3 ms·

Hack the North official statement on ejecting attendees for Facebook joke [pdf]

2 points by 13thLetter 11y ago

nness 11y ago
I think this statement highlights something I'd assume some didn't consider when debating the issue on Errington's article, or Errington and the other poster didn't consider when making the joke. It is the Universities obligation to ensure the safety of its members, it has these black-and-white rules to ensure mistakes don't happen through lack of direction, inaction or uncertainty. In these situations, whether threats are real or just a joke, the faculty doesn't gather a panel and sit down and debate the true nature of the threat, they act immediately to ensure the safety of their community. Knowing their policy is a complete evacuation, and likely realising that the comments were a joke, simply evicting Errington and the other poster was likely a cool-headed reaction in lieu of a proposing or interrupting the event.
- 13thLetter 11y ago
  That doesn't make any sense. If the university was genuinely concerned that the posters really were mad bombers, they are obligated to have police arrest them, evacuate the campus, and search for the bomb they believe exists. If the university did not genuinely believe the posters were mad bombers, then throwing them out of an event for being college students telling dumb jokes to each other is a huge and unjust overreaction: they should do nothing, or at worst quietly contact them and ask them to cut it out. Splitting the difference and merely throwing them out of the event is pointless and matches neither option. Of course, all this is irrelevant because the two weren't thrown out because the University was concerned about a bomb threat. This all happened because some random anonymous person complained to MLH that the postings made them feel "unsafe," and instead of telling that person to go pound sand, MLH and HTN cooperated to enforce exactly the same foolish zero-tolerance policies they were joking about.

2 points by 13thLetter 11y ago

nness 11y ago

I think this statement highlights something I'd assume some didn't consider when debating the issue on Errington's article, or Errington and the other poster didn't consider when making the joke. It is the Universities obligation to ensure the safety of its members, it has these black-and-white rules to ensure mistakes don't happen through lack of direction, inaction or uncertainty. In these situations, whether threats are real or just a joke, the faculty doesn't gather a panel and sit down and debate the true nature of the threat, they act immediately to ensure the safety of their community. Knowing their policy is a complete evacuation, and likely realising that the comments were a joke, simply evicting Errington and the other poster was likely a cool-headed reaction in lieu of a proposing or interrupting the event.

13thLetter 11y ago
That doesn't make any sense. If the university was genuinely concerned that the posters really were mad bombers, they are obligated to have police arrest them, evacuate the campus, and search for the bomb they believe exists. If the university did not genuinely believe the posters were mad bombers, then throwing them out of an event for being college students telling dumb jokes to each other is a huge and unjust overreaction: they should do nothing, or at worst quietly contact them and ask them to cut it out. Splitting the difference and merely throwing them out of the event is pointless and matches neither option. Of course, all this is irrelevant because the two weren't thrown out because the University was concerned about a bomb threat. This all happened because some random anonymous person complained to MLH that the postings made them feel "unsafe," and instead of telling that person to go pound sand, MLH and HTN cooperated to enforce exactly the same foolish zero-tolerance policies they were joking about.