Quote:
|
Originally Posted by roachboy
i seriously wouldnt put much weight in the way delaware reacted to this...universities tend to cower proactively in the face of negative press...part of this has to do with concerns about keeping the alumnii happy and by so doing maintaining a significant funding source.
look at any alumnii magazine, particularly the letters to the editor section, and you'll see quick the political problems they face in this regard.
...
so the university response is so heavily bounded that you cant take much away from it in terms of an official admission about anything to do with the contents of this ludicrous story. its a reaction to negative press attention of any kind, i would wager.
|
Maybe, except there's not really any negative press. There's like one or two original sources and virtually no syndication. To me, THAT'S what makes the situation curious. I just don't think there's enough information to really draw conclusions.
Host, I don't see your direction as being particularly relevant. SOMETHING happened. We don't really know what, whether or not we take the reporting at face value. And yes, based on my experience in the real world, I do believe that the original complaint probably issued from a student. I have no way of knowing how that transitioned to anything else because, as I noted above, there's just not enough information out there.
And no, I don't feel that I have to ask myself if I'm making it easier for "them" to get away with "it". I don't think that asking questions about what really happened and applying my knowledge of working directly in the field makes me complicit in anything. In fact, I think that your suggestion of me enabling or being complicit because I'm skeptical of both sides pending more information is comical almost to the point of farce. Really, to rule this out of bounds despite the ambiguity and my personal experience would be an ideologically-based knee-jerk. I try not to roll that way.
**EDIT**
I'm going to lay aside any issues of "national agenda" on the part of FIRE or CNP for now because I followed the FIRE links to archived versions of UD's internal documents regarding the program. I'm reading through them now and gaining a much clearer understanding of what was going on. If you are interested in doing the same, you can look at
this link. Look past the fact that it is a partisan diatribe from FIRE - in the numerous links within the text, FIRE has provided links to pdf files of documents from UD, including correspondence between the two organizations.
I'll come back later when I've read more, but the summary documents from UD as they were assembling the program do make me wonder how they didn't see the objections coming. You'd have to be at least a little detached from reality to work with students all the time and not forsee the completely predictable effects of implementing something like this, even if you did it well, which they didn't.