Per twitter no student section for this game

Status
Not open for further replies.

GoSU96

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
12,768
Like
15,508
This is a root of the problem, and it's the fault of the university, the kids, and society. Feelings don't matter. They're all but impossible to judge, and impractical to build a community around. Look how all these young kids talk, look at the DO quotes. I feel this, I feel that.

When feelings replaced thought, and the individual's feelings took priority over our obligations to society at large, we lost something important.

When I was three, I felt uncomfortable in the dark. When I was older (25, maybe 30), I thought about it and overrode those feelings.

I don't mean to diminish anyone's feelings. But that emotion can't dictate the rules-based objective order of our institutions and societies. If we can marry thoughts to these feelings, we can better solve our problems.
Get out of here with rationality. Appeals to logic and fact based reasoning is so straight white male. Oppressor.
 

OttoMets

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
15,579
Like
21,383
So your feelings that things have changed with respect to "thoughts/feelings" could be trumped by evidence that they haven't (1)?

Earlier in this never ending thread, Hak provided his evidence and researched backed views - and was criticized because people felt that he was wrong.

There's a little bit of irony in your argument. The students may be basing their positions on their feelings, but they also have documented incidents of racism and can document the administration response (2). One could argue the administration responded appropriately and that's a feeling (3). One cannot argue that there is no evidence of racism on campus. The only arguments I'm seeing here based entirely on feelings are those against the protesters.
(1) Yep, bring 'em on.

(2) I don't think (or feel, FWIW) that I'm operating with a full set of facts; none of us is. I do not know how the administration responded beyond the primary material they've e-mailed us and otherwise disseminated. The documented incidents of racism are necessarily short on details, because you and I have no business reading the kids' names on bathroom walls, among other reasons. (We also can't yet attribute motivation, which is necessary to categorize any of these incidents as "racist" - surely we can't call the short-haired white girl's criminal activity "racist," since her goal appears to have been helping eradicate racism by calling attention to the protests.)

(3) No, ideally that'd be a cogent argument, not a feeling. I wouldn't waste your time with the latter.

Is there institutional racism at SU? Yeah, I'm not Hak, but he knows of what he speaks and I'll take his word for it. Have students been subjected to unacceptable racially-insensitive or even racist innuendo and written or verbal communications? Based on what I've read and been told, I have every reason to think that's the case.
 

rrlbees

2017 ESPN Tourney Challenge Winner
Staff member
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
64,918
Like
80,502
This reeks of racism. More than they should have??? Which of the things that they "got" should they not have?



So from this post we learned that you hate the term that is considered the best to use by most people in those groups in 2019, make no attempt to imagine how they feel, and then call them crazies.

I think it's clear for everyone to see where you stand here. You don't want SU students of color to be made to feel any more comfortable on campus, and if they don't like it, it's not your problem. That's a bad take, and you should do better.



I'm glad you read it with an open mind and found some good points. The thing is, if Syverud tried and they reacted similarly to Boeheim's pizza, that'd be on them. It'd be their right to react that way, but I wouldn't be out here saying Syverud didn't do a good job. I doubt they would have reacted that way if he offered to meet with a couple of their leaders for a couple hours in a quiet setting. They may have asked for it to be live streamed or something, but I don't think they would have turned him down. We won't know, because he didn't do it.



Thank you. Objectively there are a handful of HBCU degrees that could be considered roughly equal to an SU degree. You'd probably have to narrow it down in terms of the area of study to make head to head comparisons, as with any school. I'd rather have a broadcasting degree from Syracuse than a broadcasting degree from Harvard or Yale, for example.



I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt on the motive for this, which IMO is a pretty easy one to deduce. I think that they didn't think through the effects of it outside of their goal, and that doesn't surprise me for 18-22 year olds.



I think part of Syverud's job here is to help them understand why in a way that makes them feel like he's accepting their goal (make sure incoming students of color feel welcomed and safe) and trying to find a way to accomplish it, rather than in a way that makes them feel like he's rejecting it. Part of the job of faculty who support them is to advise them on this and so there is valid criticism there, too... But are we sure that faculty supporters are playing any formal role in guiding them?

A lot of the reason for the way I look at who's responsible for fixing a mistake like this in the demands comes down to the age, experience and expected level of expertise of all involved.



The way people genuinely feel matters. Who's most at fault for it can be debated on any given issue, but I think it's pretty clear on issues of race to anyone with a decent education and an ability to detach bias and look at what's genuinely going on in America.

I find it interesting that you say that feelings are impractical to build a community around on a sports forum. This is a community built largely around feelings and the expression of feelings. Excitement after a big win or when a big recruit signs, anger after a bad loss, happiness and joy attending games. One of the biggest things that draws sports fans in is the excitement and feelings we experience attending games.



This take ignores that society has not been living up to its obligations at large. This "feelings don't matter" mindset also tends to be pretty extreme. Like, a great deal of what can be done to make other people feel better is at virtually no cost to others, to society, or to institutions. Like people get upset calling people of color that term instead of others. Now, do I use it every single time? No, but I try to use it. Why? It's what a lot of people of color prefer and it's at like no cost to me whatsoever. So why wouldn't I accommodate?



But if we're talking about kids being scared of the dark and monsters under the bed, we're basically talking about unwarranted feelings... So now if you compare that, you as (presumably) a white male, are making the giant assumption that you know what is warranted to be felt by a person of color in a white range of situations.



But you literally just diminished people's feelings by comparing them to your fear of the dark as a three year old child.

I think they've (NotAgainSU) done a lot of marrying thoughts to feelings, they've come up with ideas (demands) to improve their experience at SU. A lot of the ideas are almost universally accepted as good ones. One way of looking at Syverud accepting 16/19 is that he acquiesced to a bunch of demands, another (held by most who read the list) is that the kids came up with a lot of good ideas that were easy to accept that will improve the situation. That's a pretty impressive marriage of thoughts to feelings for 18-22 year old kids.

When you start talking about society and rules-based objective order of institutions, that type of discussion should really start with improving the rules-based objective order to eliminate existing forms of bias that are harming minorities and other under privileged groups. I won't get farther into that in this thread, as we're supposed to be keeping it more to the SU situation in here.
the one thing you’re missing is the protesters did react towards Syverud twice the same way they did with Boeheim. They didn’t want to hear what he said and just booed/chanted him out including them walking out and screaming for his resignation. They made it clear to the admin it was all or nothing and they still maintain that stance even though the protest has ended for now.
 

NKR1978

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 21, 2011
Messages
15,001
Like
24,725
the one thing you’re missing is the protesters did react towards Syverud twice the same way they did with Boeheim. They didn’t want to hear what he said and just booed/chanted him out including them walking out and screaming for his resignation. They made it clear to the admin it was all or nothing and they still maintain that stance even though the protest has ended for now.
That behavior is pathetic.
 

Consigliere

Left the gun; took the cannoli
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
3,019
Like
8,363
Not sure I get the correlation between events at Syracuse and Binghamton, but an interesting perspective on the inconsistencies in King Andrew's administration. Arthur Laffer, the architect of the Laffer curve which underpins supply side economics and theorizes that taxing the rich at exorbitant rates can decrease revenues, was shouted down and essentially run off from a speaking engagement at Binghamton University by protesters who felt his writings, considered a canon of macroeconomic theory for decades, are essentially racist.

Demonstrations at Syracuse and Binghamton Universities
 

Stevenson

Starter
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
1,282
Like
2,453
This reeks of racism. More than they should have??? Which of the things that they "got" should they not have?

If you want to see racism, you will see it. I can't help you with that.

Here's what they "got" that is more than they should have:

11. Aid should be given based on need not skin color.

Everything else is fine, buts its just garden variety lip service that all liberal colleges already do anyway. More programs, curriculum, focused freshman seminars, state of the union speeches, etc. will not stop some idiot from writing ignorant racist crap on walls. You can't legislate against hate. It may make you feel better that there is a diversity officer and SEM 100 is focused on racism, but there is no program that will cure hate, unfortunately. In a population the size of this student body, no metric will filter out the racist.

I take great exception with calling for the resignations of the Chancellor and the Head of the DPS and asking for more aide money for minority students. It reeks of a money grab and wanting a scalp. Enough with cancel culture. Yes, SU dealt with this in a less than optimal way at first. But once the Chancellor engaged he did fine. That's the lens I see it thru.

…..and I have no problem with protests. They normally start out organically due to a valid gripe. But in this day and age, once the lights start to shine, the protest becomes the end and not the means to an end. When that happens, I'm out, lose sympathy for the protesters and feel they start to hurt their cause.

Also, I know I tend to write in a sarcastic manner. That's me.
 

EastCoast2

Board Mathematician
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
8,112
Like
9,085
Reading s*** like this...

Moe Neal was one of those protesters. Hope you didn’t cheer for him on Saturday when he was gashing Duke for 100+ yards.

Yeah lets water cannon lawful student protesters. Brilliant and not at all racist.

View attachment 173196
So it’s racist because it happened to a minority group 50 years ago? Are the Chinese racist for spraying protestors with a water cannon, or do they do it because it’s effective?
 

cuse10

All Conference
Joined
Aug 9, 2016
Messages
3,922
Like
5,040
This reeks of racism. More than they should have??? Which of the things that they "got" should they not have?



So from this post we learned that you hate the term that is considered the best to use by most people in those groups in 2019, make no attempt to imagine how they feel, and then call them crazies.

I think it's clear for everyone to see where you stand here. You don't want SU students of color to be made to feel any more comfortable on campus, and if they don't like it, it's not your problem. That's a bad take, and you should do better.



I'm glad you read it with an open mind and found some good points. The thing is, if Syverud tried and they reacted similarly to Boeheim's pizza, that'd be on them. It'd be their right to react that way, but I wouldn't be out here saying Syverud didn't do a good job. I doubt they would have reacted that way if he offered to meet with a couple of their leaders for a couple hours in a quiet setting. They may have asked for it to be live streamed or something, but I don't think they would have turned him down. We won't know, because he didn't do it.



Thank you. Objectively there are a handful of HBCU degrees that could be considered roughly equal to an SU degree. You'd probably have to narrow it down in terms of the area of study to make head to head comparisons, as with any school. I'd rather have a broadcasting degree from Syracuse than a broadcasting degree from Harvard or Yale, for example.



I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt on the motive for this, which IMO is a pretty easy one to deduce. I think that they didn't think through the effects of it outside of their goal, and that doesn't surprise me for 18-22 year olds.



I think part of Syverud's job here is to help them understand why in a way that makes them feel like he's accepting their goal (make sure incoming students of color feel welcomed and safe) and trying to find a way to accomplish it, rather than in a way that makes them feel like he's rejecting it. Part of the job of faculty who support them is to advise them on this and so there is valid criticism there, too... But are we sure that faculty supporters are playing any formal role in guiding them?

A lot of the reason for the way I look at who's responsible for fixing a mistake like this in the demands comes down to the age, experience and expected level of expertise of all involved.



The way people genuinely feel matters. Who's most at fault for it can be debated on any given issue, but I think it's pretty clear on issues of race to anyone with a decent education and an ability to detach bias and look at what's genuinely going on in America.

I find it interesting that you say that feelings are impractical to build a community around on a sports forum. This is a community built largely around feelings and the expression of feelings. Excitement after a big win or when a big recruit signs, anger after a bad loss, happiness and joy attending games. One of the biggest things that draws sports fans in is the excitement and feelings we experience attending games.



This take ignores that society has not been living up to its obligations at large. This "feelings don't matter" mindset also tends to be pretty extreme. Like, a great deal of what can be done to make other people feel better is at virtually no cost to others, to society, or to institutions. Like people get upset calling people of color that term instead of others. Now, do I use it every single time? No, but I try to use it. Why? It's what a lot of people of color prefer and it's at like no cost to me whatsoever. So why wouldn't I accommodate?



But if we're talking about kids being scared of the dark and monsters under the bed, we're basically talking about unwarranted feelings... So now if you compare that, you as (presumably) a white male, are making the giant assumption that you know what is warranted to be felt by a person of color in a white range of situations.



But you literally just diminished people's feelings by comparing them to your fear of the dark as a three year old child.

I think they've (NotAgainSU) done a lot of marrying thoughts to feelings, they've come up with ideas (demands) to improve their experience at SU. A lot of the ideas are almost universally accepted as good ones. One way of looking at Syverud accepting 16/19 is that he acquiesced to a bunch of demands, another (held by most who read the list) is that the kids came up with a lot of good ideas that were easy to accept that will improve the situation. That's a pretty impressive marriage of thoughts to feelings for 18-22 year old kids.

When you start talking about society and rules-based objective order of institutions, that type of discussion should really start with improving the rules-based objective order to eliminate existing forms of bias that are harming minorities and other under privileged groups. I won't get farther into that in this thread, as we're supposed to be keeping it more to the SU situation in here.
I'm Black. Graduated the Class of 2010. More than welcome to post my SU ID if I need to prove myself. I hate the term POC because it lumps Black issues with the issues of groups who believe themselves to be marginalized. Various agendas have been pushed by co-opting Black movements. Civil Rights Act of 1964 is one of them. Intersectionality is a disease. If you don't like my take, put me on ignore and enjoy your weekend.
 

NKR1978

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 21, 2011
Messages
15,001
Like
24,725
So it’s racist because it happened to a minority group 50 years ago? Are the Chinese racist for spraying protestors with a water cannon, or do they do it because it’s effective?
To answer your question: yes. Advocating shooting the mostly African-American protesters with water cannons is racist.

Nice to see your side advocating and excusing violence. I don't agree with their tactics, but seeing the call for violence against them, the same violence used against civil rights protesters throughout our history, I'm happy to be on their side.

And while I know loving dictators like Xi, Kim, Erdogan and Putin is in vogue for those who adhere to a certain political figure in the United States, the last thing I want to be associated with is a university that follows the tactics of dictators.

I've said I think that the protester's behavior is pathetic, even so, it's exponentially better than some of the b****** spewed on here in the last several days.
 

cuse522

2nd String
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
649
Like
1,048
Based on my perception, there's a generation gap here. Even a few years ago when we were in school, thought seemed to trump feelings. Now "I feel" is how so many young people try to make a point.

And I would think society would head in the opposite direction, given our expanding knowledge base since the time of flat-Earthers and phrenologists.

The short version: reason is a more reliable and relatable process than emotion and I think it's governed most of what society has done well in the scientific and policy realms for centuries. Reason is why we've made gains in civil rights, because logic always trumps the "I feel" reactionaries' emotion-based attempts at argument. Somebody might "feel" that man-caused climate changed isn't happening, but the thinkers can provide evidence as to the extent that it is.
Counter point: there's a lot more feel-based reasoning to people fighting against current civil rights protesters than is used by the protesters. I'm
Ah, I'm learning the quote function is confusing when we get to the third level. Bear with me.

I appreciate the dialogue and probably have a couple more clarifications to make, but this is a significant distinction that must be made clear:

I am not diminishing anyone's feelings (at least, I'm trying not to and I want that to not be the effect of my words), but I do want to diminish the role that feelings unsupported by rational thought play in crafting institutional policy.

There are 23,000 students at Syracuse University, each with hundreds of feelings (many internally contradictory, to say nothing of how they might correspond to others') every hour of every day. It'd be madness to reconcile these. I personally care about how kids feel -- let's call this a necessary component of driving change -- but it is unsufficient. It has to be accompanied by rational thought to have practical and logical weight toward this end.

Shifting direction, the bolded portion is something I agree with. Though it is worth discussing how this can be accomplished in a moderate way. My guess is that SU's long been governed -- apart from its never-ending quest to placate full-pays' parents and bring in revenue -- in a utilitarian manner: the greatest good for the greatest number. With finite resources and a nearly infinite number of student opinions and preferences, this is the most pragmatic way to do things. Maybe that needs to change, I don't know.
I also appreciate the dialogue. In the current situation at SU, do you think that there are a lot of feelings that are unsupported by unbiased rational thought?

Regarding the end of your post, I do think it's time for some things to change. It shouldn't just be the greatest good for the great number, it should also be extremely important to create as much equality as possible.

the one thing you’re missing is the protesters did react towards Syverud twice the same way they did with Boeheim. They didn’t want to hear what he said and just booed/chanted him out including them walking out and screaming for his resignation. They made it clear to the admin it was all or nothing and they still maintain that stance even though the protest has ended for now.
Did he ever offer them the chance to speak to him about their demands in a setting where he could listen to each one, give them time to express their concerns, and then discuss the best path forward?

It's also telling to me that on a list of 19 demands, he didn't exceed their request in any area. He didn't say, "Hey, I see what you're going for and I'll do that, but I'll also do XYZ that I think will be more effective." That's telling to me, given that kids drew up the list and he has experience implementing policy.

He has shown me that he has an interest in calming the protests, but he has not shown me that he has as strong of an interest in doing everything he reasonably can to improve the situations that these students are concerned about.

Meanwhile, lots of people are assuming the kids would not have met with him if given the chance. I get that you all, you know, FEEL that way... But you don't know it, because he did not give them the chance.

11. Aid should be given based on need not skin color.
I believe that it is a better experience for everyone at SU if the student body is more diverse, hence I would argue that trying to bring in more students of color is good for all SU students. If this accomplishes that, it's a good policy. We could also get into all of the systemic reasons (I'm not talking SU I'm talking about government and society) why need and skin color are unfortunately correlated, and until we manage to fix that problem, I have no issue whatsoever with this type of aid.

Everything else is fine, buts its just garden variety lip service that all liberal colleges already do anyway. More programs, curriculum, focused freshman seminars, state of the union speeches, etc. will not stop some idiot from writing ignorant racist crap on walls. You can't legislate against hate. It may make you feel better that there is a diversity officer and SEM 100 is focused on racism, but there is no program that will cure hate, unfortunately. In a population the size of this student body, no metric will filter out the racist.
I don't think it's lip service. I also do think you can fight hate with policy. I have a strong belief that the best cure for racism is experience at as early of an age as possible to people who don't look like you. We're all mostly the same and we want mostly the same things (health and happiness for ourselves and loved ones, freedom, opportunities, being treated fairly, etc). Once you get to know people who don't look like you, that becomes obvious.

So trying to expose students to people who are different than them or trying to educate them on this is productive. Teaching faculty how to handle these types of situations is productive.

Are the Chinese racist for spraying protestors with a water cannon, or do they do it because it’s effective?
Are you seriously using the Chinese government as an example of a good way to deal with protesters right now? For real?

I mean, not that it was a good argument like a year ago either, but holy crap, turn on the news bud.

I'm Black. Graduated the Class of 2010. More than welcome to post my SU ID if I need to prove myself. I hate the term POC because it lumps Black issues with the issues of groups who believe themselves to be marginalized. Various agendas have been pushed by co-opting Black movements. Civil Rights Act of 1964 is one of them. Intersectionality is a disease. If you don't like my take, put me on ignore and enjoy your weekend.
Alright, sorry I assumed otherwise. I get your take, but if a lot of people like to be called POC rather than other terms, my attitude is that it's not for me to decide. My goal as a white male is to use the term that is preferred by the people impacted by whatever term I use. It seems like, literally, the least I can do. Obviously not everyone is going to agree.

As for co-opting movements that's obviously been an issue, and there are also examples of situations where movements could have/should have worked together and accomplished more together. They seemed to do a good job working together at SU in the past week. Anyway that's a whole separate discussion and I'd be interested to hear your thoughts about it if you want to PM me or whatever. I'm not going to be as well informed on it as you are, so I'd rather hear your thoughts and think about it more than just give an opinion.
 

OttoMets

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
15,579
Like
21,383
Counter point: there's a lot more feel-based reasoning to people fighting against current civil rights protesters than is used by the protesters. I'm


I also appreciate the dialogue. In the current situation at SU, do you think that there are a lot of feelings that are unsupported by unbiased rational thought?

...
Based on my understanding, the contention that anyone's been the victim of a hate crime. Laws (if not all words) have meanings, and nothing revealed has met that standard. And more generally everything that young woman said about Kent last night; there's a ton of bias and emotion in play, and nobody's publicly articulated a) what the chancellor's role is, b) how he's failed in that duty, and c) how that failure has risen to the level of a fireable offense.

After typing that, I'm starting to think I misread your question. You might mean whether the alleged graffiti and verbal harassment has created feelings where students have reason to fear for their safety or at least feel uncomfortable in their temporary home/work? Yes, that seems relatable and understandable to me, no argument there.
 

rrlbees

2017 ESPN Tourney Challenge Winner
Staff member
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
64,918
Like
80,502
Counter point: there's a lot more feel-based reasoning to people fighting against current civil rights protesters than is used by the protesters. I'm


I also appreciate the dialogue. In the current situation at SU, do you think that there are a lot of feelings that are unsupported by unbiased rational thought?

Regarding the end of your post, I do think it's time for some things to change. It shouldn't just be the greatest good for the great number, it should also be extremely important to create as much equality as possible.



Did he ever offer them the chance to speak to him about their demands in a setting where he could listen to each one, give them time to express their concerns, and then discuss the best path forward?

It's also telling to me that on a list of 19 demands, he didn't exceed their request in any area. He didn't say, "Hey, I see what you're going for and I'll do that, but I'll also do XYZ that I think will be more effective." That's telling to me, given that kids drew up the list and he has experience implementing policy.

He has shown me that he has an interest in calming the protests, but he has not shown me that he has as strong of an interest in doing everything he reasonably can to improve the situations that these students are concerned about.

Meanwhile, lots of people are assuming the kids would not have met with him if given the chance. I get that you all, you know, FEEL that way... But you don't know it, because he did not give them the chance.



I believe that it is a better experience for everyone at SU if the student body is more diverse, hence I would argue that trying to bring in more students of color is good for all SU students. If this accomplishes that, it's a good policy. We could also get into all of the systemic reasons (I'm not talking SU I'm talking about government and society) why need and skin color are unfortunately correlated, and until we manage to fix that problem, I have no issue whatsoever with this type of aid.



I don't think it's lip service. I also do think you can fight hate with policy. I have a strong belief that the best cure for racism is experience at as early of an age as possible to people who don't look like you. We're all mostly the same and we want mostly the same things (health and happiness for ourselves and loved ones, freedom, opportunities, being treated fairly, etc). Once you get to know people who don't look like you, that becomes obvious.

So trying to expose students to people who are different than them or trying to educate them on this is productive. Teaching faculty how to handle these types of situations is productive.



Are you seriously using the Chinese government as an example of a good way to deal with protesters right now? For real?

I mean, not that it was a good argument like a year ago either, but holy crap, turn on the news bud.



Alright, sorry I assumed otherwise. I get your take, but if a lot of people like to be called POC rather than other terms, my attitude is that it's not for me to decide. My goal as a white male is to use the term that is preferred by the people impacted by whatever term I use. It seems like, literally, the least I can do. Obviously not everyone is going to agree.

As for co-opting movements that's obviously been an issue, and there are also examples of situations where movements could have/should have worked together and accomplished more together. They seemed to do a good job working together at SU in the past week. Anyway that's a whole separate discussion and I'd be interested to hear your thoughts about it if you want to PM me or whatever. I'm not going to be as well informed on it as you are, so I'd rather hear your thoughts and think about it more than just give an opinion.
I’ll refer you to the charts that Syverud released after he go their demands and had time to review them with his staff. He listed each of their “demands”, what SU was looking to do, short term and long term, who on his staff was the long person, what other departments would participate in each demand, and a student rep for each. A student rep. They were having nothing to do with any of it. They demanded everything be signed of as the demanded, no questions asked, no negotiations, nothing. Sign it or resign. He did also meet with a small group of them after he released his sign off on 16 of them and the mark ups to 3 of them. Again, it was all or nothing to them. They rejected the whole thing. They still do and said so again yesterday.

I’m sure you’ve read this whole thread since you’ve commented on so many posts. I, and some others, were behind the protesters. I said the same as you, SU reacted too slow. But after those first couple days, SU has been all over this with Syverud and his staff working 24/7. This has been their sole focus. Syverud himself and his family has faced racial bias in the past. I know many many people at SU. Professors, administrators, staff, students, parents. There are plenty of them who have gone from supporting the protestors to now feeling like they’ve taken it way too far. Not their demands, but the way they are going about it, especially the demands for the resignation of Syverud and 3 of his staff. I don’t know what person at SU that wants that to happen. Bobby Maldonado may be one of the most popular people among the students. And I’m sure Maldonado has probably faced some racial bias in his life because he is of mixed race.
 

FrancoPizza

2018 Iggy Leading Minutes Per Game Winner
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
4,582
Like
5,625
I am not diminishing anyone's feelings (at least, I'm trying not to and I want that to not be the effect of my words), but I do want to diminish the role that feelings unsupported by rational thought play in crafting institutional policy. It has to be accompanied by rational thought to have practical and logical weight toward this end.
And therein is the rub. Emotion is the enemy of rational thought. Ever had a sane, intelligent fight with your spouse when you were angry? Of course not.

On somewhat of a tangent, there's a belief in some conservative circles that a woman is not electable as president because their judgment can be compromised by emotional swings. Not my belief (Trump certainly disproves that theory if you ask me) but it's definitely out there.
 
Last edited:

cuse522

2nd String
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
649
Like
1,048
I’ll refer you to the charts that Syverud released after he go their demands and had time to review them with his staff. He listed each of their “demands”, what SU was looking to do, short term and long term, who on his staff was the long person, what other departments would participate in each demand, and a student rep for each. A student rep. They were having nothing to do with any of it. They demanded everything be signed of as the demanded, no questions asked, no negotiations, nothing. Sign it or resign. He did also meet with a small group of them after he released his sign off on 16 of them and the mark ups to 3 of them. Again, it was all or nothing to them. They rejected the whole thing. They still do and said so again yesterday.
As far as we know he did not meet with them while formulating that chart nor after releasing it, other than to go speak to the entire group in a setting that everyone knew would not be conducive to cooperative work. As far as we know, they did not have input in the student reps.

When/where did you see that he met with a small group of them after signing off on 16 of them? I haven't seen that. Was the location conducive to an actual discussion?

I said the same as you, SU reacted too slow. But after those first couple days, SU has been all over this with Syverud and his staff working 24/7.
Unfortunately, the most important part of these situations is in the immediate response. That being lacking led to unnecessary escalation and tension.
 

rrlbees

2017 ESPN Tourney Challenge Winner
Staff member
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
64,918
Like
80,502
As far as we know he did not meet with them while formulating that chart nor after releasing it, other than to go speak to the entire group in a setting that everyone knew would not be conducive to cooperative work. As far as we know, they did not have input in the student reps.

When/where did you see that he met with a small group of them after signing off on 16 of them? I haven't seen that. Was the location conducive to an actual discussion?



Unfortunately, the most important part of these situations is in the immediate response. That being lacking led to unnecessary escalation and tension.
because I know he did. Now you want to discuss location? You’re trying too hard.
 

cuse522

2nd String
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
649
Like
1,048
because I know he did.
Good for you. I like how you're criticizing my take on the situation based on publicly available information (a phrase I've used repeatedly in this thread) and using information that is not publicly available to do so.

Now you want to discuss location? You’re trying too hard.
Well, if he attempted to pull a few of them aside after addressing them in a large group, that's a BS way to do it and it demonstrates a lack of understanding of how these things work. If he reached out to them to try to arrange a discussion and set aside time to do so, that'd be a different story.
 

rrlbees

2017 ESPN Tourney Challenge Winner
Staff member
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
64,918
Like
80,502
Good for you. I like how you're criticizing my take on the situation based on publicly available information (a phrase I've used repeatedly in this thread) and using information that is not publicly available to do so.



Well, if he attempted to pull a few of them aside after addressing them in a large group, that's a BS way to do it and it demonstrates a lack of understanding of how these things work. If he reached out to them to try to arrange a discussion and set aside time to do so, that'd be a different story.
look at when I said he met a small group. I didn’t criticize you at all. And now it seems like everything about the situation is BS to you. And he didn’t just pull a few aside. You originally made some good points. Many I originally said also. But like the protestors, you’re going too far now also and are just not accepting anything that is said.
 

HakAttack

Shirt World Hater, Script Jersey Lover
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
3,491
Like
5,205
Lots of bad takes here. Let's start here: the chancellor is a professional at/near the top of his field, making around $1,000,000 a year to do his job, with about 20 years in major leadership positions at various major universities. He's got a law degree and clerked for a Supreme Court Justice. He's 63 years old. He should be comfortable/used to handling public high pressure situations.

The students protesting are 18-22, so they have very little experience at this sort of thing, little/no experience at being in the limelight, and are more likely to be more emotionally invested in this whole thing and to act on that emotion for any number of reasons. Even the leaders are trying to keep the positions of the entire group in mind, and they're all also more likely to get caught up in the emotion/excitement of being part of a big group. They don't have much life experience in terms of overcoming that.

Meanwhile, it's part of the chancellor's job to know all of that and act accordingly.

So let's keep that in mind while evaluating the performances and positions of everyone involved.

So, for example, when the students make a demand with regard to student housing that's literally illegal, it's a stupid demand - but I don't consider them stupid for making it. I can see what their *goal* was - to create a more comfortable situation for freshman students of color in an environment where there has been some recent high profile racism. That's a very reasonable goal. Asking for something illegal in order to accomplish it was not productive, but they're not lawyers. There are also plenty of reasons why this is a bad idea that might not have been productive even if it was legal, given that it's leading toward a form of self-selecting segregation. Now, I could argue either side of it in the context of choosing roommates or characteristics for your roommate, but that's a separate conversation.

But if you ask me who has the most blame in terms of the process and how it's played out in regard to that demand, to me it's on Syverud. He should have sat down one-on-one or in a small group with some of the leaders of the protest and said, "Look, this is literally illegal, so we can't do it... But I think I know what your goal is, and I'd like to discuss with you ways that we can work toward that end within the law so that I can help you in this regard and we can do so legally. First I want to make sure - what are your goals with this request?"

Now we can get somewhere. To my knowledge, that never happened. He may have tried to do so when addressing the protesters or in the forum, but those are emotionally charged environments where that's not going to be a realistic thing that's going to happen. He knows that (or he should). It's his job to create an opportunity for that discussion to take place, and it's the protesters job to take it and go in with a game plan and then it's on both of them to be understanding and reasonable. He should definitely give something in that area, and should do his best to make them happy. They should give him the benefit of the doubt going in, including ignoring his past mistakes on these issues for the purposes of having a frank and beneficial discussion. They have every right to try to hold him accountable for past mistakes, but they should still represent their movement on that issue during that meeting.

Now, as far as I know, this conversation never happened nor did Syverud give it the opportunity to happen. That's on him, if you ask me.

So that's one example, I'll go through and address some specific posts that were bad and/or interesting.



You'd be amazed at how little some cameras can pick up in regard to facial detail. I dated someone who worked in casino surveillance and they had a shooting in a garage caught on several cameras, plus the suspects were on camera entering and leaving the casino. None had a clear enough image of the suspect's face to make any sort of positive identification. Their best lead was off a camera that picked up the license plate when they were entering/exiting the property.



There's nothing wrong with making demands in regard to matters of equality. We shouldn't negotiate on important things like that. If Syverud handled this better, there could have been a discussion that led to progress on all of these issues with great input from the students. It never should have been a negotiation in any form, but rather a cooperative effort to achieve the goals of the students in the most effective and realistic ways. In some cases I think their demands won't be very effective, but he signed off on them because they're fine. Even in those cases I consider his work to be insufficient as chancellor because he could have sat down with them and offered to do more or to do something a little different that would have been more productive.



Hold up. Like which of these 16 that he agreed to are bad? Have you read the list? There are plenty of good ideas on there that he should have been happy to sign off on.

Also, "You give an inch and a mile will always be taken," is a really stupid and offensive thing to say about matters of racial inequality.



Is that the case? Am I unaware of Syverud attempting to sit down privately (or publicly) with a small group of them in a setting and context where their concerns will be heard and a cooperative effort to solve problems through open discussion and exchange of ideas can take place?



This is stupid and offensive, and I'm saying that as a white guy. There are plenty of very good HBCU's, and while I'm proud of my degree at SU, we're not the creme de la creme.



You have no patience for college kids making mistakes? That's silly. The idea that we should all put the institution's reputation over the people who are studying and teaching there is also pretty ridiculous. Institutions of all kinds often protect privileged groups and protect systems that are in place to preserve power for the powerful, wealth for the wealth, and racial/gender/etc privilege. I'm not accusing SU of all of that, but there's certainly some of it, and we should be more concerned with making SU the best place it can be for everyone who attends than protecting its reputation.

Doing that over and over is how you get and keep a tremendous reputation.



He couldn't stop it in advance, but he could have handled the response with more urgency and transparency initially. He didn't read the room well, he didn't speak out publicly enough, he didn't understand the fear gripping campus/students/faculty after the manifesto came into play, he didn't give enough public support to people who felt threatened, and for those concerned with the university's reputation he would have done well to ask a freshman PR major what he should do at pretty much any point in the process.



They're not negotiating a salary and benefits package here, or a political deal over the federal budget. He's also not refusing to give them all 19 out of any sort of principle, but because he views the other three as impossible as requested. Why can't he be the leader in the situation and work with them on that by being the one to reach out? Isn't that sort of what SU pays him almost $1,000,000 for? To be a leader?



I agree with this, but I also think accomplishing the goals of the three that had to be edited is relatively simple and something Syverud should be trying to do.



Why in the world would/should he reverse course on stuff that is good for the student body at large, good for the university and common sense? It's not like he's giving them compensation or damages due to their emotional distress.

And, for the record, so far we know of no false flags.



They're kids. Imagine being an 18 year old person of color going away to college. You're nervous, as anyone is going away to college. Maybe a little more so if you're middle class or poor, I can speak to this as a middle class kid who attended SU. I was a little nervous about being around a lot of upper class kids and I didn't know how I'd be treated or how I'd relate - it worked out totally fine, but it was something to be nervous about as I realized how rich some of these kids and their families were. Meanwhile, it's a mostly white school and you're a person of color, so that's on your mind.

Now, all that's going on and like two months into your first semester, there are like seven racist incidents in a two-week period. Most students are probably like, "Yeah, whatever, not a big deal," up until the manifesto... So you're kind of wondering. Do they not get it? Do they not care about me? Do they not see why this is hurtful/scary? Do they actually agree with some of the racist stuff?

I think those are reasonable thoughts for an 18 year old kid to have. Now, imagine sharing a room with someone and wondering that about them. I can imagine where the mind might go by trying to put myself in their shoes. So wanting to be able to choose a roommate who looks like you makes sense to me in that context.

Now, I personally think it's a bad idea for a number of reasons and I don't think it would be productive overall. However, I support those kids right to *ask* for it. I think that Syverud should have attempted to discuss what they wanted to accomplish with that request, and then discussed whether there were other, better, legal ways to do it.

So to call the demand ridiculous is out of line in my opinion. At the very least try to put yourself in their shoes and consider what they're thinking and feeling right now before you decide that the request is ridiculous.



This has been covered but I want to be really clear. The manifesto WAS posted on the Syracuse forum of that Greek Rank site. There are screenshots of the posting on Twitter, they're easy enough to find. There was a line in some article that people think someone tried to airdrop it but that nobody received the file. I don't know how Airdrop works because I don't have an iPhone, but I would imagine you have to accept the transfer. It's possible that students just declined the transfer and nobody received it... Or it's possible that someone saw it on the site, lied about the Airdrop thing, etc... We don't know based on publicly available information.

But be careful about calling it a hoax, given that the manifesto WAS posted on a Syracuse forum on that website. That in and of itself is scary/threatening.



I don't think rational people should discount a post to a national website, nor do I think it's immediately obvious that it's a copycat or prankster. Plus, plenty of mass shooters have been "copycats" in terms of their manifestos. Given how frequently we see a manifesto drop on an Internet forum, followed minutes/hours/days later by a mass shooting by the person who posted the screed, I think we should take ALL of them extremely seriously until we know all of the facts.



She didn't carry out a false flag, she spray painted pro-protest graffiti in separate incidents. I don't condone it or support that sort of thing in this situation, but she did nothing to any of the other allegations, nor is what she did anything remotely akin to a false flag.



How in the world can you say her graffiti was racist if you don't know what it said?



There are screenshots of the posting of the manifesto on Twitter.

And so what that this isn't her first time protesting? What does that have to do with anything? Good for her, I say, for standing up for what she believes in and being willing to spend time and effort trying to enact positive change in the world.



The fact that it had specific names makes it extremely unlikely that it was a prank or a false flag, and it makes it far more offensive and threatening. It also makes it extremely likely that the person who did it is a student living in the dorm where the first couple instances of graffiti were found.



I'm pretty sure Casey is the editor of the DO, so I don't think he's personally going to be disappointed in the context you're suggesting.



I've laid out a lot here. The biggest thing is that he didn't do a good enough job early on, based on the coverage I've read, of speaking up, addressing the student body and the university, and making three things clear:

1. He'd do everything possible to protect students.

2. Racism was intolerable and the people who did this would get far more than a slap on the wrist.

3. He'd do everything possible to make students feel safe (which goes beyond #1) and to hear their concerns.

He didn't get ahead of it from the jump, and doing so is a huge part of his job. If you think the whole thing got blown out of proportion (I would disagree with you, but everyone gets to have an opinion), I think you should be mostly blaming him for that for the PR crisis and the mishandling in that regard.



Syverud is 63 years old, makes ~$1M a year in this job and likely made at least mid six figures in his last couple of jobs. Even if he was forced to resign, it'd be a pretty big reach to say his life would be ruined.
I can’t like this post enough. Bravo for having the balls to call this nonsense out.
 

CuseLegacy

Twitter Wizard
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
67,136
Like
81,710
Syracuse University

FRIDAY, NOV. 22, 2019


Update for Syracuse University Alumni

Dear Alumni,

We have heard from many of you how challenging it has been to learn of recent events at our beloved Syracuse University. As former students yourselves, you know how important it is to feel safe in this place that you called home. I am reaching out to you today to let you know the University has been listening to our students on campus and around the world. We are committed to ensuring every member of our community feels safe and included.

That’s why the University responded, not only with words, but more importantly, with tangible actions. Of the 19 recommendations made by peaceful student protesters and international students, Chancellor Syverud has committed to 16 as they were written, with minor suggested revisions to the other three. He has also committed to recommendations made by members of the Jewish student community. In addition, he has issued a message of public support for a faculty member who has received anti-Semitic email.

I know this is a hard time for those of us who love Syracuse University. Thank you for sharing your encouragement, questions, and thoughts. Working with our campus community to strengthen the Orange family remains our top priority.

Forever Orange,

Signature: Matt Ter Molen

Matt Ter Molen
Chief Advancement Officer and Senior Vice President
 

orange79

Internet Sleuth
Joined
Aug 20, 2011
Messages
24,799
Like
63,726
Syracuse University
MONDAY, NOV. 25, 2019
Dear Members of the Syracuse University Community:
This week, while many of our students, faculty and staff are away from campus for fall break, our primary focus is to ensure our campus feels safe and is safe when classes resume on Monday, Dec. 2. That’s why today, I want to update you on three critically important areas of work we are making sure to complete before our full community returns to campus: safety, student well-being and campus engagement.
Safety
Overwhelmingly, the chief concern among our campus community is safety. Before fall break began, we increased campus security by:
  • doubling the scale and scope of Department of Public Safety patrols;
  • increasing DPS patrols on and adjacent to campus;
  • enlisting Syracuse Police and New York State Police to assist with patrols on and off campus;
  • adding walking escorts and shuttles; and
  • seeking and receiving the assistance and support of the FBI, New York State Police and others.
When our community returns from fall break, the following additional measures will be in place:
  • immediate deployment of 19 new residential community safety officers spread across multiple residence halls, including but not limited to Day Hall, Flint Hall and the Brewster-Boland-Brockway (BBB) complex; the University will also continue its work to hire 90 residential community safety officers, all of whom will be in place at the start of the spring semester;
  • installation of new security cameras in strategic locations with a focus on stairwells, elevators, exterior locations and common spaces; and
  • DPS officers will continue to work increased shifts while classes are in session, doubling our presence.
Student Well-Being
We recognize this has been a very difficult time for many in our campus community. Therefore, the following enhanced resources are available in support of our students’ well-being:
  • The Barnes Center at The Arch is available 24/7 for support at 315.443.8000.
  • We have doubled the availability of health, wellness and counseling professionals available during drop-in hours at the Barnes Center. Drop-ins are 10 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Saturday, located in the counseling suite on the third floor.
  • The following offices remain available for drop-ins and small group discussions, with hours extended to 8 p.m., Monday through Friday:
    • Cultural Centers’ Suite, 548 Bird Library (Office of Multicultural Affairs, Disability Cultural Center and LGBT Resource Center)
    • Center for International Services, 310 Walnut Place
    • Dean of Students Office, 306 Steele Hall (a staff member will be located in the Cultural Centers’ Suite from 5 to 8 p.m.)
  • Monday through Friday the weeks of Dec. 2 and Dec. 9, health promotion staff, including peer educators, will be hosting de-stress activities in Bird Library and other locations across campus.
  • We are expanding hours and offering availability for support in the schools and colleges through partnerships with the School of Social Work, the Department of Psychology and the Hendricks Chapel chaplaincies.
  • Hendricks Chapel chaplains remain available 24 hours a day, seven days a week to provide comfort and care.
Campus Engagement
Our campus has experienced hateful acts in recent weeks. The fear they have caused has been exacerbated by misinformation and unverified reports. The University must engage with our community in a more timely, effective and transparent manner. As such, the following steps will be in place by Sunday, Dec. 1:
  • Introduce a new Department of Public Safety webpage, aggregating all safety updates on a single platform. This page will be continuously updated and accessible by students, faculty, staff, parents and other community members. Hate speech and other bias-related incidents will be posted to this page within 48 hours but likely much sooner. This page will be the best source of accurate and reliable information moving forward.
  • A new “Campus Commitment” webpage is now live and will feature regular updates about concrete progress toward the commitments made to our community over the last several weeks.
  • Faculty, staff and I are continuing to meet with multiple student groups through fall break. My team and I have begun immediate implementation of many of the recommendations and will be working closely with students to address concerns in a quick and effective manner.
The work outlined above represents progress, but much work remains to be done. I must also respect and thank the hundreds of students, faculty and staff who have contributed to hard work and advanced real progress on these issues in recent years.
We will be reporting further on this most vital work as our full community returns next week.
Sincerely,
Kent Syverud

Chancellor Kent Syverud
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
214
Guests online
967
Total visitors
1,181

Top Bottom