The Fora: A Higher Education Community

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on Today at 10:06:19 AM

Quote from: marshwiggle on Today at 08:53:11 AM

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on Today at 08:10:32 AM

Quote from: marshwiggle on Today at 08:04:13 AMIt's fine for students to "denounce" oppression; what they need to be made to understand that history is a long game. Whatever they do right now is unlikely to have any visible impact, but the concerted actions of people with influence and authority, over time, will change things for the better.

So is the idea that they should just wait until they have influence and authority, and then they should work for incremental change?

They have very little power right now, but they're hoping to influence some of the people with more power to start changing things for the better. What's wrong with trying to exert some influence, even if they're not successful? Is that not part of long-term incremental change for the better?

Remember the truckers in Ottawa, and blockading bridges to the U.S.? The idea that anyone who thinks they can support a righteous cause by engaging in illegal activity undermines the whole idea of what a democratic society is about. Legitimate protest is an opportunity to get people to hear your message, so that you have the chance to win them over to it. Extorting them into doing what you want in order to get on with their lives makes winning them over to your cause irrelevant.

Indeed, I do remember. And I remember being just fine with them demonstrating and even blocking traffic. I was not okay with their setting open fires, because that is a significant public safety risk. I was also not okay with their blaring air horns (which cause permanent hearing damage) in residential neighbourhoods, especially at all times of the day and night (clearly an attempt to inflict sleep deprivation on residents). You'll recall I also opposed the invocation of the War Measures Act.

As for the bridge blockade, I have no problem with a bridge blockade in principle, save that those assholes were armed with firearms. That's absolutely not okay, and a serious danger to public safety.

Whether they have firearms or tire irons,  (which truckers surely do), they are a serious danger to public safety as long as they feel entitled to prevent anyone crossing the bridge.

Quote from: the_geneticist on Today at 10:38:17 AMI got an email from a student that basically says:

"I took your class 2 years ago.  Can I get more points to raise my grade?"  Plus a lengthy paragraph about how they aren't asking for anything special, but it would be great for their financial/personal/mental well-being.  And they need a 3.80 to transfer to another university.

Guess what grade they earned?  That's right, an A-. 

I told them it was not possible, not ethical to offer more points after the class has ended, & to focus on their current classes.

Stu wrote back "Sorry, I didn't know that wasn't allowed.  But that was the only quarter I got less than As in my classes."

I'm not going to reply unless they escalate. 

1) Your grades in other quarters do not matter.
2) Even if it did matter, stu has never had a quarter of all As. 

Do you have an obligation to reply to students who are not enrolled in your classes? I'd be inclined to ignore such nonsense.

Quote from: marshwiggle on Today at 08:56:44 AM

Quote from: FishProf on Today at 08:31:47 AM

Quote from: downer on Today at 08:29:15 AMI admire the hardassity of the policy.

I don't see it as hardassity (but I will accept the label for myself), the exam is compromised once someone leaves.

The rule here for final exams (that has been in place for ages) is that people can be allowed in late until half an hour after the exam stars, but people can't leave until after an hour, so there's no possible overlap.

Most folks here will warn students "if you show up after someone has already left, then you can't take the exam."  In reality, they make a 3rd/4th version of the exam just for the late folks.

I got an email from a student that basically says:

"I took your class 2 years ago.  Can I get more points to raise my grade?"  Plus a lengthy paragraph about how they aren't asking for anything special, but it would be great for their financial/personal/mental well-being.  And they need a 3.80 to transfer to another university.

Guess what grade they earned?  That's right, an A-. 

I told them it was not possible, not ethical to offer more points after the class has ended, & to focus on their current classes.

Stu wrote back "Sorry, I didn't know that wasn't allowed.  But that was the only quarter I got less than As in my classes."

I'm not going to reply unless they escalate. 

1) Your grades in other quarters do not matter.
2) Even if it did matter, stu has never had a quarter of all As. 

Quote from: marshwiggle on Today at 08:53:11 AM

Quote from: Parasaurolophus on Today at 08:10:32 AM

Quote from: marshwiggle on Today at 08:04:13 AMIt's fine for students to "denounce" oppression; what they need to be made to understand that history is a long game. Whatever they do right now is unlikely to have any visible impact, but the concerted actions of people with influence and authority, over time, will change things for the better.

So is the idea that they should just wait until they have influence and authority, and then they should work for incremental change?

They have very little power right now, but they're hoping to influence some of the people with more power to start changing things for the better. What's wrong with trying to exert some influence, even if they're not successful? Is that not part of long-term incremental change for the better?

Remember the truckers in Ottawa, and blockading bridges to the U.S.? The idea that anyone who thinks they can support a righteous cause by engaging in illegal activity undermines the whole idea of what a democratic society is about. Legitimate protest is an opportunity to get people to hear your message, so that you have the chance to win them over to it. Extorting them into doing what you want in order to get on with their lives makes winning them over to your cause irrelevant.

Indeed, I do remember. And I remember being just fine with them demonstrating and even blocking traffic. I was not okay with their setting open fires, because that is a significant public safety risk. I was also not okay with their blaring air horns (which cause permanent hearing damage) in residential neighbourhoods, especially at all times of the day and night (clearly an attempt to inflict sleep deprivation on residents). You'll recall I also opposed the invocation of the War Measures Act.

As for the bridge blockade, I have no problem with a bridge blockade in principle, save that those assholes were armed with firearms. That's absolutely not okay, and a serious danger to public safety.


I would point out, also, that the Columbia students aren't actually blocking anything. They're peacefully encamped in a corner of the campus that's typically unused (due to pesticide spraying) and not blocking any thoroughfares. It's all the administration's doing that buildings are locked, classes online, etc. What's more, Columbia has, in the past, agreed to student divestment demands (e.g. from prison labour).

Quote from: Hegemony on March 13, 2024, 01:42:59 AMMythbuster, you can watch Oppenheimer on Amazon Prime or on YouTube for $5.99. Worth doing.

The DVD is awful Very small 2:40 aspect screen. bad lighting. I couldn't watch. I hATE watching small screens

Good morning/afternoon!

QBwSBB for portrait and papyri. Today I reached QB with a 1L nudge for the last word.

LB: I also had zirconia-ambush. I found a 2fer today also.

Happy puzzling!

I've always wondered how many people take my stance when the side they agree with uses a tactic that makes their life difficult in some way or otherwise is unsympathetic for reasons other than the cause. My personal stance is that you may have my agreement but no longer my support. Here are a few examples:

-California had a 2008 ballot proposition regarding gay marriage which I was in favor of legalizing. I was held up during a traffic shutdown not quite as extreme as the Golden Gate but they f'd my day in a number of ways. Did I actively "support" that cause in any material way afterward such as donating or giving my own time even if I still agreed with it? Nope. There are other places to put my energy.

-I've discussed on this forum before that while I believe in bodily autonomy on the choice issue, I also will not use my own time or resources to "support" the furthering of that agenda since I perceive (based on polling, party affiliation, etc.) the average pro-choice female as voting for nanny state issues that negatively affect me to a disproportionate degree. Again, you have my agreement but not my support. There are many other issues I could give time, money or energy to.

The bottom line is that even if I agree with your side, that doesn't really guarantee any active involvement from me that may have value to you. I might give a limited amount of time or funds to causes I believe in and support in any given year. Many worthwhile causes exist that could be the subject of my limited resources. If I have to remove a group from consideration, one that has actively hassled me in some way by preventing me from accessing a bridge or engaging in a business activity without a thousand licenses and permits is easy to remove. I'll direct my support to any number of other worthwhile causes that are not promoted by people making my life more difficult.

Maybe they could allow food trucks to come to campus.

It's pretty horrible to think of a campus of 12,000 with no dining options whatsoever.  And pretty astonishing that any school that size could get itself into such a situation.  For now I guess everybody will just have to brown-bag it.  It's what I did through six years of grad school.  We had dining services on campus.  I just couldn't afford them.  Good thing I really liked peanut butter.