Quote from: marshwiggle on Today at 08:56:44 AMQuote from: FishProf on Today at 08:31:47 AMQuote 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.
Quote from: marshwiggle on Today at 08:53:11 AMQuote from: Parasaurolophus on Today at 08:10:32 AMQuote 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.
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.
Quote from: FishProf on Today at 08:31:47 AMQuote 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.
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on Today at 08:10:32 AMQuote 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?