[1930] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
Re: [Mit-talk] New Card initiative
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (grace)
Mon Jul 3 13:25:15 2006
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 13:22:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: grace <gkenney@mit.edu>
To: Steven M Kelch <kelch@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.62L.0607031236210.16993@ptolomaea.mit.edu>
Cc: ua-scatr@mit.edu, mit-talk@mit.edu
Errors-To: mit-talk-bounces@mit.edu
...and we're not going to get a chance to learn until it's already
official. note that this was announced in the summer, when the UA or
dormcon can't investigate and [if needed] protest. look - the admins
aren't afraid of our horrible harsh criticism. they're afraid of having
to waste time on meetings with students, lying about how much they value
our opinions. the things that we bitch about being half-baked are
generally actually near-finalized policies that got leaked. yeah, often
times we have only partial information, but by the time we have full
information, things'll have reached the point where the admins will inform
us that such and such a policy has been in the works for years, and of
course the single student committee member was an adequate representation
of the student body's desires, and blah blah blah. it's not our criticism
that they're afraid of, it's the fact that we might find out in time to
stop things.
and bullshit - it's not too late to delete the accounts from the card
office servers. we're talking bits and bytes here, not stuff that's
really irrevocable. now, will they reconsider, or at least listen to
criticism? probably not, since without dormcon & the ua to raise a hue
and cry, odds are we won't even be able to get them to talk to us until
after it goes live. but nothing's actually irrevocable until it starts
happening, and some stuff [policies and non-physical stuff like this] can
be changed even afterwards.
-grace
gibbering like hunter thompson on a revolutionary drug, kelch@MIT.EDU said:
> This has not yet proven to be a "stupid idea". None of us knows enough about
> it to pass judgment. Many of the problems we chalk up to the administration
> are actually students jumping to conclusions. We complain when they don't
> come to us with brand new, unrefined ideas for our input, but when they do we
> attack them for being half-baked. Is it any wonder we don't hear about things
> until they are so far in development?
>
> From what I have been told, the accounts are already created, they go live in
> less than a month. Whether or not students use the accounts is one thing, but
> to my knowledge the accounts already exist on the servers and so a reversal
> isn't possible or logical.
>
> skelch
>
>
>
> On Mon, 3 Jul 2006, David Glasser wrote:
>
>> On 7/3/06, Steven M Kelch <kelch@mit.edu> wrote:
>>> I am going to push Rich Berlin for a press release of some sort (which
>>> they may already have prepared). Hopefully we can find out more in the
>>> next few days.
>>
>> Why is this useful? It seems to me that once MIT has put out a press
>> release saying they're going to do something stupid, they have even
>> more of an excuse to not reverse themselves.
>>
>> --dave
>>
>>
>> --
>> David Glasser | glasser@mit.edu | http://www.davidglasser.net/
>>
>
_______________________________________________
MIT-talk mailing list
MIT-talk@mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/mit-talk
