|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:gently caress law students and dragon age invades yet another thread.
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:31 |
|
|
And law school shouldn't be giving kids extensions on their finals to go protest if only because if you gently caress your client because you were overextended for any reason, gently caress you, get out of the profession
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:gently caress law students Track the maleficar! ActusRhesus posted:and dragon age invades yet another thread. Beaten, drat it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
Maarek posted:I'm sure that if you think very hard you can think of some examples from other forums when people were discussing social or political ideas or events that expressed mean spirited, dumb, or just plain wrong things. It's not so much a D&D thing as an internet (or SA thing) and it's basically the price of discussing important things on this site no matter how much we dislike it. Oh sure. I just find it amusing when the people who have brought absolutely nothing to the discussion are the ones yelling the loudest about how stupid everyone else is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:And law school shouldn't be giving kids extensions on their finals to go protest if only because if you gently caress your client because you were overextended for any reason, gently caress you, get out of the profession pretty much this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
Law schools should give kids extensions on their finals to go protest because I want the next generation of prosecutors and judges to be people who got teargassed because the police murdered minorities and not people who got mad about students getting extensions for protesting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:Track the maleficar! wait...so then...if Scalia is the maleficar, and law students are his phylacteries, wouldn't you WANT law students? I mean...an apostate Scalia...drat. Spoiler from DA2 because I know Warszawa hasn't played it yet... (though seeing the Lincoln memorial come to life a la Kirkwall gallows would be pretty sweet)
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:33
|
|
|
Maarek posted:Law schools should give kids extensions on their finals to go protest because I want the next generation of prosecutors and judges to be people who got teargassed because the police murdered minorities and not people who got mad about students getting extensions for protesting. your next generation of prosecutors aren't the ones out protesting generally. And not even necessarily because they disagree...but people tend to get arrested at protests, and prosecutors have to pass background checks. Anything with the potential for arrests will generally be avoided. See e.g. binge drinking (legal) vs. pot (not legal, most places)
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:33
|
|
|
That's how they hire clerks. Scalia is a mage and Ginsburg is a Templar why do you think they're always going to the opera together?ActusRhesus posted:your next generation of prosecutors aren't the ones out protesting generally. Counterpoint: Sonia from the Block.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
ActusRhesus played all the way through DA2? Are you trying to change your plea from 'Republican' to 'Not guilty by reason of insanity'? It's an unorthodox approach but I'll allow it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:35
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:That's how they hire clerks. Scalia is a mage and Ginsburg is a Templar why do you think they're always going to the opera together? See, I totally see Ginsburg as a mage. Like Wynne. Kagan's the Templar.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
Maarek posted:ActusRhesus played all the way through DA2? Are you trying to change your plea from 'Republican' to 'Not guilty by reason of insanity'? It's an unorthodox approach but I'll allow it. not republican. And I liked DA2. I'm probably the only person on the internet who did...but yeah, I liked it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:See, I totally see Ginsburg as a mage. Like Wynne. Kagan's the Templar. As long as Sotomayor is a City Elf rogue ... "Like dogs, Shianni."
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:Yeah it's telling that Columbia is developing the poo poo out of property it bought up for cheap once the city declared it blighted in Manhattanville and I'll bet not all the permits have cleared and the university doesn't want to be seen as "anti-city", plus the school's relationship with the NYPD has been tense. No poo poo, but the entire mindset behind this discussion of the policy is people basically taking that notion and wrapping it behind contemporary talking points to disguise or simply ignore the latent racism. Complaints against the government or the law are bad, unless they agree with it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
joeburz posted:No poo poo, but the entire mindset behind this discussion of the policy is people basically taking that notion and wrapping it behind contemporary talking points to disguise or simply ignore the latent racism. Complaints against the government or the law are bad, unless they agree with it. Once again, we have a straw man. I don't have a problem with people protesting. Protest all you want. It's in the Constitution. The issue was using the excuse that people are "too traumatized" to take their exams. (Which as Warzsawa explained very well, seems more the school's cop out than the students) If they had just said "we respect the right to assembly and are postponing exams for students whose exercise of their civic liberties interferes with our previously posted exam schedule" there would be no issue here. It's the "trauma" excuse that's cringe-worthy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
Unless someone can tell me how this issue relates to the Supreme Court it goes in another thread.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:51
|
|
|
Academic lawyers is a big reason why the Supreme Court sucks, and academic lawyers come from law school, ergo...
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
There would be an issue if they had done that. They would be opening up a can of worms to allow everyone to postpone exams to protest anything if they said that instead of having people complain about how soft the students/administration at Columbia are. A way better outcome in this case since no one gives a crap so far except The Blaze and other garbage right wing outlets.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Academic lawyers is a big reason why the Supreme Court sucks, and academic lawyers come from law school, ergo... In the case of SCOTUS, specifically the Ivies. however, it was tangentially relevant to the "trigger Warnings" discussion from earlier. ActusRhesus fucked around with this message at 16:58 on Dec 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:53
|
|
|
Maarek posted:There would be an issue if they had done that. They would be opening up a can of worms to allow everyone to postpone exams to protest anything if they said that instead of having people complain about how soft the students/administration at Columbia are. A way better outcome in this case since no one gives a crap so far except The Blaze and other garbage right wing outlets. So some protests are more valid than others? Good thing they are not a state university, because that line of thinking is somewhat counter to the first Amendment. And I don't think it would be opening that big a can of worms. These were pretty major cases that made national news, and it's not like student protestors planned that. They happened when they happened. If another major news story dropped the week before finals, then yeah, you'd have the same issue, but it's not like that accommodation would allow a student to plan a protest for [whatever cause] a week before finals just because they felt like it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
poo poo, I saw 50 new posts since I last read the thread two hours ago, and I was sure RBG had either kicked the bucket or stabbed Roberts.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 17:01
|
|
|
mdemone posted:poo poo, I saw 50 new posts since I last read the thread two hours ago, and I was sure RBG had either kicked the bucket or stabbed Roberts. No, she seems to have pulled through. Last reports I saw she was progressing well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 17:02
|
|
|
No, some students knew they would get bailed out by Big Uni so they gambled recklessly with their precious studying time. Little did they know their studying time was created at the expense of the poor tutionpayers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 17:03
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:So some protests are more valid than others? Good thing they are not a state university, because that line of thinking is somewhat counter to the first Amendment. Exactly why if I were in charge of Columbia, I would prefer people to think we were ridiculous hippies letting people postpone their exams for hurt feelings than have to have this argument down the road later on. I'm not saying that's what they're doing, but it makes a lot of sense. And yes, some protests are more valid than others. Maybe not in the eyes of the law, but in the eyes of the people. Do you think that Selma was more valid than a Klan march? Of course it was.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 17:07
|
|
|
Maarek posted:Exactly why if I were in charge of Columbia, I would prefer people to think we were ridiculous hippies letting people postpone their exams for hurt feelings than have to have this argument down the road later on. I'm not saying that's what they're doing, but it makes a lot of sense. Yes, of course I think Selma was more valid. But, to bring this back to SCOTUS, SCOTUS draws a big difference between what is morally more valid (Selma) and what is Constitutionally more valid (neither). That's kind of the point of the first Amendment...it protects all speech, even unpopular...hell even reprehensible...speech.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
Maarek posted:Exactly why if I were in charge of Columbia, I would prefer people to think we were ridiculous hippies letting people postpone their exams for hurt feelings than have to have this argument down the road later on. I'm not saying that's what they're doing, but it makes a lot of sense. The reason the law doesn't and shouldn't rank protests on validity is that for a long, long time, the eyes of the people saw the Klan march as more valid.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:The reason the law doesn't and shouldn't rank protests on validity is that for a long, long time, the eyes of the people saw the Klan march as more valid. also this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:The reason the law doesn't and shouldn't rank protests on validity is that for a long, long time, the eyes of the people saw the Klan march as more valid. That was the point I was trying to make. The law doesn't but people do and they will find ways to chew at the edges, like Columbia is doing here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 17:25
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:The reason the law doesn't and shouldn't rank protests on validity is that for a long, long time, the eyes of the people saw the Klan march as more valid. However as a private institution, Columbia can prioritize and endorse certain activities over others in order to project the image and biases that they wish to project.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 17:28
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:However as a private institution, Columbia can prioritize and endorse certain activities over others in order to project the image and biases that they wish to project. As an institution that relies on federal funds, it does need to exercise caution. That said, that an institution can says nothing about whether they should or if their prioritization is correct.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:As an institution that relies on federal funds, it does need to exercise caution. And seeing as the cases over military recruitment on campus pretty much said "federally funded" = "do any of your students receive a Stafford Loan?" that's certainly an issue.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 17:33
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:And seeing as the cases over military recruitment on campus pretty much said "federally funded" = "do any of your students receive a Stafford Loan?" that's certainly an issue. Guess who the big daddy in those cases was, just for curiosity? Columbia, who finally got Navy ROTC back on campus in 2013 after a hot debate through 2008 on. (Though it was a bit of a shadow exclusion - Columbia students did ROTC at other colleges in the city.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 17:36
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:Guess who the big daddy in those cases was, just for curiosity? haha. I forgot that was a Columbia case...for some reason I thought it was Yale or Harvard. Oh, and Washington Times just picked up the exam postponement story. sort of. I know, I know...not that that helps much. ActusRhesus fucked around with this message at 18:22 on Dec 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 18:02
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:haha. I forgot that was a Columbia case...for some reason I thought it was Yale or Harvard. Harvard was another one but Columbia had more student opposition.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Oh, and Washington Times just picked up the exam postponement story. sort of. Ah, a veneer of respectability for the right-wing blog circle-jerk narrative.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 18:07
|
|
|
I never understood those ROTC or recruitment arguments. People who can afford to go to a university are the least vulnerable when it comes to recruitment and don't really need protection and if we're going to have a military with officers it would be better if some of them went to Columbia instead of all of them coming from Texas A&M, anyway. Sure it's a protest against how deep the military and defense industry is dug in to our society, but even if you banish them from the ivory towers the rest of us still have to put up with this poo poo. Not only am I in favor of making them have ROTC I think it should be a law that one car out of every twenty should be forced to be covered in bumper stickers that say 'THESE COLORS DONT RUN' and have F22s airbrushed on the back. ActusRhesus posted:Oh, and Washington Times just picked up the exam postponement story. sort of. I'm guessing you don't live near Washington. I have some bad news for you about the Times...
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
How is the Washington Times even still operating? Weren't they in massive debt even before Moon died?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
Maarek posted:I never understood those ROTC or recruitment arguments. People who can afford to go to a university are the least vulnerable when it comes to recruitment and don't really need protection and if we're going to have a military with officers it would be better if some of them went to Columbia instead of all of them coming from Texas A&M, anyway. Sure it's a protest against how deep the military and defense industry is dug in to our society, but even if you banish them from the ivory towers the rest of us still have to put up with this poo poo. As I recall it was more a social statement about the don't ask don't tell policy...which was stupid because that was Congress's call, not DoD. Most in the military, especially among the officers, were like "uh...we really don't care if gays want to join...they already do." Here is the script for pretty much every "administrative separation" hearing I had to do for "gayness." AR: Members...we are here because Congress says we have to be. Today you have to decide whether or not there is a basis for separation, and, if so, what characterization of discharge [insert gay person's name] should receive. It's totally your call. Here's his entire service record, oh hey, look at those fancy awards! Here's some bullshit saying he's gay. Oh hey, look some more fancy awards. And oh yeah, by the way, if you were to...for example...decide that the fact he was caught giving blowjobs in the seabag locker was just an anomaly, and he's not actually gay, and that would be completely unlikely to ever happen again *wink wink* you could vote to retain him. So yeah, here because Congress says we have to be. Good luck. By the way...here's his high school girlfriend to tell you all how totally straight he is. Over to you ,Sally. As the prosecutor type arguing for separation, I had a 0% success rate. Somehow, despite this, the commands kept assigning me to zealously advocate for the separation of the morale destroying homos. Damnedest thing. To bring this anecdote full circle, only time I almost lost (won?) one of these cases, the defense attorney was a Columbia law grad who seemed to miss the point where I was sending a very VERY clear message to the board that the command did not want the person booted, and started delivering this fire and brimstone social justice warrior diatribe about the evils of the homophobic military. Passed note which read "Hey dumbass...I already won your case for you. You are pissing them off and the only way they will be able to express that contempt is by taking it out on your client. For the love of God, sit down and shut up."
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
I don't want to sound like one of those guys who says 'The New York Times is full of lies and your article is wrong' but the Washington Times was literally created by the leader of a cult solely to fight the communist influence of the Washington Post and no one takes it seriously. It's lost billions of dollars since it was founded and basically has been a subsidized platform for Moonie right-wing nonsense. The Times isn't 'bad' like the New York Post or Wall Street Journal is bad to left wing people. It's bad like Pravda circa 1980.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 08:31 |
|
|
When I was growing up in the DC area the only time I heard anyone even talk about the Times was when G. Gordon Liddy endlessly plugged it on his show.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2014 18:25
|
|
