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

221–230 of 269 posts

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#221

Post by ben_w »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #150
ben_w wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original cover of The Hobbit has runes running along the outside; the runes read "The Hobbit or There and Back Again, being the record of a journey by Bilbo Baggins of Hobbiton compiled from his memoirs by JRR Tolkein and published by G?rge Allen and Unwin Ltd"[0]. I can read that because of my mum's books on doing fortune telling with Viking rune stones, which she kept near her statue of a Hindu god and some mag…

> 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".

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#222

Post by qikInNdOutReply »

kryogen1c wrote: post #174
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…

> low-stakes hyper-local What a terrible take. The entire purpose of college is to influence the minds that attend them before sending them out to further propagate those ideals into the world. Furthermore, this is an elite institution that ostensibly is training future leaders - the type of people most poised to spread influence.

And that will find it acceptable in all future endavours to micro-meddle in the lifes of citizens with policy. After all, it was okay for them..

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#223

Post by tomkarho »

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…

> "fuck up once and we'll destroy you"

Welcome to the life in the internet era. every mistake, every errant post, every fuck up catalogued, stamped and preserved in perpetuity. Ready to be used in a moment's notice against you should you stray from the established narrative or the instructions of "The Party"

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#224

Post by mcv »

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…

Am I now supposed to be upset about universities tackling the problem of excessive drinking by students? Because when it comes to alcohol, fucking up once can also destroy you. I still remember how a number of years ago, a student at the university of Groningen drank himself to death under peer pressure. The article refers to a student being hospitalised due to alcohol.

The university working to reduce the dangers of alcohol sounds like a very good thing to me.

Of course the rest of the article, about harsh punishments by the university that even drove one student to suicide, is also serious. It looks like Stanford needs to be a bit more concerned with their students' mental health and not just their alcohol intake. The relationship between the university and its students comes across as far too antagonistic, and that's not good.

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#225

Post by havblue »

hgsgm wrote: post #202
havblue wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this was more or less normal over twenty years ago when everyone started to crack down on underage drinking. Get caught serving minors or hazing and the university might take your house away. From the university's standpoint they of course want to pave the way for donations and protect their reputation. If they boot an occasional animal house fraternity it just lets them open a door to a more reputable organi…

"minors" are extremely rare in college. Most "underage" drinkers are adults.

People are so literal here. It's great. You are correct, I should have put "underage" and not "minors".

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#226

Post by lapinot »

tqi wrote: post #87
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…

> 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…

No one cares about their party policy. This article is about how administration in universities are regularly harassing students. I france our uni look very much different, policy and structure-wise, and yet i can relate big time to this. I knew a lot of students who got harassed badly for tons of random reasons.

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#227

Post by kryogen1c »

tqi wrote: post #195
kryogen1c wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> low-stakes hyper-local What a terrible take. The entire purpose of college is to influence the minds that attend them before sending them out to further propagate those ideals into the world. Furthermore, this is an elite institution that ostensibly is training future leaders - the type of people most poised to spread influence.

Your argument is basically the domino effect meme with Stanford Party Policy on one end and Global Culture on the other? I dunno about others but I definitely don't buy it - I think some people just like minding other people's business. To your point about training future leaders, there is a reason people don't start out training with live ammo. If every element of campus life could randomly and capriciously be escal…

> Your argument is basically the domino effect meme with Stanford Party Policy on one end and Global Culture on the other?

this is an exaggerated straw-man version of my argument, but yes. colleges are a training ground for young people during their formative years, a place we send them to intentionally change their personalities and come into their own being away from their parents. One college isnt going to topple the global culture, but calling bad things that happen at college "hyperlocal" is obviously wrong.

> If every element of campus life could randomly and capriciously be escalated to the national stage, how could anyone possibly expect kids to learn how to take risks or make mistakes?

i dont understand this argument. the article we're commenting on is about exactly this type of oppressive, no-mistakes, no-learning regime the college administration is creating. the media coverage isnt about highlighting mistakes students made; the media coverage is escalating to the national stage the exact thing youre complaining about. a girl got a conduct violation for intentionally spilling coffee and then killed herself.

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#228

Post by ChuckNorris89 »

mcv wrote: post #224
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…

Am I now supposed to be upset about universities tackling the problem of excessive drinking by students? Because when it comes to alcohol, fucking up once can also destroy you. I still remember how a number of years ago, a student at the university of Groningen drank himself to death under peer pressure. The article refers to a student being hospitalised due to alcohol. The university working to reduce the dangers of…

>drank himself to death under peer pressure

Learning to resist tribal peer pressure without becoming an outcast is by far the most valuable life lesson I've ever learned.

Re: Stanford’s war against its own students

#229

Post by Claude_Shannon »

I don't see what's the point of the article. It is supposed to be weird that uni bans alcohol from uni parties? At my uni being drunk was an instant expulsion without right to appeal, I don't see what's wrong with it. If you disagree, you don't have to study there.
Post reply on HN