Senior Class Officers Respond; Senior Cocks Still On

The senior class officers have finally responded to all the concerns and differing opinions expressed both here on Wesleying (pro and con) and on the acb over the past few days concerning the proposal to cancel the next senior cocks and donate the funds for that event to Haiti instead. As you know, the cocks proposal survey closed on Wednesday and we’ve all been wondering about the results. Here’s the email sent out earlier today, which I have to say was nicely written and did a good job of addressing some of the major points of contention on both sides:

Dear Class of 2010,

First and foremost, we would like to thank everyone who has contributed to the ongoing dialogue regarding the proposal to forfeit our upcoming cocktail. We have received valuable feedback from members of the class both for and against the proposal. We also realize that this proposal has spurned a considerable amount of discussion regarding the appropriateness of donating cocktail funds, the method of gauging the senior class opinion, and of altruism in general. It is worth noting that we fully recognize the shortcomings of our online survey and we should have taken greater responsibility in ensuring that the survey targeted only cocktail-pass purchasers, and that voting was restricted to one-time only.

With these problems in mind, we openly accept that the results of this survey cannot be used in the decision-making process. It was, however, disappointing to see several forums of discussion, including the survey, used for very inappropriate and offensive remarks. We recognize the argument made by some seniors who felt as though the reduction of this issue to a “for cocktails” or “for giving” dichotomy was too simplistic. After considering the class response, we will continue to explore options for our class to make meaningful contributions to this cause without completely eliminating an event that our class holds dear.

It is important to note that the turnout on both sides of this issue was considerable, so we hope that we might achieve some sort of middle ground. We have decided to try to work toward both goals – we will go ahead with the four spring cocktails as planned while also providing considerable opportunities for our class to contribute funds to Haiti relief efforts. To clear up some confusion about the next few events, there will be two more traditional “cocktails” during the semester, and two events during senior week – an outing day and a semi-formal.

For our upcoming cocktail we will encourage those who feel moved to donate to do so. We will facilitate this by recommending a $10-20 cash donation at registration for whoever wishes to contribute. We hope to provide ample opportunity to raise a sizable donation for the Haitian relief efforts, while maintaining the original promise of cocktails.

Furthermore, we would like to address some of the concerns/questions raised in response to our survey. While we would love to put on a cheaper version of cocktails, perhaps even on campus, this is not as feasible of an option as it might seem. There is no venue on campus that holds our necessary capacity of over 500 guests, and the cost of outside venues takes up the majority of the event’s budget. We will do everything in our power to cut any unnecessary costs and direct any leftovers toward a class contribution. For those who expressed opposition because you value class-bonding experiences, we urge you to take advantage of many of the other senior events made available to you throughout the semester beyond cocktails, including this Saturday’s Senior Winter Ball at Beckham Hall. We are in the process of trying to coordinate with the event planners to make a cash donation box available at the entrance to this party as well. We urge all of you who expressed your desire to donate in other ways and through other venues to do so. We pledge to devote a great deal of energy over the next semester to make both class bonding and fundraising opportunities available to you, and we hope to still be able to deliver a significant donation to the Haiti relief efforts from the Class of 2010.

We would appreciate any further feedback or suggestions that anyone may have. If you would like to continue this conversation, feel free to email us at SeniorClass(at)wesleyan(dot)edu. Again, thanks to everyone for their input throughout this important and difficult decision.

Sincerely,
Your Senior Class Officers

So, dear readers, what do you think of the outcome?

98 thoughts on “Senior Class Officers Respond; Senior Cocks Still On

  1. Alex B

    @30 Good post. Especially about the using the tools of academia for inaction and obfuscation. But then that shouldn’t be surprising; the premise of academic “objectivity” is a remove from the action of the real world.

    I forget which post said this, but it is important to call out the canard being raised of “oh why not just create some other fundraising opportunity and get that $20,000” I’m in the midst of putting on a large campus fundraiser for Haiti, and let me tell you, it’s been a whole lot of sweat and tears on many peoples’ part, and the most it could POSSIBLY raise is $3000. For easily 10x the effort of canceling cocks. The idea that you can just magically come up with $20,000 is ludicrous and insulting.

    I wish I wasn’t completely exhausted from putting together our events, because @25 is right. There’s amazing opportunities to raise money and do good if people want to work very hard at it. But that’s the thing, it’s very hard work. Few people are willing or able to give that kind of time right now, which is the beauty of cancelling one cocks. It’s supremely easy, with a benefit that other on-campus events could only dream of matching.

  2. Alex B

    @30 Good post. Especially about the using the tools of academia for inaction and obfuscation. But then that shouldn’t be surprising; the premise of academic “objectivity” is a remove from the action of the real world.

    I forget which post said this, but it is important to call out the canard being raised of “oh why not just create some other fundraising opportunity and get that $20,000” I’m in the midst of putting on a large campus fundraiser for Haiti, and let me tell you, it’s been a whole lot of sweat and tears on many peoples’ part, and the most it could POSSIBLY raise is $3000. For easily 10x the effort of canceling cocks. The idea that you can just magically come up with $20,000 is ludicrous and insulting.

    I wish I wasn’t completely exhausted from putting together our events, because @25 is right. There’s amazing opportunities to raise money and do good if people want to work very hard at it. But that’s the thing, it’s very hard work. Few people are willing or able to give that kind of time right now, which is the beauty of cancelling one cocks. It’s supremely easy, with a benefit that other on-campus events could only dream of matching.

  3. Alex B

    @30 Good post. Especially about the using the tools of academia for inaction and obfuscation. But then that shouldn’t be surprising; the premise of academic “objectivity” is a remove from the action of the real world.

    I forget which post said this, but it is important to call out the canard being raised of “oh why not just create some other fundraising opportunity and get that $20,000” I’m in the midst of putting on a large campus fundraiser for Haiti, and let me tell you, it’s been a whole lot of sweat and tears on many peoples’ part, and the most it could POSSIBLY raise is $3000. For easily 10x the effort of canceling cocks. The idea that you can just magically come up with $20,000 is ludicrous and insulting.

    I wish I wasn’t completely exhausted from putting together our events, because @25 is right. There’s amazing opportunities to raise money and do good if people want to work very hard at it. But that’s the thing, it’s very hard work. Few people are willing or able to give that kind of time right now, which is the beauty of cancelling one cocks. It’s supremely easy, with a benefit that other on-campus events could only dream of matching.

  4. anon

    Seems like there’s a much better solution. Instead of voting democratically, let people vote with their money: if anyone wants, they may have their cocktail money and their portion of the school donated cocktail money sent to charity. It probably make sense to pull from one of the senior week ones instead so that an alternative venue can be found for those who choose to go to cocktails, if there’s too little money left to go to the currently planned one.

    Actually, I’m curious. Where’s the flaw in that idea?

  5. anon

    Seems like there’s a much better solution. Instead of voting democratically, let people vote with their money: if anyone wants, they may have their cocktail money and their portion of the school donated cocktail money sent to charity. It probably make sense to pull from one of the senior week ones instead so that an alternative venue can be found for those who choose to go to cocktails, if there’s too little money left to go to the currently planned one.

    Actually, I’m curious. Where’s the flaw in that idea?

  6. anon

    Seems like there’s a much better solution. Instead of voting democratically, let people vote with their money: if anyone wants, they may have their cocktail money and their portion of the school donated cocktail money sent to charity. It probably make sense to pull from one of the senior week ones instead so that an alternative venue can be found for those who choose to go to cocktails, if there’s too little money left to go to the currently planned one.

    Actually, I’m curious. Where’s the flaw in that idea?

  7. anon

    Some thoughts
    1. To those implying the funding is primarily from the school, a bit of simple math proves you wrong. A bit over 20$ per student for over $500 students is about $10k-$12k. Mathematically, the university funding is not the majority. True, those $3000 are important. So donate a bit more.

    2. The above point reinforces the idea of the false dichotomy that’s being created. If everyone simply donates $20 in addition to going to this party, you’re at a very similar result

    3. The results of the survey were not necessarily a no vote. They were entirely thrown out because the survey was worthless: according to the post, you could vote multiple times, and certainly those who didn’t pay could vote. The results meant nothing. This decision, for good or bad, rests on the officers who made it.

    4. I hate to say it, but given that a decent portion of the people who voted yes and are demonizing the “no” votes probably didn’t pay for their cocktails (student accounts being funded by parents in a decent portion of students), there’s a certain amount of extreme hypocrisy that seems to be going on. That is to say, people were happier when it was cocktails, because that doesn’t involve any actual contribution from them. Donate, don’t just whine! So sure, that’s an overly sweeping statement that only applies on a statistical level and who knows, maybe it applies to no one, but take this statement as such and if it applies to you, you need to seriously think about what your moral outrage actually consists of. And then you need to donate.

    5. Think. And hold a fundraiser. Why only tap the seniors?

    @eric b.: But you wouldn’t be contributing %15k, you’d only be contributing $20. And if the seniors actually contribute at the cocktails, you’ll have (close to) your $15k. So the decision doesn’t relate to cocktails, it relates to actually putting your money where your mouth is, but in the donation sense. Have you donated yet?
    (If so, great).

  8. anon

    Some thoughts
    1. To those implying the funding is primarily from the school, a bit of simple math proves you wrong. A bit over 20$ per student for over $500 students is about $10k-$12k. Mathematically, the university funding is not the majority. True, those $3000 are important. So donate a bit more.

    2. The above point reinforces the idea of the false dichotomy that’s being created. If everyone simply donates $20 in addition to going to this party, you’re at a very similar result

    3. The results of the survey were not necessarily a no vote. They were entirely thrown out because the survey was worthless: according to the post, you could vote multiple times, and certainly those who didn’t pay could vote. The results meant nothing. This decision, for good or bad, rests on the officers who made it.

    4. I hate to say it, but given that a decent portion of the people who voted yes and are demonizing the “no” votes probably didn’t pay for their cocktails (student accounts being funded by parents in a decent portion of students), there’s a certain amount of extreme hypocrisy that seems to be going on. That is to say, people were happier when it was cocktails, because that doesn’t involve any actual contribution from them. Donate, don’t just whine! So sure, that’s an overly sweeping statement that only applies on a statistical level and who knows, maybe it applies to no one, but take this statement as such and if it applies to you, you need to seriously think about what your moral outrage actually consists of. And then you need to donate.

    5. Think. And hold a fundraiser. Why only tap the seniors?

    @eric b.: But you wouldn’t be contributing %15k, you’d only be contributing $20. And if the seniors actually contribute at the cocktails, you’ll have (close to) your $15k. So the decision doesn’t relate to cocktails, it relates to actually putting your money where your mouth is, but in the donation sense. Have you donated yet?
    (If so, great).

  9. anon

    Some thoughts
    1. To those implying the funding is primarily from the school, a bit of simple math proves you wrong. A bit over 20$ per student for over $500 students is about $10k-$12k. Mathematically, the university funding is not the majority. True, those $3000 are important. So donate a bit more.

    2. The above point reinforces the idea of the false dichotomy that’s being created. If everyone simply donates $20 in addition to going to this party, you’re at a very similar result

    3. The results of the survey were not necessarily a no vote. They were entirely thrown out because the survey was worthless: according to the post, you could vote multiple times, and certainly those who didn’t pay could vote. The results meant nothing. This decision, for good or bad, rests on the officers who made it.

    4. I hate to say it, but given that a decent portion of the people who voted yes and are demonizing the “no” votes probably didn’t pay for their cocktails (student accounts being funded by parents in a decent portion of students), there’s a certain amount of extreme hypocrisy that seems to be going on. That is to say, people were happier when it was cocktails, because that doesn’t involve any actual contribution from them. Donate, don’t just whine! So sure, that’s an overly sweeping statement that only applies on a statistical level and who knows, maybe it applies to no one, but take this statement as such and if it applies to you, you need to seriously think about what your moral outrage actually consists of. And then you need to donate.

    5. Think. And hold a fundraiser. Why only tap the seniors?

    @eric b.: But you wouldn’t be contributing %15k, you’d only be contributing $20. And if the seniors actually contribute at the cocktails, you’ll have (close to) your $15k. So the decision doesn’t relate to cocktails, it relates to actually putting your money where your mouth is, but in the donation sense. Have you donated yet?
    (If so, great).

  10. eric b '10

    I feel a large weight of sadness that this proposal attracted the type of negative and de-humanizing discussion that we’ve seen in the past week here on Wesleying. It’s disappointing but predictable to see that students would throw all the language and tools that they have learned here in academia over the past four years at crippling an incredibly easy and powerful opportunity to positively affect the lives of others.

    Rarely in my life have I had the chance to make a small sacrifice ($20), to have such an enormous impact ($15,000). When that chance was first proposed I was energized by the idea of telling my family and friends that we as a class had decided to act quickly and altruistically in a fashion that was worth being proud of. Now, I have to explain that anonymous commentators on a blog decided that “business as usual” was so important to uphold that they would have their party. The fear of being held accountable to respond to the world is palpable on this site. What happened in Haiti is not an everday, every year, or every decade event; donating our cocktails money would not have meant that we would be setting a dangerous precedent of curtailing every part of our lives to charity. It would be demonstrating awareness of the enormity of the situation there. That kind of group awareness doesn’t often have the spark to be ignited, and I think we lost a chance in this case.

    There is a difference between self-respect and selfishness. Self-respect nurtures the kind of confidence that would have allowed us to follow through with this proposal and be proud of what we had done. Selfishness nurtures the insecurity of interrupting our lives and lives little room for pride that comes from responding to our world.

    I am sorry that this proposal has become a point of division, but feel that this was predictable taking place in this format of anonymous comments. There is a lot of defensiveness from those who felt like cocktails should happen, and that is also too bad because it seems that that attitude will only further build a shell of inaction in those people.

    I hope that everyone involved in this, because the outcome reflects all of us, spends some time alone to assess their emotions throughout the last week and think about what makes them proud to be alive.

  11. eric b '10

    I feel a large weight of sadness that this proposal attracted the type of negative and de-humanizing discussion that we’ve seen in the past week here on Wesleying. It’s disappointing but predictable to see that students would throw all the language and tools that they have learned here in academia over the past four years at crippling an incredibly easy and powerful opportunity to positively affect the lives of others.

    Rarely in my life have I had the chance to make a small sacrifice ($20), to have such an enormous impact ($15,000). When that chance was first proposed I was energized by the idea of telling my family and friends that we as a class had decided to act quickly and altruistically in a fashion that was worth being proud of. Now, I have to explain that anonymous commentators on a blog decided that “business as usual” was so important to uphold that they would have their party. The fear of being held accountable to respond to the world is palpable on this site. What happened in Haiti is not an everday, every year, or every decade event; donating our cocktails money would not have meant that we would be setting a dangerous precedent of curtailing every part of our lives to charity. It would be demonstrating awareness of the enormity of the situation there. That kind of group awareness doesn’t often have the spark to be ignited, and I think we lost a chance in this case.

    There is a difference between self-respect and selfishness. Self-respect nurtures the kind of confidence that would have allowed us to follow through with this proposal and be proud of what we had done. Selfishness nurtures the insecurity of interrupting our lives and lives little room for pride that comes from responding to our world.

    I am sorry that this proposal has become a point of division, but feel that this was predictable taking place in this format of anonymous comments. There is a lot of defensiveness from those who felt like cocktails should happen, and that is also too bad because it seems that that attitude will only further build a shell of inaction in those people.

    I hope that everyone involved in this, because the outcome reflects all of us, spends some time alone to assess their emotions throughout the last week and think about what makes them proud to be alive.

  12. eric b '10

    I feel a large weight of sadness that this proposal attracted the type of negative and de-humanizing discussion that we’ve seen in the past week here on Wesleying. It’s disappointing but predictable to see that students would throw all the language and tools that they have learned here in academia over the past four years at crippling an incredibly easy and powerful opportunity to positively affect the lives of others.

    Rarely in my life have I had the chance to make a small sacrifice ($20), to have such an enormous impact ($15,000). When that chance was first proposed I was energized by the idea of telling my family and friends that we as a class had decided to act quickly and altruistically in a fashion that was worth being proud of. Now, I have to explain that anonymous commentators on a blog decided that “business as usual” was so important to uphold that they would have their party. The fear of being held accountable to respond to the world is palpable on this site. What happened in Haiti is not an everday, every year, or every decade event; donating our cocktails money would not have meant that we would be setting a dangerous precedent of curtailing every part of our lives to charity. It would be demonstrating awareness of the enormity of the situation there. That kind of group awareness doesn’t often have the spark to be ignited, and I think we lost a chance in this case.

    There is a difference between self-respect and selfishness. Self-respect nurtures the kind of confidence that would have allowed us to follow through with this proposal and be proud of what we had done. Selfishness nurtures the insecurity of interrupting our lives and lives little room for pride that comes from responding to our world.

    I am sorry that this proposal has become a point of division, but feel that this was predictable taking place in this format of anonymous comments. There is a lot of defensiveness from those who felt like cocktails should happen, and that is also too bad because it seems that that attitude will only further build a shell of inaction in those people.

    I hope that everyone involved in this, because the outcome reflects all of us, spends some time alone to assess their emotions throughout the last week and think about what makes them proud to be alive.

  13. anon

    @ 26
    I agree that more should be donated to the middletown community. It’s good that Haiti is getting a lot of publicity so people can help, but that doesn’t mean we should ignore the problems in our own locale. I feel remiss in never having donated to a middletown-related cause

  14. anon

    @ 26
    I agree that more should be donated to the middletown community. It’s good that Haiti is getting a lot of publicity so people can help, but that doesn’t mean we should ignore the problems in our own locale. I feel remiss in never having donated to a middletown-related cause

  15. anon

    @ 26
    I agree that more should be donated to the middletown community. It’s good that Haiti is getting a lot of publicity so people can help, but that doesn’t mean we should ignore the problems in our own locale. I feel remiss in never having donated to a middletown-related cause

  16. anon

    @27

    1)it is MUCH more practical to tie your untied shoes than to take them off or buy ones with velcroes. #20 is not saying that the ONLY option is to contribute to haiti via senior cocks funds, but it is a lot easier and probably a lot more lucrative than creating a separate haiti fund that nobody will contribute to.

    2)i think #23 is not advocating the idea of voting to spend other people’s money. ze’s just pointing out that it’s not fair to blame the people who voted yes for a decision that the rest of their class made them look bad for. That being said, anybody who voted “yes” had better fucking donate to Haiti, cocktails or no cocktails.

  17. anon

    @27

    1)it is MUCH more practical to tie your untied shoes than to take them off or buy ones with velcroes. #20 is not saying that the ONLY option is to contribute to haiti via senior cocks funds, but it is a lot easier and probably a lot more lucrative than creating a separate haiti fund that nobody will contribute to.

    2)i think #23 is not advocating the idea of voting to spend other people’s money. ze’s just pointing out that it’s not fair to blame the people who voted yes for a decision that the rest of their class made them look bad for. That being said, anybody who voted “yes” had better fucking donate to Haiti, cocktails or no cocktails.

  18. anon

    @27

    1)it is MUCH more practical to tie your untied shoes than to take them off or buy ones with velcroes. #20 is not saying that the ONLY option is to contribute to haiti via senior cocks funds, but it is a lot easier and probably a lot more lucrative than creating a separate haiti fund that nobody will contribute to.

    2)i think #23 is not advocating the idea of voting to spend other people’s money. ze’s just pointing out that it’s not fair to blame the people who voted yes for a decision that the rest of their class made them look bad for. That being said, anybody who voted “yes” had better fucking donate to Haiti, cocktails or no cocktails.

  19. peanuts

    @20

    While Haiti is a “truly important perspective,” why does that mean anything about how we conduct ourselves. There are many horrible truths out there in the non-Wesleyan world, but the existence of a truth does not in itself lead us to specific actions. If my shoe laces become untied, there are many things I could do. I could say fuck it and take my shoes off, I could go buy some shoes with velcro straps. Its a mistake to say my shoes are untied, therefore I must retie them. Retying your shoes is a decision made by you, not something dictated by the situation.

    @23
    Your self defense (“I AM A GOOD PERSON THOUGH!”) actually points to another error made in the execution of this process. Yes, the final decision is projected to the entire voting pool. BUT SO IS THE AFFECT OF THE DECISION! How is it rational that one could vote on how to spend other people’s money, money which was collected for goals which other than those originally stated. You are a silly one.

  20. peanuts

    @20

    While Haiti is a “truly important perspective,” why does that mean anything about how we conduct ourselves. There are many horrible truths out there in the non-Wesleyan world, but the existence of a truth does not in itself lead us to specific actions. If my shoe laces become untied, there are many things I could do. I could say fuck it and take my shoes off, I could go buy some shoes with velcro straps. Its a mistake to say my shoes are untied, therefore I must retie them. Retying your shoes is a decision made by you, not something dictated by the situation.

    @23
    Your self defense (“I AM A GOOD PERSON THOUGH!”) actually points to another error made in the execution of this process. Yes, the final decision is projected to the entire voting pool. BUT SO IS THE AFFECT OF THE DECISION! How is it rational that one could vote on how to spend other people’s money, money which was collected for goals which other than those originally stated. You are a silly one.

  21. peanuts

    @20

    While Haiti is a “truly important perspective,” why does that mean anything about how we conduct ourselves. There are many horrible truths out there in the non-Wesleyan world, but the existence of a truth does not in itself lead us to specific actions. If my shoe laces become untied, there are many things I could do. I could say fuck it and take my shoes off, I could go buy some shoes with velcro straps. Its a mistake to say my shoes are untied, therefore I must retie them. Retying your shoes is a decision made by you, not something dictated by the situation.

    @23
    Your self defense (“I AM A GOOD PERSON THOUGH!”) actually points to another error made in the execution of this process. Yes, the final decision is projected to the entire voting pool. BUT SO IS THE AFFECT OF THE DECISION! How is it rational that one could vote on how to spend other people’s money, money which was collected for goals which other than those originally stated. You are a silly one.

  22. douche

    Why not donate the 15,000 to the local public schools, Woman’s Shelter, or soup kitchen? There are people in Middletown who need our support as well.

  23. douche

    Why not donate the 15,000 to the local public schools, Woman’s Shelter, or soup kitchen? There are people in Middletown who need our support as well.

  24. douche

    Why not donate the 15,000 to the local public schools, Woman’s Shelter, or soup kitchen? There are people in Middletown who need our support as well.

  25. Alum

    I’m class of ’06 and stumbled on this debate by accident… but I thought I’d offer a perspective from a few years out from Wesleyan:

    – Wesleyan is a fantastic platform from which you can do good in the world. You’re surrounded by like-minded, smart people of your own generation who want to create change.

    – That doesn’t end on Wesleyan’s campus.

    I’d encourage everyone to think outside the Wesleyan box here. Yes, you’re part of a Wesleyan community – but you’re also part of a wider community in Middletown, in Connecticut, full of people who want to contribute to helping Haiti and Haitians. There are other ways to give and other coalitions to forge. There are people with loads more money than a bunch of college students (many of whom are alumni) who you could reach out to and ask far more than $15,000 for Haiti. Use your power for much more than this. And enjoy cocktails – you won’t get to go to parties that good after college. No lie.

  26. Alum

    I’m class of ’06 and stumbled on this debate by accident… but I thought I’d offer a perspective from a few years out from Wesleyan:

    – Wesleyan is a fantastic platform from which you can do good in the world. You’re surrounded by like-minded, smart people of your own generation who want to create change.

    – That doesn’t end on Wesleyan’s campus.

    I’d encourage everyone to think outside the Wesleyan box here. Yes, you’re part of a Wesleyan community – but you’re also part of a wider community in Middletown, in Connecticut, full of people who want to contribute to helping Haiti and Haitians. There are other ways to give and other coalitions to forge. There are people with loads more money than a bunch of college students (many of whom are alumni) who you could reach out to and ask far more than $15,000 for Haiti. Use your power for much more than this. And enjoy cocktails – you won’t get to go to parties that good after college. No lie.

  27. Alum

    I’m class of ’06 and stumbled on this debate by accident… but I thought I’d offer a perspective from a few years out from Wesleyan:

    – Wesleyan is a fantastic platform from which you can do good in the world. You’re surrounded by like-minded, smart people of your own generation who want to create change.

    – That doesn’t end on Wesleyan’s campus.

    I’d encourage everyone to think outside the Wesleyan box here. Yes, you’re part of a Wesleyan community – but you’re also part of a wider community in Middletown, in Connecticut, full of people who want to contribute to helping Haiti and Haitians. There are other ways to give and other coalitions to forge. There are people with loads more money than a bunch of college students (many of whom are alumni) who you could reach out to and ask far more than $15,000 for Haiti. Use your power for much more than this. And enjoy cocktails – you won’t get to go to parties that good after college. No lie.

  28. anon

    @#20
    I agree with you that the final decision should be yes. Haiti is an emergency disaster that requires immediate funding, which sets it apart from chronic suffering (such as the war in Afghanistan). The people who say “then you should never party because there will always be dying people in the world” do not realize that the Haiti earthquake is in a different category than your standard ‘problems in the world.’
    My only issue with your post is that you blame the ENTIRE SENIOR CLASS for voting “no,” when I am sure that many of them actually voted yes. We do not know the percentage breakdown of the votes: for all we know, it could’ve been 52% – 48% or something else really close. The problem with democracy is that projects the image of the final decision on the entire voting pool. But I completely agree with your sentiments otherwise

  29. anon

    @#20
    I agree with you that the final decision should be yes. Haiti is an emergency disaster that requires immediate funding, which sets it apart from chronic suffering (such as the war in Afghanistan). The people who say “then you should never party because there will always be dying people in the world” do not realize that the Haiti earthquake is in a different category than your standard ‘problems in the world.’
    My only issue with your post is that you blame the ENTIRE SENIOR CLASS for voting “no,” when I am sure that many of them actually voted yes. We do not know the percentage breakdown of the votes: for all we know, it could’ve been 52% – 48% or something else really close. The problem with democracy is that projects the image of the final decision on the entire voting pool. But I completely agree with your sentiments otherwise

  30. anon

    @#20
    I agree with you that the final decision should be yes. Haiti is an emergency disaster that requires immediate funding, which sets it apart from chronic suffering (such as the war in Afghanistan). The people who say “then you should never party because there will always be dying people in the world” do not realize that the Haiti earthquake is in a different category than your standard ‘problems in the world.’
    My only issue with your post is that you blame the ENTIRE SENIOR CLASS for voting “no,” when I am sure that many of them actually voted yes. We do not know the percentage breakdown of the votes: for all we know, it could’ve been 52% – 48% or something else really close. The problem with democracy is that projects the image of the final decision on the entire voting pool. But I completely agree with your sentiments otherwise

  31. Pissed off Underclass(wo)man

    Wow, I have never been more ashamed to be a part of this university. I honestly cannot believe that any student at this University would vote no on this survey. Many of the arguments that have been made, which justify voting “no,” bring up valid points and critiques. Sure, it was anti-democratic and coercive. Sure it makes students feel guilty, and it brings into question the ideas of consumption of unnecessary pleasantries at a time of great suffering around the world. Point taken, it was a problematic proposal. But you still should have voted “yes,” all of you, and any other action is inexcusable.

    These critiques are valid, but if you notice, NONE of the valid critiques of this proposal ever once discussed the only truly important perspective that matters at all: Haiti. The suffering and death is unimaginable, and the need for funding and supplies is present NOW, not a few months from now. Haitians are being forced to fight over food and water, and people are still dying from starvation. Sending $20,000 could SAVE LIVES, and that is all that should matter here. Any hurt you seniors feel was inflicted upon you, any guilt that you were forced to confront, none of it matters when people are suffering in ways none of you can imagine. You who voted NO are privileged, selfish, and disgusting. Be ashamed, it’s what you deserve.

    The donation box at senior cocktails will not likely raise more than a few hundred to a thousand dollars, nothing compared to what it could have been. $20,000 is an incredible sum of money. Raising that much money is incredibly difficult, would take many months of work from many people to put together an event that could even match that. Supplies and money are needed NOW, and we have passed up a critical opportunity to do a cent of good in this world (something Wes students rarely do). I am so disturbed that some of you on this campus could be the ones who justified avoiding helping people in dire need with fancy theoretical dilemmas, inhuman emotional detachment, and pathetic objections.

    Shame on the senior class, I hope that every sip of wine you drink at senior cocks makes you think of the suffering of those you could have prevented. You should be very proud that thanks to you, someone will now likely die who did not have to.

  32. Pissed off Underclass(wo)man

    Wow, I have never been more ashamed to be a part of this university. I honestly cannot believe that any student at this University would vote no on this survey. Many of the arguments that have been made, which justify voting “no,” bring up valid points and critiques. Sure, it was anti-democratic and coercive. Sure it makes students feel guilty, and it brings into question the ideas of consumption of unnecessary pleasantries at a time of great suffering around the world. Point taken, it was a problematic proposal. But you still should have voted “yes,” all of you, and any other action is inexcusable.

    These critiques are valid, but if you notice, NONE of the valid critiques of this proposal ever once discussed the only truly important perspective that matters at all: Haiti. The suffering and death is unimaginable, and the need for funding and supplies is present NOW, not a few months from now. Haitians are being forced to fight over food and water, and people are still dying from starvation. Sending $20,000 could SAVE LIVES, and that is all that should matter here. Any hurt you seniors feel was inflicted upon you, any guilt that you were forced to confront, none of it matters when people are suffering in ways none of you can imagine. You who voted NO are privileged, selfish, and disgusting. Be ashamed, it’s what you deserve.

    The donation box at senior cocktails will not likely raise more than a few hundred to a thousand dollars, nothing compared to what it could have been. $20,000 is an incredible sum of money. Raising that much money is incredibly difficult, would take many months of work from many people to put together an event that could even match that. Supplies and money are needed NOW, and we have passed up a critical opportunity to do a cent of good in this world (something Wes students rarely do). I am so disturbed that some of you on this campus could be the ones who justified avoiding helping people in dire need with fancy theoretical dilemmas, inhuman emotional detachment, and pathetic objections.

    Shame on the senior class, I hope that every sip of wine you drink at senior cocks makes you think of the suffering of those you could have prevented. You should be very proud that thanks to you, someone will now likely die who did not have to.

  33. Pissed off Underclass(wo)man

    Wow, I have never been more ashamed to be a part of this university. I honestly cannot believe that any student at this University would vote no on this survey. Many of the arguments that have been made, which justify voting “no,” bring up valid points and critiques. Sure, it was anti-democratic and coercive. Sure it makes students feel guilty, and it brings into question the ideas of consumption of unnecessary pleasantries at a time of great suffering around the world. Point taken, it was a problematic proposal. But you still should have voted “yes,” all of you, and any other action is inexcusable.

    These critiques are valid, but if you notice, NONE of the valid critiques of this proposal ever once discussed the only truly important perspective that matters at all: Haiti. The suffering and death is unimaginable, and the need for funding and supplies is present NOW, not a few months from now. Haitians are being forced to fight over food and water, and people are still dying from starvation. Sending $20,000 could SAVE LIVES, and that is all that should matter here. Any hurt you seniors feel was inflicted upon you, any guilt that you were forced to confront, none of it matters when people are suffering in ways none of you can imagine. You who voted NO are privileged, selfish, and disgusting. Be ashamed, it’s what you deserve.

    The donation box at senior cocktails will not likely raise more than a few hundred to a thousand dollars, nothing compared to what it could have been. $20,000 is an incredible sum of money. Raising that much money is incredibly difficult, would take many months of work from many people to put together an event that could even match that. Supplies and money are needed NOW, and we have passed up a critical opportunity to do a cent of good in this world (something Wes students rarely do). I am so disturbed that some of you on this campus could be the ones who justified avoiding helping people in dire need with fancy theoretical dilemmas, inhuman emotional detachment, and pathetic objections.

    Shame on the senior class, I hope that every sip of wine you drink at senior cocks makes you think of the suffering of those you could have prevented. You should be very proud that thanks to you, someone will now likely die who did not have to.

  34. anon

    we should have had a legit (re)vote open ONLY to pass holders. this would have been a rational, effective course of action instead letting some trolly online rants obfuscate the issue. as a school we talk about open dialogue incessantly—really, we just fucking talk incessantly—but are completely inept at organizing and following through on anything. fuck y’all

  35. anon

    we should have had a legit (re)vote open ONLY to pass holders. this would have been a rational, effective course of action instead letting some trolly online rants obfuscate the issue. as a school we talk about open dialogue incessantly—really, we just fucking talk incessantly—but are completely inept at organizing and following through on anything. fuck y’all

  36. anon

    we should have had a legit (re)vote open ONLY to pass holders. this would have been a rational, effective course of action instead letting some trolly online rants obfuscate the issue. as a school we talk about open dialogue incessantly—really, we just fucking talk incessantly—but are completely inept at organizing and following through on anything. fuck y’all

  37. Sheek

    Everyone is fucking stupid. I’m drunk as shit.

    Listen, fucktards: If you want to help Haiti, fucking donate. If you don’t, fucking don’t donate. God damn, is that fucking difficult to understand? I didn’t god damn think so, fuck all of you god damnit.

  38. Sheek

    Everyone is fucking stupid. I’m drunk as shit.

    Listen, fucktards: If you want to help Haiti, fucking donate. If you don’t, fucking don’t donate. God damn, is that fucking difficult to understand? I didn’t god damn think so, fuck all of you god damnit.

Comments are closed.