Slashdot Mirror
The Kid Who Wouldn't Be King (UPDATED)
From the Daily Breeze:
"Manhattan Beach Unified School District Superintendent Jerry Davis said school and district officials stand behind the suspension. 'There's always consequences for actions," Davis said. "We believe it disrupted homecoming activities ..." (It would be interesting to know if the Unified School District knows that George Washington refused the offer of the Contintental Congress to be the first American King.)
"Suspension papers signed by Griffiths and the school principal charged that the 17-year-old Griffiths 'disrupted school activities or otherwise willfully defied the valid authority of supervisors, teachers, administrators, school officials or other school personnel engaged in the performance of their duties.' Other offenses that warrant suspension include gun possession, drug use, theft or destruction of school property, and physical violence."
"Griffiths was a member of one of the six couples who lined up with their parents during halftime of last Friday's football game to hear the royal announcements. When his name was called as homecoming king, he placed his crown on the field and walked away. He later said he had planned all along to make some sort of statement about the warped value system in schools like his (Mira Costa High School) if he was elected king, but he never dreamed he would win. 'The idea of winning was so far-fetched,' he said. 'I knew I'd have a fair amount of support from the downtrodden, my friends. I'm just trying to get more people to think about and re-evaluate what we value and if [contests like] homecoming should be encouraged.'" says the Daily Breeze story.
He returned to school this week. His parents are considering legal action to force the school to expunge the suspension from his academic record. Griffiths isn't a classic victim. He was definitely poking the bear, but in a good cause. He said he welcomed any and all media attention because he wants to use the spotlight to encourage people to think about the way schools promote popularity contests and pit students against one another. "They martyred me," he said. "Which was a great thing."
Instead of a suspension, Griffiths ought to get an award for challenging the insane culture facing so many individualistic kids in American schools. Students like Griffiths have few if any Constitutional rights. They have no privacy or right to due process, and are routinely sent home, suspended, or forced into "special education" programs for dressing oddly, speaking honestly, or playing the wrong kind of computer games. As he was trying to point out, the pressure to conform, be normal and popular is enormous -- creating environments that are hostile and alienating to people outside the mainstream. This ethos has hit bright, idiosyncratic and creative kids especially hard, as the volumes of Hellmouth messages testify so eloquently.
So here's to Patrick Griffiths, who deserves better than his own school. He's a hero in the classic American sense, and in the country's best traditions of thinking freely, daring to be different, and willing to pay the price.
Author's Note: The source material for this column was the Daily Breeze paper linked to above, a wire story, and about 20 e-mails, including two from local reporters urgingme to write about this. Reading over this now I can see there is a paragraph that should have quotes from the Daily Breeze [note: since corrected -- t]. I didn't do it because I probably used material from the wire story and/or because it was linked. The comments, opinions and language about the story are obviously mine, since the point was to write about the issues he raised and the conformity question, which the paper and the others didn't raise.
Personally, I didn't even attend my high school's prom. My friend, who is also an avid Quaker, also abstained. Not surprisingly, if there was a Superlative in the yearbook that said "Most Likely to become an artillery expert/go Columbine", then we'd both win it.
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
Don't run if you don't plan to accept. I would have accepted and given a speech rather than ungratefully ignoring the attention of the student body.
This kid was just plain selfish. He could have given everyone a voice who couldn't speak for themself, and instead he wanted to show off that he could walk away.
A suspension, however, is totally out of line for this sort of thing. He should have been escorted out and a new king chosen on the spot. But a suspension is uncalled for.
a kid comes along and wants to reject these values, and not only can they not accept it, but they fear it enough to pronounce him guilty of "disrupting school activities" which of course is usually code for "we didn't like the way he looked" but in this case has been expanded to "we didn't like the way he thought."
pezpunk
Internet killed the video star,
i could live a little longer in this prison
Schools have no business taking disciplinary action against students that fail to produce the correct theatre for them. If they think they were embarrassed by his rejecting the crown, I imagine they realize they've made a more serious mistake now.
Also, I hope the administrators at Mira Costa are named personally in the suit, as well. Their disruptive activity by failing to use appropriate channels to "express dissatisfaction" with this student should not go unpunished.
I went to a highschool very similar to that for a year. The biggest thing those for those redneck was who was going to be homecoming king and queen. So they could look real pretty for hteir parents and give off the illusion that they conformed to all their parents wants and hopes.
In my opinion this is a violation of his first Amendment right to freedom of speach. He didn't wanted the award and expressed it through his action of putting the crown on the ground. Just another example of some lowlife highschool teachers making them all look like idiots.
"Can't sleep. Clowns will eat me"
Guess what Patrick, when you go to college, and when you get a job, the popularity thing still goes on.
While there are a few rare prodigies that can be successful with an abrasive personality (Gates, Jobs), most successful people learn to deal well with others.
Humans are social animals, descended from apes, being influened by popularity is in our genes. I guess the only real solution is to withdraw into a computer generated world...
Oh wait, we're on Slasdot.
Apparently there was a joke movement to get *ME* of all people to be homecoming king (started by The Assimilators For The In-Crowd). It sprouted into a real effort. Luckily, I was able to decline all nominations. The HC king ended up being the starting TE of the football team. Figures.
Thus sprach DrQu+xum, SID=218745.
DrQu+xum: Proof that the lameness filter doesn't work.
disrupted school activities or otherwise willfully defied the valid authority of supervisors, teachers, administrators, school officials or other school personnel engaged in the performance of their duties.
Way to go. Get an early start preparing the kid for the kind of open-ended "don't interfere with authority" laws he will experience as an adult. In 15 years, when the no-knock warrantless search comes based on the flimisiest excuse for probable cause, he'll already know just how far over to bend.
-- In the future, everyone will code Perl for 15 minutes. --
It's to point out how trivial this kid's 'offence' was in relation to the other things that would get a kid suspended.
The kid's actions are slightly reminiscent of John Carlos and Tommy Smith at the '68 Olympics, although I'm sure he wasn't afraid of being picked off by a sniper.
Free speech has its place, and must be protected. I applaud this high schooler for his display of non-violent civil disobedience.
---
---
Gort! Klatu Barata Nikto!
Good to see that people can make a statement in school without greasing a bunch of kids in the process.
I think it says a lot about the student body that an outcast kid can play their social game for a couple of weeks and win the Homecoming King title. Talk about fickle! They deserved to have their precious title soaked in venom and forced back down their throats.
-Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music.
I think Katz is listing the other offences that you can get expelled for, not saying that the student actually did any of those things.
Unless I'm mistaken, bestiality is against the law in most states. He's lucky he just got suspended -- he could have been clawed to death.
Does Katz seriously believe that his commentary about the suspension of Patrick Griffiths won't be noticed as the wholesale, unattributed lifting of somebody else's work that it is?
Open Source is about the willing participation of creators in the distribution, modification, and enhancement of their work. We do not take; we accept what is freely given.
MacOS, Windows, BeOS, GNOME, KDE: they're all just Xerox copies
She said that if she were chosen, she would shave her head. Guess what happened.
It was really interesting. She was chosen, she "accepted the honor," but the evidence was there, staring you in the face: if you're prepared to tailor your appearance to popular demand, then you too can win these contests. She just put it in a different light, in a very intentional and thought -provoking way.
I hope it wasn't just those of us that were already thinking about the system that found this situation meaningful and informative. I hope a few other people - the ones who thought the whole thing was a joke - got the point too.
[|]
How about not zero?
Maybe the college of his choice is iffy on him and decides to reject his application based on his suspension. That decision of the college admissions board could send his life down an entirely different path.
I sometimes think about how different my life would be now had something been different at those critical junctures in my life... meeting my wife... getting into college... taking my first professional job. Any small change would mean a huge difference now.
So yes, he deserves to have this removed from his records.
-S
--- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
Quoted from the end of the article:
They martyred me," Griffiths said. "Which was a great thing."
I think that quote is huge. Without the suspension, without the school officials refusing to change, and without the media attention, his voice would have never been heard.
--------
-------
"Every artist is a cannibal, every poet is a thief."
True, but no one would have heard about it. When making a political statement it is important to be seen, and heard. How does one win the congressional election? By out spending all the other candidates in advertising.
The suspension was probably more an act of self defense by an insecure school official that a response to a legitimate threat to the learning atmosphere. How dare someone make a political statement at my school. What would happen if the students realized they have more power in the school than me? Although extreme there are probably the thoughts running through the official's heads. They couldn't tolerate not having control. And to think, the reason America has public schools is to ensure that we have an education so we participate in a democracy
Superintendent Davis said that if Griffiths didn't like the homecoming court selection process, he could have spoken to student government leaders, the school newspaper or any administrator on campus.
"There are many opportunities for any student to express dissatisfaction at Mira Costa," he said. "(Griffiths) was within the organization that plans homecoming. At no time did he express dissatisfaction with the process or the program. That's where it should have been expressed and dealt with."
Griffiths said he figured renouncing his crown at the homecoming game would make the strongest statement
So, he got suspended for voicing his opinion publicly. Sure, it was probably a disruption to the ceremony to have him walk away. If I were handing out the crown, I'm sure I wouldn't have known how to address the crowd at that point--but to suspend him? That's a bit much.
Besides, if he had spoken out to administrators, what would've happened? He would've been removed from the team he was on, someone else elected, and no one would've given it a second thought--except him. His voice would've been silenced before it could be heard.
-Llew "I've wrestled with reality for years, and, I'm proud to say, I won" Silverhand
This kid successfully protested an entire system without any violence or personal attacks whatsoever and managed to get more publicity and widespread acknowledgement of it because he did execute it so well. I can't remember a single person in my high school that would have been able to succeed in that way.
If you think education is expensive, you should try ignorance -- Derek Bok, president of Harvard
Sweet Athene, you went to all that effort to make a protest, and now you want them to expunge the record? Are you NUTS?
By all that's holy, I'd demand a copy and get it FRAMED. I'd write a manefesto railing against the poverty of culture in highschool, staple copies of the record to the top, and include it in my college applications.
Do you understand how good this could make you look to college admissions officers?? (At the good schools -- Podunk State would be scared, but MIT would love it.)
I wish I'd thought of this when applying to college!
-*- Any technology indistinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced -*-
While I have no plans to become a school administrator, I would hope to be the man that you attempt to stomp.
"Mr Sdo1, your son deliberately and willfully disrupted festivities that he voluntarily joined. If he didn't want to participate, that would be fine, but it is not fine to spoil everyone else's fun. But you're right about one thing -- 2 days is not an appropriate punishment. Make it a week. Now get the hell out of my office and teach your child 1) some manners, and 2) that the world does not solely revolve around his needs."
--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
Unless, you are stating his beliefs poorly, as in he is an avid player of the game Quake.
--
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
In other words, its fine to express disatisfaction when no one will listen and only a small group will hear. But if you want to make a statement that the whole school will hear, you aren't allowed to express your opinion in the means that you desire.
Its people like superintendent Davis that want to destroy freedom of speech.
No violence was involved. No insults were involved. Nothing libelous or slanderous was said. The kid made a statement by not saying anything and walking away and the school administration isn't mature enough to just deal with it. They feel the need to retaliate like spurned high school socialites.
have a day,
-l
I agree that perhaps the word "martyr" was a bit strong, but you have to give him credit. I hope he didn't get any crap from the students at his school, hope they don't dump a bucket of pigs' blood on him. Then he might have really gotten mad and done something with pyrotechnics..
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
No sig
Ok lets go over this really slow for those of you who don't quite get it. He was not accused of any of the bad "other offenses" These where listed as other things that someone could be suspened for. The point of this list was to point out that in the mind of the people who are going after this kid that refusing the Homecoming King title == gun possession, drug use, theft or destruction of school property, and violence. This is why this stupid the kid is being pounded on because he does not fit their image of a "normal" kid. And they wonder why we grow up and hate everybody.
Cypherpunks: Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics. Those who live by the sword die by the arrow.
Umm, I didn't pay a lot of attention to this in high school, as I hung out with the band and role playing cliques, but emperically it's the most popular guy.
There is an election in the fall, at the high school footbal (American Footbal that is) homecoming game, the announcement of the winner is made, and the homecoming king and queen are announced.
The a screen is dragged around them while they consumate their victory.
No, wait, that last part is from a video I rented, Homecoming sluts.
Don't believe it? Try going into a linux channel on IRC and asking a 'newbie' question...If you're lucky, you'll just get kicked. Usually you'll be insulted and then kick banned...
Try asking Tom Christisen anything about perl...
Etc...
Most every group is guilty to some degree of the type of terrible 'in-crowd' behaviour that JonKatz always attributes to 'the Jock' types in High School...It just manifests itself slightly differently in different forums.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. I was an A/B level honors student as well as being in the JROTC program etc at a school where Jerry Davis was principal. Generally a smart and responsible guy. But because i refused to 'play ball' many times my record was marked by Jerry Davis and the other administrators.
I would go against the administration whenever I had a chance and they hated it. I would write letters to the editor of the school paper and make other statements when the moment was right. Never disruptive or disrespectful but always pointed.
The result? I was labelled as a problem child and under suspicion. They even told me once 'Just do not publically go against the administration and everything will be fine.' It even went so far as to them threatening to not let me graduate!( As if it were in their power, a fact I pointed out many times ).
Overall, this school district ( Jerry Davis and others ) do not so much hate individuals but rather hate individuals who do not agree with their social program. These are schools that literally have barbed wire fencing around them to keep students in, that discourage any kind of free discussion of school policy etc and are so patronizing to their student bodies that it makes one want to puke.
Until public educators understand that students are PARTNERS in this process we call learning and not SUBJECTS, these sorts of incidents will continue to happen and the truly smart seeds will flee to home schools and private schools. We treat our children like criminals, give them no say in their daily lives and then wonder why they disdain participatory democracy. Its ridiculous.
Anyhow, as someone who has actually EXPERIENCED Jerry Davis I will say that this story, while awesome in that it is getting so much attention, is nothing in comparison to the daily things the thhis administration does in the name of 'education'.
This is nothing. In my junior highschool the children of the lawyer/activist, at the end of my street, all garnered the offices of student government and ran things effectively, even mobilizing a few sit-in protests against school policy. :-)
--
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Were I a parent, I would congradulate myself on good parenting skills were my child to pull such a stunt.
I'd tell my kid how proud I was that he understood the troubles of mindless conformity.
The cake is a pie
Martyr \Mar"tyr\, n. [AS., from L. martyr, Gr. ma'rtyr, ma'rtys, prop., a witness; cf. Skr. sm[.r] to remember, E. memory.]
1. One who, by his death, bears witness to the truth of the gospel; one who is put to death for his religion; as, Stephen was the first Christian martyr --Chaucer.
2. Hence, one who sacrifices his life, his station, or what is of great value to him, for the sake of principle, or to sustain a cause.
Then if thou fall'st, O Cromwell, Thou fall'st a blessed martyr! --Shak.
Griffith was clearly using definition 2: he sacrificed his station, i.e. a student in good academic standing, for the sake of his values and to make a principled point. There, you learn something new each day!
I was a high school outcast and I would have killed to have been noticed 'less' rather than being considered cool by that bunch of losers that was the 'hip' crowd. If being considered cool meant having them look up to me, I'd sooner chop my own genitals off and eat them in front of a crowd.
Don't think that just because some outcasts really want to 'fit in' it applies to the rest of us. The entire concept of fitting in never appealed to me at all. And it still doesn't.
Bite my yammer.
So a guy at the top of the heap, Mr. Popular, decides it's wrong to win a popularity contest.
His friends are the downtrodden. If all his friends are downtrodden, how the hell did he get to be some damn popular huh?
Hanging out with the downtrodden, the geeks and freaks and oddballs as it were, does not get you elected homecoming king unless the school is comprised mainly of geeks, freaks, and oddballs.
(I myself am a geek, somewhat freakish, and definately an oddball). I seriously doubt that it is.
Still, I give him Kudos for standing up for what he believed in (if in fact, he's being honest and it's not just some publicity stunt or something).
The schools on the other hand... they're all out of control, all this 0 tolerance crap. I swear, the vast majority of school administrators out there these days are serious control freaks that really trip out on their power to make or break a student's life. We need some common sense for the new millenium people.
So, he gets suspended for disrupting an extracuriccular, non academic activity outside of shcool hours? Man, talk about petty and vindictive. All he did was poke eliteism in the eye. Sure, the diehard school boosters and their ilk were cheesed, but did this really disrupt school and students learning? Was it on the same level as fighting on school grounds?
Meanwhile, given what I read about the guy in the Daily Breeze, he sounds like a hard core eccentric. Its interesting and hopeful that his peers elected a stand out non-conformist guy like him. To me it sounds like the student body is a whole lot more mature and well adjusted than the adults running the place.
During each school year, their is a Homecoming Dance which is usually associated with a Homecoming football game in which a weaker opponent is intentionally chosen so victory is all but assured. A King and Queen are elected by the student body for the occasion. They get nothing but "status" for the honor; they have no duties or responsibilites except to wear the crown. In this case, our hero refused to accept the crown. Off with his head.
Why would a Quaker attend prom anyway?
To spread the word to teenagers about their delicious oatmeal.
I find it hard to "pity" a group of people who are part of the pervasive environment of harrassment in the typical high school. (once again the Onion is the voice of oracular truth for the end of the 20th Century.)Homecoming is the penultimate event of the stratification process of the school year. Students who do not want to participate should not have to withdraw to a nearly hermit-like status to avoid harassment. (Does this guy remind anyone else of the character of the sister in the movie Election?
Don't run if you don't plan to accept.
At most high schools, homecoming candidates are nominated by the student body, not the themselves. So it's quite likely this kid could have been elected against his will.
Since when is high school a democratic state?
Intelligence is like four wheel drive, having it just means you'll get stuck in more remote places.
More power to people who make up their own minds and have the courage to stick to their principles.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Seriously though Kudos to Patrick Griffiths for standing up for what he believes in. He may have gotten burned, but he made his point. Personally I would have kept my school record as is. I would have had the referral / suspension notice framed and hung on my wall. I would have copied it and stapled it to my resume and all college applications. Most Colleges actually encourage independent thought.
"Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know."
-- Ernest Hemingway
If only one person in the audience questioned the lunacies in which they were participating for just half a second.... i'd say Griffith accomplished an admirable goal.
cheers,
ecc
I DID ask Tom Christiansen something about Perl...
And he was downright helpful.
But I HAD read the FAQ, and I had been lurking for 3 weeks straight, reading EVERY message in comp.lang.perl (on my employers dime, of course)
So what I'm saying is that I didn't just blunder in, but I studied on how to enter this "scene" gracefully.
To bring it back on Topic:The scorn and "US vs Them" mentality is present in any group/scene with the sentience to know that it is a group. So the question is "chicken vs. egg": does every group embody this "Us vs Them" view becuase it is forced upon us by a society driven by competition? i.e.- it's forced on us by the Jocks and its kill or be killed?
Or is it a natural by-product of specialization and focusing in on one mode of being?
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
Yeah, go ahead and flame me. But, everyone including Katz is supportive of what he did. So am I a little. However, the article (which I can't get back to now for some reason) said that he had ample time to step down before hand. Each person could've declined nomination before hand. Ok, yeah he didn't think he'd win. But, he had this planned if he did. It was disruptive. Granted, I myself think homecoming is worthy of being disrupted, but you have to pay the price for actions. If the price is a two day suspension, then so be it. He wanted to make a statement. He did. I think he did it wrong. Oh sure, more attention is definately brought to this means of statement. But, was the point delievered? Did people understand? Or did they just think that this was yet another misguided youth with a bad attitude? I'm not disagreeing with what he did. I'm just trying to say that some methods don't work as well as others.
I guess what I'm thinking is that he was deceptive. I think honesty and integrity are important. He should have backed down from nomination and been honest about it then.
I will say that I do feel that his suspension should be off the record and that it should not be held against his work at school. (Make up tests, turn in assignements, etc.) But, perhaps a better form of disciplinary reaction would be to required him to compose an essay/report of why he did that. Instead of just throwing him out of school, find out why he did what he did. Just my $0.02
For those who fight for it, life has a flavor the sheltered will never know.
USA. Land of the free, home of the brave.
A nice place where they put your right to education on hold because you won't be part of their theatrics and play 'homecoming king'.
"We *need* royalty, dammit!" these loyalists demanded. "We need a means of fixing our place in the social ladder. How will we know where we stand if we don't have someone at the top?"
So the tradition of the high school homecoming was instituted. Essentially it's a weird ritual that revolves around the most important football game of the year for a given high school. For this football game, the former Homecoming Kings and Queens, former runners-up, and former wannabe Kings and Queens who all graduated from said high school years ago, return to revisit the glamour and pageantry of their high school years.
The entire school is encouraged through relentless banners, announcements, flyers, cheerleading shenanegans, and other inducements, to attend this marvellous football game, so that they might be one with the pathetic alumni who are also attending the game.
Somewhere in the midst of this pageant (sometimes during the halftime, sometimes before, sometimes after the game), the Homecoming King and Queen are announced. These young royals have undergone a grueling competition that stretches for weeks. The competition consists of being as cheerful and friendly as possible. Bonus points are given for aristocratic precidents (sons and daughters of influential families often do well), good looks (let's be serious, this is America), lack of intellectual rigor (this isn't student goverment, you know), and involvement in as many sports and extracurricular clubs as possible.
The King and Queen are crowned, the losers are downcast, the alumni laugh and clap, and everyone gets a thorough dose of training for what awaits them in college, when they'll all go through a similar version when they try for spots in fraternities and sororities.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Like the post above, my high school was a pretty decent place compared to some. There were 'cliques', but they weren't very hardcore and it was possible to belong to multiple groups. I was in the college prep classes, but I also played football and did theater. There were very few 1-to-1 correlations between belonging to one group and another, but instead a lot of cross-pollination.
;-)
On the football team, everybody was given some "-Dawg" related nickname. Names like "Junkyard-Dawg", "Higgy-Dawg", etc. Mine was "Mr. Peabody" (To the Wayback Machine, Sherman!). Go figure
Associate with people not like yourself. My experiences in high school, college, and especially the military showed me there are decent people (and dicks) from all walks of life and backgrounds. It's a useful perspective to have.
I personally agree with his actions, but I also think the school was justified in theirs.
You've never heard of the saying "Let the punishment fit the crime," have you?
Look at what the school considers grounds for suspension - "gun possession, drug use, theft or destruction of school property", and "refusing to be crowned homecoming king".. in the immortal words of Sesame Street, "one of these things is not like the others"
This is the equvalent of "Crimes worthy of Execution include Terrorism, First Degree Murder, High Treason, and Littering."
Let the punishment fit the crime - Civil protest is not a capital offense.
well, as a geek through school, I would have to say that the sour grapes seems like a cop out in and of itself. If you blame yourself for certain things, fine. I know I did not wear the right clothes, didn't even have a car, and had no money (my parents didn't have any, in other words). I am a bit bitter about attitudes and the values the school "kids" had and still have. However, like you, I worked around them. But I didn't reinvent myself. I am still the "nice guy" alot, but now it doesn't matter as someone who thought I was the nicest guy married me. I could really care less about appearance, but that does not mean I am one of these hypocritical "anti-everythings" that simply do the very OPPOSITE of what is popular under the guise of being "real". So, yes, I agree very much with what that student did. Maybe it was seen as rude to simply walk off the field. But think about this, he made a moral stand, then stuck by it when offered to sell out. Had he accepted, he would have been a hypocrit and a sell out. This was the best way for him to get his message out, that he was willing to sacrifice what many probably covet. That takes a lot of balls. Courage is doing what you think is right, regardless or how people will think about you. I say kudos to him, and that he shows a lot more character than MANY, whether adults or students.
You can disagree with his tactics, him, me, etc. But surely you can admit that he showed a lot of integrity by not accepting.
One other thing I learned that was real imporant. You questioned above whether the previous poster thought social "skills" equated to being mean and cruel, yet said it was sour grapes, bigotry and jealousy. Coming from a very forthright person, who is often looked at funny because he comes right up to people and says Howdy (translation: hi) and shakes hands, I initiate conversations and make jokes (not usually good ones though). And I have actually seen more cruelty and bigotry from the shy. On the other hand, I respect others personal space and don't intrude if I determine I am overstepping. Is that sour grapes? Am I jealous... of what, I have no idea. I think it would be great if young adults (not like I am old, however) put more into constructive interaction and helping each other (is that cheese I smell?), as opposed to playing politics and popularity games. I often see many in awkward situations (me included), and I have NEVER viewed it as a reflection of their worth. I actually have observed that the "socialites" as they are often refered to are self centered and never "compete" by bettering themselves, but rather by tearing others down. That shows a lack of self respect, maturity and social skills. Just because it is chick to act like and arrogant elitist, does not make it a positive social skill.
Perhaps the most important thing, though, is that the social competing crap should really go out by the time junior high is over with. Notice how the high school aged are acting more and more like kids all the time, yet instead of trying to reverse this, many just shrug and turn around and treat them like kids. Yes, the ol' "what comes around goes around" is true, but works both ways. I have found that by respecting the 'young'ns' of that age, and acting respectfully, that they seem to grow up while in my presence. I have even seen 16 year olds slap or chastice their buddies for cursing, acting stupid, etc, after having a short conversation with the teenager.
Now, another thing I want to address is the excuses of "they are still growing up" regarding the predatory behavior or many teenagers. Yes, kids are cruel, but as I mentioned before, these are not kids (even though I think of myself as a kid, 26). I have heard of too many cases (mainly from people in college that helped counsel) of long term psychological damage from high school ridicule. I was ridiculed, but was lucky in that it mellowed out by grade 11 to a degree. Some of these teenagers are basically punished for being alive. Maybe they have a pizza face, maybe they have a lemon for a car, who cares. Its one thing for them to be an outcast. But to be actively picked on all the time is rediculous. Personally, if I ever have kids that tried that crap, they would find themselves in a military school faster than you can say, "haze me". I have seen teachers look the other way, or even worse help in the riducule. I once walked out of a class because the teacher was helping to ridicule another student over some superficial crap. While that was rather direct of the teacher, I have seen teachers play favorites, by punishing the ridiculed student if he/she retaliates back, but ignoring the attacks on him/her. Or, the teacher treats the attacking students like angels, but gives cold responses and sighs to the victim. Basically most school societies have their priorities backwards, IMHO.
ahhh, much better now... thats like tking a good 20 minute dump
I seek not only to follow in the footsteps of the men of old, I seek the things they sought.
You mean to actually imply that the Homecoming Queen nominees are not sluts? Hrrm, not so for my school
Information is the catalyst for revolution
This is just pissing on what would otherwise be a fun event for the majority of the school. Most people enjoy the Homecoming experience -- that's why they have it. I wasn't elected King in my class, but I still had a crapload of fun.
You must live in that rare community where the parents haven't made such a f*cking big deal over stupid shit like a popularity contest and football game, and the athletes/cheerleaders don't let their popularity go to their heads.
Sorry to sound so bitter, but I'd seen too much of the Abuses Of The Popular And Powerful at my high school to keep me pissed for several years. And I've been out of HS for 5 years...
Thus sprach DrQu+xum, SID=218745.
DrQu+xum: Proof that the lameness filter doesn't work.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Democracy is: Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives. (From the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition)
A republic is: A political order in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who are entitled to vote for officers and representatives responsible to them. (From the same source.)
The differences between the two are summed up in two words: entitled and responsible. In a republic, the people voting are doing so because it is their right. It is something that they are entitled to do. This concept of having a right to vote is absent from the basic definition of a democracy. In a democracy, you are allowed to vote. The second difference is who the government is responsible to. In a republic, the elected officials are responsible to the citizens who elected them. This idea of responsibility to the voters, like the idea of a right to vote, is not present in a democracy, even if it is a representative one.
So, why is the government of the USA often called a democracy and who started calling it that? Beats me. If I was being cynical, I'd say it was some one who wanted to confuse the issue of where the powerlies, with the citizens or the government.
(That should be "People Lead" in my sig.)
--
"You can put a man through school,
But you cannot make him think."
"You can put a man through school,
But you cannot make him think."
Ben Harper
Way to go moderators! This is exactly where moderation fails- when someone uses it to supress an opinion that is contrary to their own. I hope to god I get this one in meta moderation...
Yep, it's fine to allow some kids bully others, make their lives a misery and generally set them up for a life filled with depression, misery and loneliness - after all, they're typically not disrupting school activities - but it's not acceptable for someone to peacefully rebel over anything because it might make some people uncomfortable and force them to think for a change.
All right, let's talk about what "people skills" are, and what they're for. Suppose you live in a culture which actively detests intelligence (as demonstrated in its films, books, and all other modes of popular culture). Suppose you yourself are smart enough to have studied history and realize that
Wouldn't it be your responsibility to try to get others to think for themselves, before you simply try to take control and do their thinking for them (a la Gates and your other so-called "successful geeks")? The boy in high school who is smart enough and has enough integrity to fail to conform deliberately, with a funny and strikingly effective act of theatre that galvanizes such an unthinking response by authority, has a great chance of growing up to be one of our new "leaders."
If you studied what used to be called "leadership traits," you'd know that political "leaders" are actually those who intuit or otherwise know (through manipulation, sometimes) how the crowd feels -- they get out front and lead them in the direction they already want to go. This is sad but true.
But we can imagine a society differently organized, can't we: a society in which individuals are free to speak many-to-many, can use reason in their low-level political discourse, and perhaps arrive at high-level consensus based on the merits (for a particular issue) rather than based on the "popularity" of the leader, or her/his conformity to the lowest denominator of popular values. Since you are online, and visit /., I have to hope you know what I'm talking about.
"People skills" are those skills which allow us to understand how others (who are different from us) think and feel; and to speak, listen, and act with them in a non-violent manner. Depending on your own personality, you may believe good "people skills" are those which allow you to become coercive, to manipulate others and accomplish your personal will collectively. Some of us, however, believe good "people skills" are displayed exceptionally well by individuals like the 19-century Quaker who single-handedly decided slavery was wrong, and visited every Quaker slaveholder to persuade them of the same, without any coercion, individually. By the Civil War, no Quakers held slaves.
There are many times I would despair of humanity, except that I note that despite the barbarism and inhumanity of mass warfare and genocide in the 20th century, the last century also saw the birth of civil disobedience movements, and non-violent intentional social change. My hope is in young men and women, like this young man who lay down his crown, to continue this brand-new form of "people skills" as practised by Gandhi, MLK, and a few other pioneers.
I am a Senior at Monte Vista High School in Danville, CA. I suppose you could say I am also a member of the "downtrodden" community; I'm a "nerd", a guy who spends all his time messing with Linux and Perl and doesn't have a real life. I, too, think the schools' culture is far too restrictive and conformist. While the teachers at my school are a positive influence (all my teachers know of my computer skills and are grateful for the time I spend helping them), the students are, shall I say, less than supportive.
I feel many times as if the skills I bring and the work I do for the school is under-appreciated by the students; I'm just "the smart kid who knows about computers". Students who know how to program computers are told they "need to get a life", they need to actually do something meaningful, they need to "have some fun once in a while", and of course, they need to "get out" more often. What most people don't understand is, I choose programming over "going out" and "getting a life"!
Schools need to understand that things like dumping the homecoming crown are just fine. I think the district's action was way off base, and I hope they realize what a stupid mistake they've made. What every school needs to remember is that there are some of us who just don't fit the mold, and won't function well within the canonical system. As long as they remember that students are people too (yes, with feelings, thoughts and opinions), we'll get along just fine.
-- Josh
"I haven't lost my mind -- it's just backed up on tape somewhere."
Why would a Quaker attend prom anyway? Aren't Quakers forbidden by their religion from dancing?
No, they aren't. I was raised Quaker, and I went to my prom. No problem there.
Has ANYONE has a school disipline issue (that "perminant record" stuff they always threatend us with) come back to haunt them? Hell I was suspended, thrown into detention, and all kinds of other stuff. After HS, it means dick.
Finkployd
Wow! An interesting JonKatz article!
...and are routinely sent home, suspended, or forced into "special education" programs for dressing oddly, speaking honestly, or playing the wrong kind of computer games.
However, I must take issue with one statement:
They have no privacy or right to due process, and are routinely sent home, suspended, or forced into "special education" programs for dressing oddly, speaking honestly, or playing the wrong kind of computer games.
1) They have no right to privacy or due process...
Very true, and they shouldn't. Are we next going to argue for due process in the home, and pick on parents who don't implement it? Don't get me wrong - I think the kid got a very sour deal, but I don't think the answer lies in a school court system. Privacy? They should have it if they earn it. One thing that really bothers me as a parent is to hear people talking about how children (mine included) should have all the rights and priviledges that adults have. Should my children have the right to total privacy if I am partly responsible, under the law, for their every act? That's not fair, Jon. I'm not against privacy, but I will invade it if I need to uphold my moral or legal responsibility as a parent.
2)
Wow, you make it sound like an epidemic. I did every single one of those when I was in school, but I was never put into special education, nor sent home. In fact, I earned the respect of some of the teachers for my intelligence and honesty. Okay, I said I was never sent home - I meant sent home unfairly. Most of the time, when I had a problem with a teacher, it was because I "spoke honestly" at the wrong time or in the wrong way. It wasn't honesty, it was disrespect, and I believe that that sort of speaking should be corrected.
What? No free speech for children?
Not without consequences - just like in the real world, which is what we're supposed to be preparing our children for.
What I want to know is this: why, Jon, do you pander to the young readership on Slashdot? Is it because you haven't grown up yourself and you identify with them better, or is it so they'll keep coming back and sometimes click on the ads?
I can't wait until you have your own children. Then, when you're all responsible for the life, well being, and education of people who can't live without your support, we'll see how much privacy and due process you really think they should have.
I got my Linux laptop at System76.
So some kid opposed to the popularity contest that is the homecoming charade pulls a fast one on the school. Suspending him has really rewarded him for this act-- which is one of a number of great reasons for the school to have just let it go. If I recall the aphorisms of my youth correctly, they went something like, "Sticks and stones..." and "Ignore them and they'll go away."
This crap is not front page news for Slashdot. If this is news here, how much moreso is news like this case, where a teenage girl was suspended from school for casting a spell on her teacher.
I do not have a signature
1. People under 18 years of age have no rights. Constitutional amendments notwithstanding
NO!
This is not only untrue, it is also fundamentally and purely an evil and hellish thing to say and you should be run out of the country for it. American citizens all have the same rights *in theory.* In practice, that's another matter. But don't ever let anyone tell you that young people don't have rights merely because we adults tend to marginalize them without thinking twice about it.
2. Once you walk onto public school property, you forfeit all rights you may have had. Your locker is subject to search, you're subject to questioning without an attorney.
Also wrong. All students are in constant possesion of their Consititutional Rights while on school property. The student's rights are [arguably] regularly infringed upon, but these rights are still present. The school insititutions simply don't follow them by a matter of course that is often upheld by overly conservative local judiciaries under the guise of "protection."
No one forfeited any rights unless they consented to foreit them in advance. Rights cannot be foreited without written [possibly verbal in some cases?] consent.
I may be mistaken but I do not think that Consititutionaly rights can ever be forfeited. Anyone?
_________________________________________________ Did they get you to trade your heroes for ghosts?
I ran for Student Body President of Cypress High School in wonderful Orange County, CA in 1980. This was after our school library hours were cut because of Prop. 13. So I campaigned on the issue of using more student money for the library and the school and less for the football and other sports teams. To make a long story short, there was a riot at a speaking rally when members of the football team threw things at the stage, and punched one of my staffers. I had the mic so I used it to call these idiots what they were, "a bunch of fucking hypocrites." I was suspended for three days. Members of the football team that physically assaulted one of my friends were let off with a warning. I am not surprised the way the school acted, and I do think our youngster is more clued in to the way things really are than most. GOOD JOB KID!
Errors are necessary for the universe to work, perfection is stagnation.
Point: What he did should not have resulted in suspension. It is goddamned ridiculous that the school would suspend him for declining an award, which is in no way "disruptive", since the rest of the evening can continue without pause. Furthermore, he wasn't defying school officials, since they didn't choose him for king. He was defying his peers, the possibility of which is exactly what makes the US the greatest country in the Solar System (not that we don't have problems here). I really hope that his parents triumph in any legal action they pursue, because the boy only exercised the rights accorded to a US citizen: freedom of speech. He made a statement that he didn't want to accept the award, and I applaud that.
Counterpoint: Although bold and to-the-point, he could have rejected the award in a more graceful fashion, by stepping up to a microphone and saying, "Thanks, but no thanks, I do not accept my award." This kid is clearly trying to feel like he's some kind of political activist, and it makes him look like an idiot and a fool. Just listen to some of his quotes about how schools ought not put glamor in these popularity contests. What a fucking moron. The more he talks, the more grace he nips away from his actions. I've seen more worthy causes in my toilet, and I flush those away. He's no martyr, he's just a moron who wanted to become more popular overnight than any Homecoming King award could have ever made him. "The downtrodden"? What the hell are they? Sounds like this guy is a real loser, who likes to complain that he's not popular, which just makes him less popular. I've always been a computer geek, and was in fact the best student in my high school. Although not popular by any measure, I was never shunned. I firmly believe that those who are shunned in high school put themselves in that position. It starts by a perceived alienation, so that the child withdraws until it becomes real. For some reason, the people who withdraw are those who enjoy being alienated, because it gives them reason to cry, whine, and attract attention. Of course, since everybody loves to be a victim, the child then claims he was an outcast from the start, when in fact it was he that withdrew. All this complaining just drags his friends' attitudes down, so that they eventually abandon him. Finally, whiny and alone, the child tries to make a statement (although it's a hollow one), by complaining even more, changing his personality, dressing differently, and associating himself with others of his type.
While I don't know if he actually wanted this much attention, it is very clear he wanted to act like a "grown-up". The problem is, he picked one of the political-activist grown-ups that behave like children to push their worthless causes down your throat. If he doesn't endorse this sort of popularity contest, he shouldn't have come. It's as simple as that. To think that he has some right to enforce his values on a mass of people just because HE wants to attend a school activity, is childish and self-centered at best. At worst, it's the sort of dictatorial attitude that RMS takes toward Free Software (I'll call it Open Source just to piss him off, Fuck You RMS).
This kid thinks things should be his way just because he's an American citizen? Well so am I, and I want things my way. What's he going to do about that? If you want to abolish popularity contests, kid, run for superintendand of your school district in 20 years, then push to have them abolished. Quit whining now.
Finally, I feel sorry for the Homecoming Queen, who must have felt horrible standing there smiling while her king just walked away. What an asshole.
In response to the "Nerds 7, xxxx 0" post subject (I don't remember what the xxxx stands for), this kid is by no means a nerd. He's not a geek, either. He's just some whiny little kid who wants adverse attention. He wants people to notice him, and have respect for his political activities. A true nerd does one of two things:
Since this kid chose neither route, he's not a nerd.
I do not belong in the spam.redirect.de domain.
As is often the case with this kind of change, there was much animosity between the two groups. A great deal of Us vs. Them mentality, in spite of many great efforts to get along.
One of my biggest gripes with the new company was this silly awards thing they did once a year. A weak attempt to boost internal morale if I ever saw one.
I soon found myself awarded (along with a few others) a Team Player Award (or something like that). The funny thing was that that all of the other guys in my department were of the Other Side -- also physically in another state -- and I hardly considered us much of a team. It was a diamond-shaped Lexan (or similar hard plastic) thing with etched writing on it. I knew a guy who was into guns, so I gave him my trophy and told him to shoot a hole in it.
It was a very cool sight, that modified award. I still have it. A high-powered round at about 2 yards punched a hole right in the middle of it, with about six or so spidery cracks radiating from the hole. I took it to the office for a couple of days, and word spread quickly back to Corporate HQ.
A short while later, I was browsing the company's internal weblog, known ironically as "SpeakEasy". It was a place for employees to "anonymously" vent and bring up internal issues that were troubling them. To my surprise, a few of the lemmings from HQ started posting things about how horrible this unknown person was who shot their award. It was quite amusing.
Eventually, I cut loose on the board. I explained why I did what I did, that the entire concept of silly awards to make things all shiny and happy in a company with many problems was too bogus for me to take sitting down. I made a few pointed observations about upper management and that was that.
To everyone's surprise, the CEO totally blasted me and the original company on this discussion forum. He truly made an ass of himself, and the consensus from many people (from both camps) was that he stepped over the line. Word got back to me that even some of Them thought my demonstration and explanation was right on the mark.
After catching some heat from other on the forum, the CEO issued an apology. It was so sincere, you could almost see the gun to his head as you read it. :-)
The next Monday, I found myself unemployed. The reason? (I mean aside from the obvious.) I was fired for subordination, for failing to complete a yearly evaluation of my performance months before this very incident. This was my first, and only, offence in almost 3 years of respected employment with this company. I knew others who also refused to piss away their time with the evaluation, but none of them ever got fired (as a direct result, at least).
The funny thing was that they tried to bribe me with severance pay. I could receive 2 more weeks of pay if I only ageed to: 1) Not discuss my reasons for departing; and 2) Not take legal action against the company. I flatly refused, much to the astonishment of one of my managers. Is this kind of bribery standard practice in the private sector?
Oh, what fun times we live in! :-)
The article said that "couples" lined up. Were the ladies nominated and voted on separately? If not, was the young woman who campaigned with him aware that he was going to do this? Or did he have an unwitting participant who he left at the throne?
Look forward to it, man! And when they get suspended for anything like this, tell them good job and take them out to lunch! A suspension for standing up for your beliefs is a hell of a lot better than just caving in....
you have to remember, you guys are in America, meaning most papers and essays are, for the most part, *ignored* by the commoners (and administrators, to boot...) but actions are _always_ noticed... case in point: why do you think action movies and other such forms of visual stimuli are more popular than "chich flicks" or anything cerebral? your country's been dumbed down so bad, everything has to be in-your-face before anyone'll get the first clue. why do you think W Bush managed to get where he is now? gah.
"unfortunately i just knocked over a box of lucky charms cereal and now there's irony all over my floor." -bobby
I just got in and was very sorry to see myself accused of plagiarism for the first time in my life. To me, it's a new low in the story of /. hostility to me and others. Tim and jeff are posting messages about this, but just to make it clear. I don't plagiarize, not now or ever.
The source of the bulk of this info is linked to in the introduction..it's the Daily Breeze, the local paper. I don't know how you plagiarize something you link to. I don't think that's even possible. But there were several other sources for one or two facts, including wire services, local TV and about 20 e-mails people sent me, including some school officials and reporters who didn't want to be id'd. So I respected that, and linked to the stuff that came from the paper so there would be no doubt as to the source.
I agree all factual material should be attributed which is why I always did it and a couple of paragraphs here or phrases should have had quotes on them, but it didn't all come from one source, which was the problem. Obviously the point, opinions and commentary are mine. Attribution is importand and valid point to raise. But plagiarism is an ugly charge and it's particularly vicious to make it in this way when anybody with any common sense or good faith could have seen the link or simply e-mailed me. If anybody has any questions, feel free to e-mail me now. This is a sad accusation for me, especially when it's made in so witless and irresponsible a way. Anybody has the right to ask anything here, but some of you really ought to ask yourselves some questions about the level of viciousness and cruelty you seem to take as acceptable in your writings. If anybody has any questions, e-mail me, or you can arrange to speak to me. There is no plagiarism issue here, only a question of attribution in one or two paragraphs. Nobody in the world is more of a stickler on this than me,as anybody can see by reading any of my columns...hardly a one doesn't have quotes and attributions. This is really a cheap shot, well over the line, but you're all entitled to an answer about it.
jonkatz@slashdot.org
Katz, you've gone way too far on this one. Geeks don't need to band together, we don't need another group of people with special rights, and popularity contests are not bad.
High school is designed to help you deal with social situations where people are smarter than you are, dumber than you are, faster than you are, richer than you are, and more popular than you are. These are things that everyone will run into for the rest of their lives, and kids need to be taught how to deal with these situations in a "practice environment" where the consequences are mostly symbolic punishment and hurt feelings.
If you can't deal with other people getting a bigger peice of the social pie than you have, what are you going to do when the beautiful people in line get seated in that swanky new restaurant while you stand outside in your broken shoes with a stain on your shirt?
There are rules as to how things are done in this world, and if you don't play by the rules then you're not going to get anywhere. I am not saying that there is not a place for revolutionaries, I am simply saying that most young kids need to learn how to deal with unfairness from an early age, or they'll constantly be frustrated by their inability to understand why they're being treated unfairly.
If you are smart enough to realize that high school and its methods are a bunch of bunk, then get your diploma, get out, start a company, buy a sparc and have fun. If you're not smart enough to see past that facade, better to get your knocks in a place where it doesn't really matter. If you're intelligent, part of your job is to see past the apparent nastiness of high school for what it really is, a boxing match preparing you for the street brawl of the real world. If you can't see it, then you're not as smart as you think you are, and maybe you're just a tortured soul.
http://wharris.poweredbygeek.net
This is a lie and shouldn't be allowed to stand. It's really on the edge of defamation. The source material for this story was linked to in the introduction on the front. You can't plagiarize something that you are linking to, obviously, as should be clear even to Greg. The fact that the wording is similiar is also not especially significant, since all of the accounts of the suspension used more or less the same language.
This story came from the local paper, the Daily Breeze, which was credited and linked to at the beginning of the piece. But that wasn't the only source..Others included wire services, two local reporters, a bunch of kids who all sent me the same info but didn't want to be ID'd or have the information attributed to them. So to make sure, I linked to the story and then paraphrased the information. Some phrases should technically have had quotes around them. I didn't because I linked to the entire piece and couldn't credit the others. Greg, you don't know what you're talking about. This isn't plagiarism by any stretch of the imagination. That's a deeply offensive charge. Anyone familiar with my work, regardless of what you think of it, will see meticulous attribution to all information that doesn't come from me. If you have the least bit of decency, which appears doubtful, you should apologize for this and set the record straight. I won't hold my breath. If I were really into the law, I'd teach you what it really means to charge somebody with something so recklessly and stupidly. But you have the perfect right to raise this issue, however inaccurately.
I don't plagiarize, and in nearly two decades of writing, th is is the lst time the word has ever come up in connection with my and. And inaccurately. I find this sad.
jonkatz@slashdot.org
College application have a section that says, "have you ever been suspended or expelled from a school?" That information will also appear on a person's high school transcript that will get submitted to colleges.
Sure, right now, anything that happened in high school doesn't matter a bit. But at the age of 17, it did matter.
-Dean
This is America where you have the right to rebel for the freedom to be like everyone else. I think the poor kid got off easy with a suspension. Chances are if this happened somewhere less liberal the student would have been charged with conspiracy to commit a violent act, insurrection, bad manners and daring to have an opinion no matter how sophomoric the expression of that opinion. Go down to God Fearin Amurrcan Heartland and there is a better than average chance the kid's house would've had some windows broken or worse and mom & dad could've caught some shit at work for not raisin' em up raht.
One of my better friends in high school, the captain of the pop quiz team since 10th grade, the one guy who I always knew would beat me out in any test of the mind, even if I bested everyone else, the most well-read guy in the school, and I mean more than most of the teachers, too, was also a 2-sport varsity athlete. Those sports being Football and Lacrosse. Jock? Nerd? Take your pick. My preferred term was "friend". Interestingly enough, I don't recall seeing him at the dances...
WARNING: there is a trojan on your
"Some phrases should technically have had quotes around them."
"Reading over this now I can see there is a paragraph that should have quotes from the Daily Breeze."
The original story that you submitted, while it looked like you provided the links, made no clear distinction between the original story and your own contributions. The burden of distinguishing between your writing and the original story should not be left to the reader - as the writer that is your responsibility and yours alone, and in that respect, you failed.
It may (we hope) have been an oversight, and perhaps you had no intention to mislead your audience, but this omission did, in fact, constitute plagiarism, and people had every right to openly accuse you and call for a correction.
An apology from you to your editors and readers, for failing to properly attribute sections of your writing, as well as to your accusers for immaturely lashing out, would be appropriate.
I'm sure you'll be much more careful next time.
"I hope you know /
...Oh yeah?"
that this will go down /
on your permanent record... /
-- The Violent Femmes
I'd be amazed if any of this were enough to generate a *real* permanent record, (an FBI file, that is...) but it would be very silly and entertaining as hell if someone had something this stupid catch up with them.
("Mr. Bush, we have here that you got suspended in high school and later tried to have that record expunged. Is that true? You DO know that you have a suspension on your PERMANENT RECORD, right? I'm sorry, but America cannot in good conscience elect a President with such a black mark on his PERMANENT RECORD. We all understand about the drugs and the alcohol and not wanting to serve in the military, that's just business as usual. But MY GOD, MAN, why did you have to get suspended in High School?")
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
How do I know what is really jon
You don't, you halfwit. For all you know his name is Mordecai McWhirters, and he's appropriating the name of Rolling Stone journalist Jon Katz in order to feed his own ego.
The Net is neither an anonymous medium or an identifiable one. Verifying someone's identity is just about as hard as making yourself anonymous.
The better question is, how do I know what's posted here as "original material" really is?
The answer is: you don't. But then again it doesn't matter, because how do you know your local paper is posting original material?
My scorn for the journalistic profession is at a pretty high level. For every decent, ethical journo out there who just wants to print the truth, there are a dozen journos who just want ratings (or readership, or pageviews). But my scorn is based on reason, not hypocrisy.
So far, while I often vigorously disagree with Jon's writings (just ask him--he's got an email box full of loud disagreement from me), I have not once had cause to doubt his ethics. I still don't have cause today.
Plagiarism is the worst charge you can file against a journo. It is also a charge which has a very clear definition: appropriating another's work as one's own. How can he "appropriate another's work as his own" when he linked to the original story?
If you really think he's a plagiarist, then you're also going to have to think he's the world's stupidest plagiarist, if he's going to plagiarize something and provide a link for all of us to see the original material.
The irony isn't lost on me, you addle-brained moron. The common cry on Slashdot is "geeks suffer prejudice! Geeks are discriminated against! Geeks are unfairly judged!" And what are you doing? You're turning around and unfairly judging someone else.
I don't like most of Jon's writings.
I don't agree with his political philosophy.
But, by God, I will be Goddamned before I stand around and watch someone be crucified by the very people who rant, scream and wail about how horrible crucifixions are!
"Don't pull a stunt, take a stand"
Uh .. thats exactly what he did, he took a stand, and in a way that brought far more attention to his opinions than a pathetic letter to some editor, even if published, would have received.
I would be extremely proud if it were my son. Most people are so easy to subject into conformist behaviour, and the entire school system is designed to encourage it - you have to follow hundreds of pathetic, completely meaningless rules, the value system is completely warped, you are encouraged to not think, etc.
"On the other hand if he wrote a paper or letter to the editor protesting the Homecoming King/Queen status quo I would applaud him and stand behind his personal conviction"
No; you probably would never have read his letter, nor heard his opinion. Even if you had, you probably would have forgotten about it by lunchtime, and I doubt you would have even discussed it with your friends.
Quite frankly, you sound spineless - you advocate making a protest by going through society's predefined, narrow, ineffective supplied "standard" means of making "protests" - a typical "don't rock the boat" attitude.
This veiled threat...
Fact check: if you're smart enough to see the threat, it's not veiled. A veiled threat is one which requires Solomonic wisdom to perceive, or else the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. I've received a few of these.
Fact check: unless someone says I'm going to do this to you, and you won't like it one bit, it's not a threat.
So what's that statement? Answer: frustration. Frustration that the very people he's trying to talk to, the very people he's trying to communicate with, the very people who scream at the top of their lungs that nobody's listening to them, are refusing to listen to him.
Personally, I'd have done a lot more than that.
calls into question everything you've ever written about freedom, democracy, and dissent.
So now free speech is only free when it dovetails with what you want to hear? What about "I may not like what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it"? Doesn't Jon have the right to defend himself against his accusers, an equal right to that of his accusers to levy accusations?
If you really were not "into the law", you wouldn't even suggest this possibility.
I have zero faith in the law and I'd suggest that possibility. When someone's been maligned in a public forum, you can either take it on the chin, respond in a public forum, or take it to court and resolve it once and for all.
Just because someone talks about having their day in court doesn't make them an enemy of liberty. It makes them the friend of liberty. One of the most fundamental human rights is the right to be judged fairly.
And let me tell you, your judgment is far from fair.
...is when he gets paid big bucks for the movie rights!
#naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
What WOULD happen is by some freakish twist of Fate, Nader WON... And then just walked away? What if he cussed out the political system, and all those who supported him in the process...
What would Washington do? How would his supporters feel?
The REAL jabber has the /. user id: 13196
The REAL jabber has the user id: 13196
What you do today will cost you a day of your life
Actually, I'm not sure of the origins of Homecoming. Is anybody else?
jonkatz@slashdot.org
I was just turning the parent post's subject line around.
To the flamers: chill...
Now hiring experienced client- & server-side developers
-- @rjamestaylor on Ello
All students are in constant possesion of their Consititutional Rights while on school property.
It's not a question of school property, it's a question of students being minors. Minors, generally, have very little rights and not all constitutional rights apply to them (e.g. right to vote, to bear arms, etc.)
Besides your rights may be more limited than you realize. For example there is no right to wear clothes you like. School can force you to wear brown-colored suits and ankle-length skirts and there no "right" to prevent it. Similarly, there is no "right" not to be suspended on a whim of a principal, e.g. because you didn't smile at him brightly enough. If anything, it's bad publicity and lawsuits by parents that (sometimes) keep schools in check.
I may be mistaken but I do not think that Consititutionaly rights can ever be forfeited. Anyone?
Some of them can. For example police can search your home without a warrant if you consent to search. Some of them cannot. For example you cannot agree to be a slave (err... technically speaking you can, but that promise will not enforceable).
Kaa
Kaa
Kaa's Law: In any sufficiently large group of people most are idiots.
"Anyone familiar with my work, regardless of what you think of it, will see meticulous attribution to all information that doesn't come from me."
Really?
I wrote a nasty-gram to you several months ago that chapped your thin-skinned ass so badly that you wrote a series of articles that were basically whines about how people aren't very nice to you.
Not only did you misquote me, you did it in such a way to make yourself sound better. Not only are you inaccurate, you're manipulative.
Why are you still here? Please die. With sugar on top.
(For those curious about what I really wrote, search the above linked page for 'Talisman' or just look for reply #79)
"Study your math, kids. Key to the universe." -The Archangel Gabriel
...on his head. Then he could have have telekinetically locked all the exits and wasted the bastards one by one with newly acquired Evil Powers! ...
I used to have a sig, but I traded it in for a glock!
"It may (we hope) have been an oversight, and perhaps you had no intention to mislead your audience, but this omission did, in fact, constitute plagiarism, and people had every right to openly accuse you and call for a correction"
Oh come on .. anyone with half a brain can tell that Jon Katz is not by any means a plagiarist. He's been contributing original material to /. for many months, and been writing for decades. Let's be rational about this; if he did make a mistake now, it was obviously a tiny one out of a very prolific career .. you people harp on this one miniscule incident as if it defines his entire writing career or something. That's clearly a load of crap.
This really is a non-issue. Drop it already, and leave the guy alone. You don't have to keep attacking him.
...is that a person is raised into a religion, but enters into a cult of his own free will as a responsible adult.
I'm sure this is a moderately famous quote, but I can't seem to find through google. R.A. Heinlein used it in an essay about the cultural decay of America (unfortunately I don't have the book - Expanded Universe - it's in right now).
He added words to the effect that a religion is a comfortable habit in a stable culture of a man who goes to church every Sunday. He has a vague sort of belief he avoids openly questioning (in fact he views any attempt to apply logic to his religion as boorish), but generally when he goes to church he is more concerned with keeping in touch with the community and next week's church picnic than the promise of glorious life everlasting and the threat of eternal torment in hell.
Regardless of which religion, or how devout the worshipers, it is a good sign for the community for these things to be stable, for the herd to all change attitudes gradually in the same way, not for individuals to be rejecting it and heading off on their own.
Hypocracy in religion is healthy.
So an American raised in a Christian community taking up Buddhism is joining a cult, and so is a Mongol who decides to get baptized into some sect of Christianity. These are people who look at a religion from the outside, as grown, presumably reasonable adults, with a clear view of all the contractions and persecutions of the past, with the certain knowledge that it will cause awkwardness in social life, and says "This is for me!"
There are two main reasons for this: honest belief in the religion, or wishing to set oneself apart from their society. Whichever is the case, cult popularity is a very bad sign for the culture it is happening in. In the first case, it shows that people are being poorly educated: the culture has failed in both vital tasks of indoctrinating them in the norms of society, and in imbuing them with a capacity for reason. In the second case, it shows that people are viewing their culture as something they don't want to be associated with. Very bad signs indeed.
This isn't to say that the cults themselves (and all such radical rejection of cultural norms) are necessarily destructive, but a symptom of a deeper problem. Christianity couldn't have gained a foothold in the Roman Empire unless it was a seriously sick society (bread and circuses, vote selling, debasement of coins, et c.).
--------
From dictionary.com (a proper attribution)
plagiarism n 1: a piece of writing that has been copied from someone else and is presented as being your own work 2: the act of plagiarizing; taking someone's words or ideas as if they were your own
The point is you did _not_ attribute at all when you know darn well you should have. The daily breeze was linked but not credited. The link was 'officials suspended him', rather than 'as reported by' or 'sourced from' the daily breeze. The name 'daily breeze' appears nowhere in your article. Would it be appropriate for me to post 'romeo and juliet by Greg@RageNet' and have a link at the bottom 'hemlock poison' that points to the original by Shakespere? I think not.
I appreciate Hemos coming along and fixing your screwup to keep Slashdot out of hot water. Obviously some of the staff at slashdot agree with my position that what you did was wrong.
So lets, analize this word for word; although the story has been updated (twice) since my first posting the following is all based on the original.
The second paragraph is direct copies breeze paragraphs 5 and 6, followed by your comment in brackets. The third paragraph follows the exact flow of the breeze article sentence-for-sentence with minor modifications, such as changing 'indicted' to 'charged'. Again the begining of the fourth paragraph follows the flow of the breeze article with minor changes to wording.
Some phrases should technically have had quotes around them.
As something slashdotters can relate to, this is no better than building some propriatary software and using a snippet here and a snippet there of GPL code. Adhering to the GPL for a few snippets of code may be a 'technicality' to some but others take it very seriously.
-- Greg
Slashdot, would a spell-checker for posting be too much to ask? It's not rocket science!
Homecoming is an annual celebration/event held at most schools and colleges, usually in mid-autumn, where alumni of the institution are encouraged to return and revel in their shared nostalgia/school-spirit/what-have-you.
The celebration lasts anywhere from a few days to a week, includes some or all of these events: a parade, a dance, a game of football (that's American football, not soccer) with an easily-beaten opponent, and the appointment of a pseudo-royal Homecoming Court.
The Homecoming Court is composed of an arbitrary number of couples, headed by a Homecoming King and Queen. Methods of selection vary. Sometimes they are chosen from and by the student body at large. More traditional schools reserve participation for the members of the football team and their personally selected escorts.
The duties of the Homecoming Court are largely ceremonial, and their origin and purpose are lost to the mists of time. Very often, it amounts to little more than the women putting on fancy dresses, appearing in the parade, and then viewing the game from a special dais near the field sideline.
On a more personal note, I have attended exactly one Homecoming celebration in the ten years since I left high school, merely because I happened to be back home for a friend's wedding and had nothing else to do. I didn't run into any of my old friends, but I did see a number of former in-crowd classmates, who apparently never left the county, cheering their little hearts out.
Our team lost 28-7.
Ned Flanders, I mock your value system. You also appear foolish to the eyes of others.
I had the misfortune of being nominated for homecoming king in high school, as a not-that-funny-joke by the waterpolo team. Nobody consulted me. Nobody asked me. I personally found the whole thing frustrating and humiliating.
Fortunatly, some of the administration was probably slightly paranoid [1]. There was a rumor that I won the ballot, but was removed from consideration because there was a high likelyhood that I wouldn't show.
[1] (Most of) the teachers loved me [2], the administrators hated me. I had, and still have, a general thing against pigheaded, stupid, and incompetent administrators. And they knew it.
[2] With the notable exception of the bastard who ran MUN. Something about humiliating his daughter and outcompeting the seniors as a freshman ticked him off. Serves him right, the bastard. AP US history was better anyway.
Nicholas C Weaver
nweaver@cs.berkeley.edu
Test your net with Netalyzr
This is significant, because Mira Costa is one of the most conformist schools in the country. It is as if you took Columbine and moved it next to the Pacific Ocean. Mira Costa is located in Manhattan Beach, CA, a very nice, well-to-do beach down south of LA. Most of the students there are your usual trendies, popularity whores, and others who place too much value on insiginifcant things.
My girlfriend went to Costa for her freshman year of high school (1995-96), and I know many others from that school. There are a wealth of intelligent, creative, interesting people there, but they tend to get buried beneath the usual layers of bureaucracy and stifling of free expression that is endemic at American schools.
The social atmosphere there was described to me as "oppressive". My girlfriend was one who you would have thought would fit in well--blond hair, white skin, very good-looking--but she refused to play the game, refused to socialize and conform. There is even a patch of grass on the campus where only seniors are allowed, and there was even hazing of freshmen--something I didn't think occurred at Southern California schools. She was happy to move to another school further up the coast, and she told me that she didn't think that her sanity would have survived Costa had she stayed.
To hear, then, that the person who was voted Homecoming King decided to make this kind of statement is an extremely gratifying thing. It shows that, as I've personally seen and suspected, there are a LOT of people who feel exactly as he did, but don't speak out about it or who are not heard.
At the same time, it is very depressing to hear of the MCHS administration's reaction to this statement. It proves yet again that our Constitutional protections of free speech are not respected at our schools, where they're trampled upon by petty dictators (i.e. principals) who see any independent student discussion or speech as threatening.
To me, you cannot have a good education without being allowed to learn how to use your mind. If anyone wonders why our schools are so bad, they might do well to look at how our natural (God-given for you religious folks) curiosities and intellectual talents are beaten down in the name of conformity. And unless people are given outlets for their anger, given ways to express their frustration via free speech, this pent-up feelings could well explode as it did in Colorado in April 1999.
In the end, though, I think this person's act of defiance is a very bright silver lining. If a popular student at Mira Costa can see the idiocy and harm the system causes and actually speak out about it in this small, symbolic way, then there is hope for the schools and teenagers across the country.
You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one
-John Lennon
This garbage about not using the right outlet for his dissatifaction is their way of saying, "You shouldn't have dissed us publically. You should have told us in private where we could have placated, then ignored you."
Of course, they are retalliating with a proportional response. Morons couldn't figure out that this was going to cause even MORE bad press. If they had just left the kid alone, it never would have made papers, in all likelyhood. They played right into the kids hands.
So what's my point? My point is that in my experience, school administrators are the establishment that the kid rejected. He didn't reject the crown, he rejected the entire school, so they suspended him for INSULTING them.
I'm stunned that it took this long for something like this to hit the press. Good for Griffiths!
this just shows how most adults never grow out of the high school mentality. they grow up, get jobs, and still can't see through the childish BS of their glory years.
Had the administrators simply cancelled all the various seasonal rite-of-passage rituals that at least some seniors may have been looking forward to, then they'd have made their own point much more effectively, rather than making Mr. Griffith's for him.
I sometimes wonder whether we should worry about entrusting our children's education to people so irony impaired. Maybe we should be providing them with (intellectually) tougher opposition. The best you can say is, "they're dense, but fortunately they also happen to be ineffectual."
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
"as well as being in the JROTC program"
Hm, conformity and military service go hand-in-hand. Are we talking about a Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps member, bucking authority "every chance you got"?
Get 'im another bucket of 'taters to peel. He'll be on KP for a while longer.
[
I used to live in Manhattan Beach before I came up to UC Santa Barbara, and this is exactly the mentality of most of the people there. The vast majority of the people there are vain and more concerned with their own prestige than the real issues that affect the community.
I remember when the High School (Check out http://www.manhattan.k12.ca.us) conducted a "sting" operation and after arresting a total of three or so people, declared the school free from drugs. They could care less what's really going on so long as their image isn't tarnished.
The funny thing is I kind of know this guy. His friend's band was banned from playing in the school quad because one of the members was wearing a shirt that made reference to him being gay. His father was in the ACLU and immediately threatened the district with a lawsuit if his band wasn't allowed to play. The school took the easy way out that time....
In a community that values only superficiality, it's no suprise that this would happen.
Dan
(Yeah, when I was there, I was on the Winter Court- Wooh hoo!)
Now, try #linuxhelp on undernet - one would think that this is a logical step BEFORE #linux, but generally not the case. The ops are helpful, knowledgeable, and manage to get most questions answered. The type that don't get answered are the, "Howz do I set up mailz??!" type of question. And even those get a good deal of help, considering their utter stupidity and lack of any intelligence - anyone that has any information at all about linux should know at least some semblance of what sendmail is. Even script kiddies know this. It's name itself even expresses what it is!
Granted, there are kicks and bans in #linuxhelp - but with warrant. Once again, look in the right places. It's generally not a good idea to go to microsoft.com and look for the latest software patches for linux - because they're not available there. Common sence, people - use it. :)
-------
CAIMLAS
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
Calling him "selfish" is just a little bit out of line. Some friends of mine actually threatened to do there very same thing with me -- nominate me and then try to get everyone they could to vote for me so that on the off-chance I won I could stand up at the podium and refuse the crown just to show everyone how ridiculous the whole thing was. (I told them not to do it, since I'm sure my school would have done the same thing they did to this guy to me; while I was hardly a trouble-maker, I was a very vocal opponent of many of the school's practices and policies, and they probably wouldn't have had a whole lot of patience with me.)
What this student did was make an admirable statement -- he wasn't willing to even be a part of the institution that he opposed, so he just left. Plus, just walking off the spot is much less dicey than actually saying something -- if he said something that someone could possibly take as offensive or negative, then the school could legally use it as an excuse to suspend him. The school certainly couldn't suspend him on the grounds of what he didn't say, so he has much more grounds for appeal since he kept silent.
I disagree that he should have even been escorted out. He wasn't causing a disruption; he simply refused to participate in an activity that he wasn't obligated to participate in. He never signed any legal document stating that by being nominated or by attending the prom he had to agree to accept the crown -- since the school never prohibited it, he had the option to not accept the crown all along, and it's neither right nor legal for the school to simply make up rules when he does something that they don't like and then punish him retroactively.
It may (we hope) have been an oversight, and perhaps you had no intention to mislead your audience, but this omission did, in fact, constitute plagiarism, and people had every right to openly accuse you and call for a correction.
To rise to the standard of plagiarism an act of literary misappropriation requires the intent to steal anothers work and pass it off as your own. This intent can be inferred a number of ways: when the extent of the misappropriation is extensive; if there are steps taken to disguise the source. In this case, providing a link to the original source is pretty clear evidence that there was no intent to commit plagiarism.
This is no mere quibble -- it's the intent to defraud the reader and deprive the author that makes plagiarism an odious literary crime. What we have here is more of a faux paux, or perhaps a kind of literary misdemeanor bearing the same relationship to plagiarism that reckless endangerment has to premedidated murder. Where there is no intent to commit plagiarism, there cannot be plagiarism.
The passages quoted are neither so extensive nor scintillating that they would warrant any plagiarist's attention. There's just too many damned people in this world who like to wait in the bushes and jump out to say "Gotcha!"
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
The right to vote does not apply because the enumerated right itself states the age limit (via some random web page):
Nothing is in there denying the right to bear arms to persons of a specific age, so I imagine it was a ruling by a court somewhere which may or may not be a proper one. Or maybe even an oridance not yet chalange in court.
Nothing in "We the people" says "We the people over 18 years of age", nor
That's exactly the sort of situation I worry about. I was homeschooled before it became a more visible option, and my family used to worry that someone was going to call social services, even though everything we were doing was legit and above-board.
My grandfather attended a Catholic school, and the nuns beat him for being left-handed. When he got married, he made my grandmother promise to send their kids to public school. At CCD class, Mom was told her parents didn't love her because they sent her to public school.
They also told her that the Devil dances on the altar at Protestant churches. My grandfather took Mom to a Protestant service to prove them wrong. *grin*
"Somebody exploded a letter-bomb today
This even happened to me during high school, so I'm not being delusional. During my junior year of high school, I discovered that my computer account was disabled. I E-mailed the system administrator, who told me to talk with my principal, who wanted my accound disabled.
I met with the principal, who told me that my account was terminated because it contained copies of three copyrighted programs on the school computers. It quickly became obvious that someone stole my password for my account and used it to copy copyrighted software onto my account. This is quite easily accomplished, since our passwords were our student ID numbers, and we were required to wear our IDs around our neck at all times (something I was a vocal opponent of), and we couldn't change our passwords. After seeing the list of what was on my account, it was obvious that this is exactly what happened -- someone (I still don't know who) who didn't like me decided to get me in trouble and didn't have much difficulty doing it thanks to the school's computer "security" system.
What made me mad wasn't the fact that it was disabled; I could more or less care less if I did in fact copy those programs, because that's the consequences you suffer for breaking the law. What angered me was that after politely telling my principal that I didn't do it, he told me that I would have to find out who did it myself and get him/her to confess to it before I would get my account back. That is quite clearly against their own rules -- copying the model in the Constitution, the school district's rules say that they can't do anything to me unless they can prove I did it, and they can't make me prove my innocence. He even said that I should have been grateful that he didn't call the police.
The only way I got them to back down was by coming back the next day and politely telling him that they should go ahead and call in the police and ask them to press criminal charges, and we would see who the police sided with. I even offered to dial the phone for him. Needless to say, the principal quickly changed his mind once he saw he was dealing with someone who understood his rights.
The point I'm making here is that the school didn't really care what was right or legal when they dealt out the punishment because of who I was. Although I'm not exactly a trouble-maker (I have no criminal record, and my school record is spotless, and my teachers would say that I was a model student) I was (and still am) a dissident of sorts. I was a vocal opponent of a number of the school's policies, and they were just looking for something to nail me with.
Lest you think this is sour grapes, I can cite case after case from our school alone where our school dealt harshly with people who acted just slightly out of the norm. A group of students, who felt that our pep rallies had become too much like 1984-ish loyalty tests, protested by reading newspapers during the pep rally, and they were given detentions. Letters to the editor in the school newspaper in opposition of school decisions have been censored. And a meeting used to pass a matter that was kept a secret for months and that many students opposed was the information was accidentally (?) leaked by a teacher inadvertently (?) leaving a memo from one of the closed meetings in the library, was not announced and was scheduled in conflict of an extra-curricular activity that many of the vocal students attended. (Or perhaps better stated, would have attended -- the meeting was flooded by angry students and parents nonetheless.)
The point I'm trying to make is that today American school systems (excluding higher education, who are thankfully mostly free from such problems) train their students for absolutely loyalty, and they punish anyone who disagrees with them. I'm not the only one to complain about this -- both fellow students and teachers have told me they agree, though they wouldn't tell the administration so. The school in question here apparently decided that they didn't like the student giving other people at the prom ideas, so they shut him down. What better way to make an example of what happens to you if you oppose policy than to publicly punish him at a heavily-attended school function?
Do admire what he did? Absolutely. Do I agree with you? Of course. Do I think it matters? No. So long as we as a society put up with the current school system, this is going to keep happening. Personally this scares me; my school robbed me of my faith in democracy and in education, and I don't want this to happen to future generations.
This year, a good number of students didn't return their applications this year, for a variety of reasons. The most common reason was a lack of community service hours, so we're putting on a luncheon for sophomores and juniors to let them know what Honor Society does at our school, and how they can get involved. I'm sure there were other reasons they didn't turn in their applications, and that's fine - to each his/her own.
However, you shouldn't blame National Honor Society as a whole just because your school's faculty reacted badly to what you said. Personally, I would have dismissed it as immature ranting from someone who didn't understand the service aspects of the organization. Then again, your school's chapter may have been run incorrectly as an elitist organization. Ours on the other hand just painted the largest computer lab in the school a couple weeks ago because the old paint was flaking off and the work order to repaint it would take two years to process in the district. But to be very honest, National Honor Society is not supposed to be something you're in just to add to your resume (although it often is) - it's supposed to enable and encourage you to participate in your community through volunteer service and leadership activities. Anything else means your school's advisor isn't doing his/her job.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Gandhi
Homecoming History The first Homecoming was conceived at the University of Illinois in the fall of 1909, but the down-count for what proved to be a succesful launching didn't come until October 15 of the following year. On that memorable day, for the first time in nine years, Illinois defeated Chicago by a score of 3-0 on a dropkick by Otto Seiler '12. Today, Homecoming is a tradition on just about every college campus in the United States. The late Elmer Ekblaw '10, AM '12, editor of The Daily Illini and one of the most forceful undergraduates in the University, and I were members of the Shield and Trident, a senior honorary society. We met frequently in the office of the Illini to discuss policies of the publication, campus polititcs and, from an undergraduate viewpoint, the desitny of the University which we loved so well. We wanted to do something constructive for Illinois. At long last, the idea of a super reunion began to evolve in our minds. On the way from the Illinioffice to our respective campus homes, we sat down one evening on the YMCA steps for further discussion. Why not a homecoming for alumni and their friends, something like the old New England homecomings, one of us suggested. It was a nostalgic approach. It fired us with the confidence and enthusiasm of youthful dreamers. After further discussion and consideration, we presented the Homecoming idea to Shield and Trident, and later to Phoenix, the other senior society, both of which entusiastically voted to support the project. Ekblaw and I called upon President Edmund James and Dean Thomas Arkle Clark, Class of 1890, who also were convinced that a bang-up Homecoming would rekindle loyalty and interest among alumni and would create favorable publicity, generally. Dr. James and Dean Clark voiced their whole-hearted approval. -------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------
Thanks to presidents and other officers of the Alumni Association, editors of alumni and undergraduate publications, and capable undergraduate leaders of appropriate committees, it looks as if Homecoming, as introduced at Illinois in 1910, is here to stay.
--C. F. (Dab) Williams '10, 1960
(upon the 50th anniversary of Homecoming)
Public school students are treated more and more like prison inmates every day. How can we raise our children to believe in a free society; to respect the ideals of freedom of speech, due process of law, the right to privacy, and the freedom from unreasonable searches by government agents when we deny them those basic rights. Crap like this reinforces my conviction that my daughter should be home-schooled.
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
As a parent myself, I would support my daughter 100% for taking a moral stand according to her personal beliefs, EVEN IF I DID NOT PERSONALLY AGREE WITH HER DECISION. She deserves nothing less than my full and unquestioning support. Personally, I think this young man WAS taking a stand -- if he believes that the institution of "homecoming king & queen" is an example of all that is wrong with high school, then he had no other choice BUT to decline; to accept would be hipocritical. A "stunt" would have been to moon the audience; he acted with dignity.
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
Great suffering is relative.
To a person who has never had to pay bills, or be responsible for anything - not getting to go to chuck-e-cheese is suffering greatly - in their world.
Its all relative. Whether he suffered greatly or not is also besides the point. He "suffered" in that he was punished. Whether this was "great suffering" doesn't matter.
Martyrs are a silly concept anyway. Just because someone died or suffered for something doesn't make it right - it could just mean that they were stupid - or, at the VERY MOST that THEY believed it was right.
-Steve
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
I'd say it was.
Open Source. Closed Minds. We are Slashdot.
This is why I love the Web. All questions are answered. Thanks for this.
I also want to thank the very many people who e-mailed me in support about the exchanges regarding this story. Assaults like this remind me why I love writing for
I need to be very careful about issues like attribution, and that's a healthy reminder to get. At the same time, I will never give in to the stupidity and cruelty that constitues a small but very vocal segment of the
jonkatz@slashdot.org
I'm getting so much e-mail about this column that I feel it's necessary to keep on clarifying, as long as people want to talk about it.
l. There was no intent, directly or indirectly to misrepresent the source of this article. I linked directly to it.
2. My attribution was sloppy. The column was written at midnight, and I didn't think it was going to run, so I didn't go over it. I just didn't get how close the wording was, since I got so much e-mail from so many sources about the story. But since some people obviously weren't clear about the source, I was obviously wrong about the attribution. If it's dont right, there should be no confusion.
3. For that, I happily and fully apologize.
4. For me, this was a turning point. I got a health reminder of the importance of clear attribution, and many, many e-mails from people who had had enough of the brutish nastiness that passes for discussion and criticism among a vocal minority of Slashdot readers. I never got so much praise or support on anything I've written in my life, even from a significant number of people who felt my attribution should have been clearer. They are definitely right. It's the first time it's ever happened to me, to my knowledge, and believe me, it will be the last.
Ultimately criticism is helpful and useful, even when it goes over the line, as I believe this particular attack did.
I am very happy writing here, and plan to be there for as long as Rob, Jeff and Robin want me. I think I have the best job on the Net, and even though a lot of you are e-mailing me encouraging me not to get discouraged by it, the fact is it's left me feeling even better about the place than I did before. Hope this completely clarifies everything, and that we can move on.
jonkatz@slashdot.org
It's not the gov't that maintains the record -- it's just the gov't that failed to provide privacy for U.S. residents with regard to other civil or criminal records maintained by all the other "institutions" we have to pass through. The individual schools each maintain records, which they are mandated (locally or state-wide, presumably) to maintain for varying amounts of time. The individual colleges/U's may or may not require "records" aside from a transcript (a list of academic grades). The heavy emphasis on conformity in the U.S. does come from the top (McCarthyism is by no means dead, and is in fact being revived yet again this election year with regard to "entertainment"), but the central gov't confidently leaves it to lower-level institutions to carry out the record-keeping that makes continual surveillance possible. Btw, there are now towns in the U.S. where one is continually monitored by "security" videocameras in every public space.
Did you imagine that the violent right-wing, anti-gov't extremists here just sprung up full-grown out of nothing? They are merely reacting (in their paranoid, inappropriate ways) to circumstances we all face.
When I was in HS so long long ago my friends and I made up something called the "Grunt Party." I was the candidate for Student Council President. My platform, as I expressed it in my speech, was that I intended to disband the Student Council altogether, as it was obviously a waste of time and a lot of nonsense. Rumor had it that the Grunt Party candidates all got the majority of votes in their various races - for sure our speeches elicited better, louder laughter from the voters in the audience than all the other candidates put together - but, needless to say, the school administration cancelled our candidacies over some inane technicality. Ah well!
You know, half of my buddies, great guys they were, who were Grunt Party candidates, are dead now.
Yours WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net
That his action was only significant because the administration suspended him.. How different would it have been had when he stepped down the school officials merely smiled, thanked him for running and for making his decision, and had passed the crown on to the runner up?
You're confusing AC with JK. AC said something JK didn't like, and JK threatened to sue the pants off JK. It's JK who wants to restrict AC's speech.
Bzzt, thanks for playing. Restriction of speech is not the same as holding someone accountable for speech. We, as a society, have decided that libel is against the civil law. Jon felt that he'd been libeled, and was mentioning his legal, entirely justifiable recourse, namely the court system.
Learn to differentiate censorship and accountability, please. Until then, you're making yourself look like an ass.
It's real simple. JK said he isn't "into the law" and in the same breath threatened to sue.
Learn to read, too. Until then, you're making yourself look like an ass by asserting Jon said things he never did. He specifically said he wasn't going to, although he was tempted to.