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

Stanford’s President and Provost Must Resign

theymustresign.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 52 posts

Re: Stanford’s President and Provost Must Resign

#41

Post by dekhn »

shkkmo wrote: post #15

Even without the deaths if these parts of the allegations are correct, it seems like a firing is in order: > In May 2021 WSCUC, Stanford’s accreditation regulator, launched a formal investigation into President Tessier-Lavigne’s administration. > In an unsigned and undated letter, President Tessier-Lavigne’s administration lied repeatedly to WSCUC investigators. > President Tessier-Lavigne’s administration forged and…

Does anybody have any references for this statement: "In an unsigned and undated letter, President Tessier-Lavigne’s administration lied repeatedly to WSCUC investigators."

I'm trying to understand what's meant by that, and I can't find anything referencing it online.

Re: Stanford’s President and Provost Must Resign

#42

Post by dekhn »

shkkmo wrote: post #40
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry to give that impression. My whole comment was intended to convey that the furor sounds like generalized criticism of a President, almost unrelated to the specific problems that occurred. All too common nowadays, to just fling criticism and claims around and hope something sticks, with no honest attempt to connect to the tragedy. Sure conflicts of interest are concerning. How does that get a student into a bathr…

The criticism is pretty specific: > In sum, 1) An internal Stanford document finds repeated failure by Stanford staff, 2) Both Giammalva and Madarasz quietly depart Stanford, 3) Giammalva has been accused of past misconduct, and 4) the Dean overseeing all this, Lisa Caldera, has been the subject of an ethics complaint. Despite this, President Tessier-Lavigne’s administration released a public statement in January 202…

I'm trying to track down the truthfulness of the claims that Stanford's administration lied to its accreditor.

If that isn't independently verifiable, I'm going to ignore the rest of this complaint, as (based on several details) it looks like a person with a personal vendetta is trying to make a larger case than exists.

Re: Stanford’s President and Provost Must Resign

#43

Post by dekhn »

Animats wrote: post #20

Stanford apparently puts a significant number of students in a locked ward at Stanford Hospitals for attempting or discussing suicide.[1] But Stanford refuses to disclose statistics on that. [1] https://stanforddaily.com/2019/04/05/where-do-stanford-stude...

Those are 5150s. It's done when a person is considered an immediate risk. it's not just stanford that does this- it's a federal law. I know a person at berkeley who was suicidal and she was regularly 5150d (often shortly after she stopped taking her meds). if you're trying to use this as a point that "stanford=bad", please be aware that mental health issues are extremely serious and there is likely another explanation for what you consider to be nefarious data-hiding.

Re: Stanford’s President and Provost Must Resign

#44

Post by Animats »

dekhn wrote: post #43
Animats wrote: post #20

Stanford apparently puts a significant number of students in a locked ward at Stanford Hospitals for attempting or discussing suicide.[1] But Stanford refuses to disclose statistics on that. [1] https://stanforddaily.com/2019/04/05/where-do-stanford-stude...

Those are 5150s. It's done when a person is considered an immediate risk. it's not just stanford that does this- it's a federal law. I know a person at berkeley who was suicidal and she was regularly 5150d (often shortly after she stopped taking her meds). if you're trying to use this as a point that "stanford=bad", please be aware that mental health issues are extremely serious and there is likely another explanatio…

If going to Stanford creates a significant risk of being locked up as crazy, that risk needs to be documented.

Re: Stanford’s President and Provost Must Resign

#45

Post by dekhn »

Animats wrote: post #44
dekhn wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are 5150s. It's done when a person is considered an immediate risk. it's not just stanford that does this- it's a federal law. I know a person at berkeley who was suicidal and she was regularly 5150d (often shortly after she stopped taking her meds). if you're trying to use this as a point that "stanford=bad", please be aware that mental health issues are extremely serious and there is likely another explanatio…

If going to Stanford creates a significant risk of being locked up as crazy, that risk needs to be documented.

In front of everybody on this site: are you being serious when you say that?

Real question.

Re: Stanford’s President and Provost Must Resign

#46

Post by dekhn »

joshuahaglund wrote: post #26
dlandis wrote: post #19

I'm not familiar with this situation, but this is such an immaturely written post. For example, the third bullet point in the summary is: > On March 1, 2022, Stanford student Katie Meyer died by suicide. During that time, Dean Caldera was running a raffle for her side consulting business. What is the writer trying to imply, exactly? Are they suggesting that there is something inappropriate about the raffle? Or was th…

Sounds like they laid out facts. The Dean had a job to do but was also doing a side hustle. It's not vague to me. If you're giving a poor performance to your well-paid first job, you shouldn't be taking 2nd job.

this document isn't a "laid out facts". This is a document written to cloak truth and make you believe something, without sufficient evidence. I learned all these tricks in my rhetoric education.

Re: Stanford’s President and Provost Must Resign

#47

Post by Animats »

dekhn wrote: post #45
Animats wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If going to Stanford creates a significant risk of being locked up as crazy, that risk needs to be documented.

In front of everybody on this site: are you being serious when you say that? Real question.

Of course. We've seen this at the high school level near Stanford. Palo Alto's high schools have a significant suicide rate, about 4-5x the national average. The causes of that have been much discussed.[1] The school district takes surveys and has a lot of counseling resources. "Twelve percent of Palo Alto high-school students surveyed in the 2013–14 school year reported having seriously contemplated suicide in the past 12 months." The city fenced the railroad tracks, and has guards and cameras at the crossings. Students of those high schools are now asking for more information about suicides.[2] They're the ones at risk, after all.

[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/12/the-sil...

[2] https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2022/04/29/students-urge...

Re: Stanford’s President and Provost Must Resign

#48

Post by shkkmo »

dekhn wrote: post #41
shkkmo wrote: post #15

Even without the deaths if these parts of the allegations are correct, it seems like a firing is in order: > In May 2021 WSCUC, Stanford’s accreditation regulator, launched a formal investigation into President Tessier-Lavigne’s administration. > In an unsigned and undated letter, President Tessier-Lavigne’s administration lied repeatedly to WSCUC investigators. > President Tessier-Lavigne’s administration forged and…

Does anybody have any references for this statement: "In an unsigned and undated letter, President Tessier-Lavigne’s administration lied repeatedly to WSCUC investigators." I'm trying to understand what's meant by that, and I can't find anything referencing it online.

It's a reference to the Author's past issues with the Stanford Administration described in this 2021 Medium post that they link to: https://erdorsey2.medium.com/persis-drell-should-resign-as-s...

Re: Stanford’s President and Provost Must Resign

#49

Post by shkkmo »

dekhn wrote: post #42
shkkmo wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The criticism is pretty specific: > In sum, 1) An internal Stanford document finds repeated failure by Stanford staff, 2) Both Giammalva and Madarasz quietly depart Stanford, 3) Giammalva has been accused of past misconduct, and 4) the Dean overseeing all this, Lisa Caldera, has been the subject of an ethics complaint. Despite this, President Tessier-Lavigne’s administration released a public statement in January 202…

I'm trying to track down the truthfulness of the claims that Stanford's administration lied to its accreditor. If that isn't independently verifiable, I'm going to ignore the rest of this complaint, as (based on several details) it looks like a person with a personal vendetta is trying to make a larger case than exists.

The details are here: https://erdorsey2.medium.com/persis-drell-should-resign-as-s...

There is a personal vendetta for sure, but also probably some underlying sketchiness from the Stanford administration that prompted said vendetta.

Re: Stanford’s President and Provost Must Resign

#50

Post by dekhn »

Animats wrote: post #47
dekhn wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In front of everybody on this site: are you being serious when you say that? Real question.

Of course. We've seen this at the high school level near Stanford. Palo Alto's high schools have a significant suicide rate, about 4-5x the national average. The causes of that have been much discussed.[1] The school district takes surveys and has a lot of counseling resources. "Twelve percent of Palo Alto high-school students surveyed in the 2013–14 school year reported having seriously contemplated suicide in the p…

wait, you just switched from stanford-the-college to palo-alto-high-schools. which is it- stanford makes you go crazy, or living in palo alto?

I don't think whatever argument you are trying to make is very well thought out. From what I can tell, you have some sort of model where you think that living in the Palo Alto area makes people go crazy/kill themselves, possibly in a way that is associated with the institutional policies of the schools in the area.

If you don't see why that sort of speculation is both stupid and dangerous, I don't think it's worth me continuing to engage. There are any number of explanations for what you observe that don't involve blaming institutions for causing suicides.

I live in the area and am quite aware of what happened around Caltrain- many people die on the caltrain tracks every year. Having a grade-crossing railroad in the middle of a dense suburban area is crazy.

Post reply on HN