8 ms·

I honestly don't think statements like these mean that much, nor do I think speech policing quite takes the form people expect. Columbia's president Lee Bolling

I honestly don't think statements like these mean that much, nor do I think speech policing quite takes the form people expect. Columbia's president Lee Bollinger is well known as being a free speech advocate and scholar, but Columbia usually strikes people as having a more social-justice sort of climate (if I'm not mistaken Latinx as a term originates from Columbia). Usually, I believe that undergrads are typically the source of protest and these sort of policies. These policies really just indicate whether the university will formalize student demands, but de jure doesn't really do much when you'll still have tenured faculty doing their own thing and students protesting regardless. Additionally, I don't know if many students will share your convictions. Chicago has long had a free-speech policy, but even though they're probably the most academically serious/legitimate institution alongside Princeton and Caltech, I think their usnews ranking has done more for their applications than free speech. Still a good thing, but I'd think it'd be more meaningful if MIT brought back stallman

version_five 4y ago
> undergrads Anecdotal only - when I was in university (20 years ago) a lot of the student protest stuff was coming from the student equivalent of professional politicians. They were undergrad mostly (a few grad students) but usually had been in university for like 8 years and were ideologically motivated to stick around pursuing political aims, rather than just be there to advocate for their fellow students. I was marginally involved in student government, and there was a big difference between the (majority) that were there to make sure their faculty/department got representation, and those that were trying to co-opt student government for some broader political aim. Unfortunately, there is rarely enough of an opposing force on these people, and inevitably they have an outsized influence. So I wouldn't really think of it as undergrads as a whole, more like some 30 years old taking 1/4 course load and pushing their politics.
- philippejara 4y ago
  are there no maximum time for a course in the US? where i'm from if you take more than 50% of the time the course would normally take you just lose it
  - malwrar 4y ago
    I’ve encountered a few… obsessive people like what OP describes. College costs too much to maximize your time in it, but between taking a bare minimum number of courses and staying below the retake limit there were some really strange people who managed to stick around longer than 4 years. One guy was a personal thorn in my side for my entire tenure as president of a hobby student org because he had some beef with a previous administration years prior of whom all were long graduated. Found out later he was like 9 years into his degree yet spent most of his time trying to be influential among hobby student orgs.
    - philippejara 4y ago
      longer than 4 years is normal, expected even, but when you start going into >7 years it gets...weird.
asleepawake 4y ago
I would encourage you to read why Stallman resigned from MIT [1]. The emails that were “leaked” were not private discussions. They were sent to email lists that included everyone in CSAIL and to be frank, were awful. Here is a link to the emails [2]. [1] https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec210794 https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec21... [2] https://www.vice.com/en/article/9ke3ke/famed-computer-scientist-richard-stallman-described-epstein-victims-as-entirely-willing https://www.vice.com/en/article/9ke3ke/famed-computer-scient...
- cultureswitch 4y ago
  Still now I fail to see how these emails could be intrepreted any other way than someone being pedantic with legal terms. Not good timing, yes. But there is no trace of malice. You'll read this as a defense of epstein or child trafficking if you want to read it as such, not if you're reading what's written. Are people incapable of keeping their heads cool and holding off their a priori judgments when reading something?
- nverno 4y ago
  He apologized for all this, though. His initial comments read, to me, as basically someone who is pretty clueless about those topics. But this is the exact kind of speech that should be protected- he wasn't trying to offend or antagonize people, but voicing his philosophy/opinions. He then heard other people's perspectives and they seem to have led him to him reassessing his own, which is how this sort of thing should work, instead of publicly shaming or what have you.
  - chonkerz 4y ago
    [flagged]
    - michaelmrose 4y ago
      Whose careers did her harm, how, and why would I care about his personal grooming or cleanliness?
    - 4y ago
lazyeye 4y ago
Most students are at that stage of life where they are too stupid and ignorant to know how stupid and ignorant they are. This is why the primary responsibility to protect free speech lies with the faculty. And as we know, they often fail miserably at this.
ShredKazoo 4y ago
>Usually, I believe that undergrads are typically the source of protest and these sort of policies. Statements like this one probably serve to discourage some of the more censorious undergrad applicants though. Basically telling undergrads what they can expect and what they're signing up for.

version_five 4y ago

> undergrads Anecdotal only - when I was in university (20 years ago) a lot of the student protest stuff was coming from the student equivalent of professional politicians. They were undergrad mostly (a few grad students) but usually had been in university for like 8 years and were ideologically motivated to stick around pursuing political aims, rather than just be there to advocate for their fellow students. I was marginally involved in student government, and there was a big difference between the (majority) that were there to make sure their faculty/department got representation, and those that were trying to co-opt student government for some broader political aim. Unfortunately, there is rarely enough of an opposing force on these people, and inevitably they have an outsized influence. So I wouldn't really think of it as undergrads as a whole, more like some 30 years old taking 1/4 course load and pushing their politics.

philippejara 4y ago
are there no maximum time for a course in the US? where i'm from if you take more than 50% of the time the course would normally take you just lose it
- malwrar 4y ago
  I’ve encountered a few… obsessive people like what OP describes. College costs too much to maximize your time in it, but between taking a bare minimum number of courses and staying below the retake limit there were some really strange people who managed to stick around longer than 4 years. One guy was a personal thorn in my side for my entire tenure as president of a hobby student org because he had some beef with a previous administration years prior of whom all were long graduated. Found out later he was like 9 years into his degree yet spent most of his time trying to be influential among hobby student orgs.
  - philippejara 4y ago
    longer than 4 years is normal, expected even, but when you start going into >7 years it gets...weird.

asleepawake 4y ago

I would encourage you to read why Stallman resigned from MIT [1]. The emails that were “leaked” were not private discussions. They were sent to email lists that included everyone in CSAIL and to be frank, were awful. Here is a link to the emails [2]. [1] https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec210794 https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-fec6ec21... [2] https://www.vice.com/en/article/9ke3ke/famed-computer-scientist-richard-stallman-described-epstein-victims-as-entirely-willing https://www.vice.com/en/article/9ke3ke/famed-computer-scient...

cultureswitch 4y ago
Still now I fail to see how these emails could be intrepreted any other way than someone being pedantic with legal terms. Not good timing, yes. But there is no trace of malice. You'll read this as a defense of epstein or child trafficking if you want to read it as such, not if you're reading what's written. Are people incapable of keeping their heads cool and holding off their a priori judgments when reading something?
nverno 4y ago
He apologized for all this, though. His initial comments read, to me, as basically someone who is pretty clueless about those topics. But this is the exact kind of speech that should be protected- he wasn't trying to offend or antagonize people, but voicing his philosophy/opinions. He then heard other people's perspectives and they seem to have led him to him reassessing his own, which is how this sort of thing should work, instead of publicly shaming or what have you.
- chonkerz 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - michaelmrose 4y ago
    Whose careers did her harm, how, and why would I care about his personal grooming or cleanliness?
  - 4y ago

lazyeye 4y ago

Most students are at that stage of life where they are too stupid and ignorant to know how stupid and ignorant they are. This is why the primary responsibility to protect free speech lies with the faculty. And as we know, they often fail miserably at this.

ShredKazoo 4y ago

>Usually, I believe that undergrads are typically the source of protest and these sort of policies. Statements like this one probably serve to discourage some of the more censorious undergrad applicants though. Basically telling undergrads what they can expect and what they're signing up for.