RickJWagner »

Oberlin was acting totally irresponsibly.

I'm glad for the damages. I hope this sends a chilling message to universities-- spend your time and efforts on providing the best education possible. Leave toxic politics in the past. Education should be the primary reason for existence, by far.

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#153

Post by UnpossibleJim »

elicash wrote: post #141
UnpossibleJim wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freedom of speech does does carry with it freedom from the repercussions of libel and lost wages due to those erroneous statements. Now, you can argue the validity of those laws and their impact on the freedom of speech, but they aren't protected under the free speech laws. They have very real specifications and aren't cart blanche to be an asshole without repercussion. Ignorance of the law has never been a defence,…

I think you misread what I wrote because the statements aren't in conflict with one another. I'm saying there are limitations on libel as a result of the First Amendment, not that you can't have any libel laws at all.

Of course, but when you use your position of authority (as a professor would have) as a bully pulpit, to have a call to action (like boycott), it can be argued that damages are justified. I'm actually very pro free speech, and I think the damages in this case are egregious, but there was very much a call to action from a very influential person on a group of people who had limited capabilities (though, not legally, maybe). The precedent is more similar to yelling fire in a crowded movie theater and being responsible for the outcome rather than voicing your political opinions in a town square.... Though, I will admit, when I wrote this first comment I hadn't read far enough down in this thread =)

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#154

Post by lolcat5e »

elicash wrote: post #132
mullingitover wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think simply calling somebody "racist" should EVER be libel. Even when inaccurate. You're a racist. Just exercising free speech over here, am I doing this right?

Yep. Even if I had your name, I wouldn't sue! And if I did, I'd hope that it'd get laughed out of court. Now imagine a world where I could win. For tens of millions of dollars. That should scare you. Thanks for making my point.

No need to imagine. There are countries where you would win.

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#155

Post by mullingitover »

elicash wrote: post #148
mullingitover wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you think I should be able to successfully sue you for millions of dollars if you had SERIOUSLY just called me a racist? If I damage you with lies in word or in print, you are entitled to be made whole. If I lied about you and it cost you millions of dollars as a result, yes, you should be allowed to sue me to get those millions back. What problem do you have with this system? Edit: and if the damages were done…

> What problem do you have with this system? I think people define "racist" differently. Some see it in terms of systems. Some people think calling out racism is itself racist. Some view certain types of jokes as being a sign of being racist. There are as many definitions of the term as there are people. I have repeatedly mentioned there are limits, but my problem with the system you laid out (which I'd argue is far…

> I'm a free speech guy who thinks we're better off when we can discuss issues openly.

You can already do this. You just can't harm people with your speech and expect no consequences.

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#156

Post by mullingitover »

elicash wrote: post #149
mullingitover wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, nobody gets sued for libel over honest debate. They do, however, face social repercussions for taking positions out of line with society's values. Freedom of speech isn't freedom from consequences.

You just argued below that if I had bad economic impact based on the FACT that you called me a racist that I should be able to sue you over this very honest debate and win. You've taken a very extreme position here. At least one person, you, are arguing this. So don't say "nobody."

That's not an extreme position, it's the law of the land and has been for a long time. It's basic civil law that if you harm someone they can take you to court to be made whole. Civilization is sort of built on this concept.

The thing here is that you're not being harmed by rhetoric. If you were, you'd have a case.

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#157

Post by elicash »

UnpossibleJim wrote: post #153
elicash wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you misread what I wrote because the statements aren't in conflict with one another. I'm saying there are limitations on libel as a result of the First Amendment, not that you can't have any libel laws at all.

Of course, but when you use your position of authority (as a professor would have) as a bully pulpit, to have a call to action (like boycott), it can be argued that damages are justified. I'm actually very pro free speech, and I think the damages in this case are egregious, but there was very much a call to action from a very influential person on a group of people who had limited capabilities (though, not legally, m…

> The precedent is more similar to yelling fire in a crowded movie theater and being responsible for the outcome rather than voicing your political opinions in a town square

A closer precedent would be yelling "this sucks!" in a crowded theater of a film that in fact is quite good and then calling for people to boycott it on that faulty basis. Mostly joking with this example, but it kinda gets to where we disagree too.

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#158

Post by elicash »

mullingitover wrote: post #156
elicash wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just argued below that if I had bad economic impact based on the FACT that you called me a racist that I should be able to sue you over this very honest debate and win. You've taken a very extreme position here. At least one person, you, are arguing this. So don't say "nobody."

That's not an extreme position, it's the law of the land and has been for a long time. It's basic civil law that if you harm someone they can take you to court to be made whole. Civilization is sort of built on this concept. The thing here is that you're not being harmed by rhetoric. If you were, you'd have a case.

> If you were, you'd have a case.

So if Eli Cash was my actual name (rather than a Royal Tenenbaums character), and if I didn't get a job because the employer googled my name and your claim came up..? You really think I'd have a real case?

I guess if we still disagree nothing can be done about that. We've both made our points.

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#159

Post by elicash »

ThrustVectoring wrote: post #85
surge wrote: post #23

I saw it happen first hand once at Guilford College, another small liberal arts college. There was an incident between a group of drunken football students and some kids that were Arabic. The school didn't do its part to encourage rational and cool heads until all the facts were in and there were mobs looking for football players, even those not involved. It wasn't safe for them so had to leave campus. Once the facts…

>Free speech standards in the US requires you have evidence to back up what you're saying if you're going to speak negatively of someone You're free to speak negatively of people, you just can't damage someone's reputation by spreading false facts. I'm allowed to call my neighbor a poopyhead or the like, but I can't tell people that he sexually molests children. Debate is fine, lively discussion is fine, talking nega…

> I'm allowed to call my neighbor a poopyhead or the like, but I can't tell people that he sexually molests children.

"Racist" is more in the category of the former than the latter. The "assault" allegation in the flier handed out, in part, by a dean is admittedly more of a gray area than either of your examples.

Re: Oberlin College case shows how universities are losing their way

#160

Post by mullingitover »

mullingitover wrote: post #156
elicash wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You just argued below that if I had bad economic impact based on the FACT that you called me a racist that I should be able to sue you over this very honest debate and win. You've taken a very extreme position here. At least one person, you, are arguing this. So don't say "nobody."

That's not an extreme position, it's the law of the land and has been for a long time. It's basic civil law that if you harm someone they can take you to court to be made whole. Civilization is sort of built on this concept. The thing here is that you're not being harmed by rhetoric. If you were, you'd have a case.

> So if Eli Cash was my actual name (rather than a Royal Tenenbaums character), and if I didn't get a job because the employer googled my name and your claim came up..? You really think I'd have a real case?

Would a reasonable person read my post in context and somehow walk away believing you were a racist? You know they wouldn't.

Post reply on HN