Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. Meanwhile, at Harvard...

Meanwhile, at Harvard...

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
237 Posts 16 Posters 7.4k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • jon-nycJ Offline
    jon-nycJ Offline
    jon-nyc
    wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
    #105

    It isn’t a question of what’s allowed. It’s a question of what constitutes harassment.

    If I post a general comment here about (say) gender differences, should an employee at my foundation be able to report it to HR as harassment?

    Of course not.

    What if I post it and then send them the link? That’s different.

    You were warned.

    HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
    • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

      It isn’t a question of what’s allowed. It’s a question of what constitutes harassment.

      If I post a general comment here about (say) gender differences, should an employee at my foundation be able to report it to HR as harassment?

      Of course not.

      What if I post it and then send them the link? That’s different.

      HoraceH Online
      HoraceH Online
      Horace
      wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
      #106

      @jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

      It isn’t a question of what’s allowed. It’s a question of what constitutes harassment.

      If I post a general comment here about (say) gender differences, should an employee at my foundation be able to report it to HR as harassment?

      Of course not.

      What if I post it and then send them the link? That’s different.

      Thanks. I guess I was thinking about it all wrong. I had been thinking that the subject was, what was or was not allowed as campus speech.

      ***************-
      note from Jon. I tried to reply to this but hit edit accidentally. I cut off the rest of his paragraph. The text below here is my “reply”
      ***************-

      The entirety of Lemoine’s point was about Stefanik asking about whether this constituted ‘harassment and bullying’.

      Perhaps the universities have ‘hate speech’ codes that this could have violated, in which case surely the Representative could have nailed them on that.

      Education is extremely important.

      HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
      • jon-nycJ Offline
        jon-nycJ Offline
        jon-nyc
        wrote on last edited by
        #107

        FIRE President Greg Lukianoff with a principled take as you would expect.

        You were warned.

        HoraceH George KG 2 Replies Last reply
        • Aqua LetiferA Aqua Letifer

          I also think the tweet misses the point entirely. Yeah sure okay, that's what the hearings are about, but the problem on the table right now, the one we are and should be focusing on, isn't adherence to university harassment policies.

          jon-nycJ Offline
          jon-nycJ Offline
          jon-nyc
          wrote on last edited by
          #108

          @Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

          I also think the tweet misses the point entirely. Yeah sure okay, that's what the hearings are about, but the problem on the table right now, the one we are and should be focusing on, isn't adherence to university harassment policies.

          Seems like Representative Stefancik missed the point.

          You were warned.

          Aqua LetiferA 1 Reply Last reply
          • jon-nycJ Offline
            jon-nycJ Offline
            jon-nyc
            wrote on last edited by
            #109

            Horace - forgive me I accidentally edited your post above instead of replying to it. Fat fingers, small phone.

            I can’t undo it or I would. I’ll make a note in the post itself

            You were warned.

            1 Reply Last reply
            • HoraceH Horace

              @jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

              It isn’t a question of what’s allowed. It’s a question of what constitutes harassment.

              If I post a general comment here about (say) gender differences, should an employee at my foundation be able to report it to HR as harassment?

              Of course not.

              What if I post it and then send them the link? That’s different.

              Thanks. I guess I was thinking about it all wrong. I had been thinking that the subject was, what was or was not allowed as campus speech.

              ***************-
              note from Jon. I tried to reply to this but hit edit accidentally. I cut off the rest of his paragraph. The text below here is my “reply”
              ***************-

              The entirety of Lemoine’s point was about Stefanik asking about whether this constituted ‘harassment and bullying’.

              Perhaps the universities have ‘hate speech’ codes that this could have violated, in which case surely the Representative could have nailed them on that.

              HoraceH Online
              HoraceH Online
              Horace
              wrote on last edited by
              #110

              @jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

              The entirety of Lemoine’s point was about Stefanik asking about whether this constituted ‘harassment and bullying’.

              Perhaps the universities have ‘hate speech’ codes that this could have violated, in which case surely the Representative could have nailed them on that.

              My four scenarios about Joe the Jew are coherent as either allowed or disallowed within any policy you'd care to name.

              Education is extremely important.

              1 Reply Last reply
              • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                FIRE President Greg Lukianoff with a principled take as you would expect.

                HoraceH Online
                HoraceH Online
                Horace
                wrote on last edited by
                #111

                @jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                FIRE President Greg Lukianoff with a principled take as you would expect.

                From the from the comments:

                Best line: "As FIRE President and CEO Greg Lukianoff has written, censorship doesn’t change a person’s mind — it only prevents us from knowing what’s in their mind."

                This is actually not quite accurate. Ideas which people cannot talk about, do die, or are at least damaged. It's poetic to think that somehow, karmically, the ideas remain, and emerge stronger when finally freed, but really, as programmable meat robots, if you deprive humans of the programming, which is to say the messaging and conversation around it, those ideas do go away.

                Education is extremely important.

                1 Reply Last reply
                • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                  @Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                  I also think the tweet misses the point entirely. Yeah sure okay, that's what the hearings are about, but the problem on the table right now, the one we are and should be focusing on, isn't adherence to university harassment policies.

                  Seems like Representative Stefancik missed the point.

                  Aqua LetiferA Offline
                  Aqua LetiferA Offline
                  Aqua Letifer
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #112

                  @jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                  @Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                  I also think the tweet misses the point entirely. Yeah sure okay, that's what the hearings are about, but the problem on the table right now, the one we are and should be focusing on, isn't adherence to university harassment policies.

                  Seems like Representative Stefancik missed the point.

                  Are you of the opinion that anti-semitism isn't a concern at these universities, and that university policy is what we should be focusing on?

                  Please love yourself.

                  jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
                  • CopperC Offline
                    CopperC Offline
                    Copper
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #113

                    The university presidents screwed up.

                    They should have given the simple yes or no - 1 word.

                    Why not? I think either way is legal and the fact that democrats now hate Jews is well known.

                    They acted like a bunch of guilty teenagers.

                    bachophileB 1 Reply Last reply
                    • Aqua LetiferA Aqua Letifer

                      @jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                      @Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                      I also think the tweet misses the point entirely. Yeah sure okay, that's what the hearings are about, but the problem on the table right now, the one we are and should be focusing on, isn't adherence to university harassment policies.

                      Seems like Representative Stefancik missed the point.

                      Are you of the opinion that anti-semitism isn't a concern at these universities, and that university policy is what we should be focusing on?

                      jon-nycJ Offline
                      jon-nycJ Offline
                      jon-nyc
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #114

                      @Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                      @jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                      @Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                      I also think the tweet misses the point entirely. Yeah sure okay, that's what the hearings are about, but the problem on the table right now, the one we are and should be focusing on, isn't adherence to university harassment policies.

                      Seems like Representative Stefancik missed the point.

                      Are you of the opinion that anti-semitism isn't a concern at these universities, and that university policy is what we should be focusing on?

                      Of course not. Again, Lemoine’s point was rather specific. I even said it was a bit of a nitpick when I posted it.

                      You’re right that it’s beside the point. But maybe Stefanik could have gotten to the point?

                      You were warned.

                      Aqua LetiferA HoraceH 2 Replies Last reply
                      • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                        @Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                        @jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                        @Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                        I also think the tweet misses the point entirely. Yeah sure okay, that's what the hearings are about, but the problem on the table right now, the one we are and should be focusing on, isn't adherence to university harassment policies.

                        Seems like Representative Stefancik missed the point.

                        Are you of the opinion that anti-semitism isn't a concern at these universities, and that university policy is what we should be focusing on?

                        Of course not. Again, Lemoine’s point was rather specific. I even said it was a bit of a nitpick when I posted it.

                        You’re right that it’s beside the point. But maybe Stefanik could have gotten to the point?

                        Aqua LetiferA Offline
                        Aqua LetiferA Offline
                        Aqua Letifer
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #115

                        @jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                        @Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                        @jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                        @Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                        I also think the tweet misses the point entirely. Yeah sure okay, that's what the hearings are about, but the problem on the table right now, the one we are and should be focusing on, isn't adherence to university harassment policies.

                        Seems like Representative Stefancik missed the point.

                        Are you of the opinion that anti-semitism isn't a concern at these universities, and that university policy is what we should be focusing on?

                        Of course not. Again, Lemoine’s point was rather specific. I even said it was a bit of a nitpick when I posted it.

                        You’re right that it’s beside the point. But maybe Stefanik could have gotten to the point?

                        If this were another century maybe. I hope against but always expect our legislators to be this incompetent.

                        Please love yourself.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        • George KG Offline
                          George KG Offline
                          George K
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #116

                          The editors at National Review:

                          https://www.nationalreview.com/2023/12/university-presidents-abhorrent-hypocrisy-on-anti-jewish-speech/

                          "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

                          The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                            @Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                            @jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                            @Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                            I also think the tweet misses the point entirely. Yeah sure okay, that's what the hearings are about, but the problem on the table right now, the one we are and should be focusing on, isn't adherence to university harassment policies.

                            Seems like Representative Stefancik missed the point.

                            Are you of the opinion that anti-semitism isn't a concern at these universities, and that university policy is what we should be focusing on?

                            Of course not. Again, Lemoine’s point was rather specific. I even said it was a bit of a nitpick when I posted it.

                            You’re right that it’s beside the point. But maybe Stefanik could have gotten to the point?

                            HoraceH Online
                            HoraceH Online
                            Horace
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #117

                            @jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                            @Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                            @jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                            @Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                            I also think the tweet misses the point entirely. Yeah sure okay, that's what the hearings are about, but the problem on the table right now, the one we are and should be focusing on, isn't adherence to university harassment policies.

                            Seems like Representative Stefancik missed the point.

                            Are you of the opinion that anti-semitism isn't a concern at these universities, and that university policy is what we should be focusing on?

                            Of course not. Again, Lemoine’s point was rather specific. I even said it was a bit of a nitpick when I posted it.

                            You’re right that it’s beside the point. But maybe Stefanik could have gotten to the point?

                            I don't know why the senator was so specific about the policy, but even a harassment / bullying policy could be violated by a call for the murder of a group of people one is part of.

                            Education is extremely important.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            • bachophileB Offline
                              bachophileB Offline
                              bachophile
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #118

                              IMG_1745.jpeg

                              Aqua LetiferA 1 Reply Last reply
                              • 89th8 Offline
                                89th8 Offline
                                89th
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #119

                                I would've kept it simple and said there is free speech on these campuses, as hateful as the speech might be, and that the university only intervenes once it seems like the speech is converting to a sticks and stones phases, as opposed to just words and air.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                • CopperC Copper

                                  The university presidents screwed up.

                                  They should have given the simple yes or no - 1 word.

                                  Why not? I think either way is legal and the fact that democrats now hate Jews is well known.

                                  They acted like a bunch of guilty teenagers.

                                  bachophileB Offline
                                  bachophileB Offline
                                  bachophile
                                  wrote on last edited by bachophile
                                  #120

                                  @Copper said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                                  The university presidents screwed up.

                                  They should have given the simple yes or no - 1 word.

                                  Why not? I think either way is legal and the fact that democrats now hate Jews is well known.

                                  They acted like a bunch of guilty teenagers.

                                  well, it was a bit of a trick question, if you say yes, the next question is why wasnt anyone disciplined or expelled, if you say no, you sound like a fascist, so they tried to lawyer their way through by saying yes,but...(context blah blah blah)

                                  and only after the fact do you see how simply assinine that sounds. but it was a lose lose situation, because the fact stands that no one was disciplined, or certainly expelled, so that has to be defended as defending free speech.

                                  i really wonder if these presidents will keep their jobs, i understand there are lots of very angry board members at each school saying they humiliated themselves and the institutions they represent in front of the US Congress. not a pretty site.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  • bachophileB bachophile

                                    IMG_1745.jpeg

                                    Aqua LetiferA Offline
                                    Aqua LetiferA Offline
                                    Aqua Letifer
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #121

                                    @bachophile said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                                    IMG_1745.jpeg

                                    Perfect.

                                    Please love yourself.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                                      FIRE President Greg Lukianoff with a principled take as you would expect.

                                      George KG Offline
                                      George KG Offline
                                      George K
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #122

                                      @jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, at Harvard...:

                                      FIRE President Greg Lukianoff with a principled take as you would expect.

                                      More from FIRE. A little less nuanced.

                                      "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

                                      The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

                                      HoraceH AxtremusA 2 Replies Last reply
                                      • jon-nycJ Offline
                                        jon-nycJ Offline
                                        jon-nyc
                                        wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
                                        #123

                                        I fear yesterday will become known as the day the right effectively signed off on hate-speech laws.

                                        You were warned.

                                        HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
                                        • LuFins DadL Offline
                                          LuFins DadL Offline
                                          LuFins Dad
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #124

                                          Sorry, but this is all a result of decades worth of accepting and even promoting criminal harassment, intimidation, and extortion and calling it free speech, while punishing and belittling those that peacefully assemble and express themselves.

                                          Harassment and intimidation is not a policy issue for Presidents and Chancellors to debate, it’s a policing issue.

                                          The Brad

                                          JollyJ 1 Reply Last reply
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups