Comments on: QuickSpec: Interesting Parallels Edition

By: uhhh

uhhh — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 02:05:08 +0000

i can’t believe i’m about to defend chris kulawik here.

i’ve just re-read his article and i don’t see anything that would indicate that he believes minorities should not get a voice. read carefully: he says that minority voices should not be FORCED onto the administration, and that the administration cannot possibly comply with the demands of every single interest group on campus. clearly, the minority view DOES have a voice. kulawik is saying that this voice should not be allowed to strong-arm everybody else into agreement, not that this voice should be silenced.

By: Well.

Well. — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 01:37:14 +0000

I’ll agree with Kulawik that radicals should not get a voice just for being radical, but the simultaneous claim that minorities should not get a voice because they are minority is revolting.

Besides which, from what I understand, his advice is: trust the system. The system works. If the system ignores you, that’s for the greater good. His demonstrating example: a student group that’s had 40 years of being ignored and have not changed tactics. Oooookay.

By: here here

here here — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 21:14:41 +0000

i was so disturbed that i agree with him.

By: Aga

Aga — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 18:48:35 +0000

Sorry, here’s the actual link:

http://columbia.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6847924917

By: Aga

Aga — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 18:47:22 +0000

YES! JOIN THE FACEBOOK GROUP “We Do NOT Support the Hunger Strikers” (at: http://columbia.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6847924917).
Some way of showing Bollinger/Brinkley/etc. how many students do NOT support the strike is in the works.
Also, to counter many of the comments here, this facebook group (that is, the one NOT in support of the strikers) is actually MUCH closer in numbers to the number of members in the group in support of the strike than may appear at first sight. If you take the time to actually look through the members of the facebook group in support of the strike, you will see that an extraordinarily high percentage of their members have no stated relationship to columbia (I am in the process of calculating the exact numbers, but for now I *think* it will be around 40% non-Columbia). The group “We Do NOT Support the Hunger Strikers” is open ONLY to Columbia-related individuals, because after all, how many STUDENTS here support them is crucial.

Anyway, do join the group if you are not in support of the hunger strike!

By: hey

hey — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 18:11:38 +0000

fuck you asshole

By: boars ass

boars ass — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 18:00:00 +0000

where’s the large vocal opposition? until i giant cardboard shark battling the giant octopus i will continue to believe that the opposition is only on bwog, where uh, people bitterly oppose everything ever

By: at the least

at the least — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 17:19:36 +0000

the strikers petition at most has maybe 200 CU students/alum on it

The fast growing anti strikers group was already up to 350 when i checked

By: um no

um no — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 17:18:12 +0000

it says that the majority of people generally support the demands—some of the specific demands are obviously troublesome

and the poll in question says that 52% are against the strike and 51% are in favor–3% fall into don’t know. the first graph is similarily out of 106% . there’s no rounding explanation here and its just lazy to put the raw number as a pie chart.

Furthermore, the tipping point for a lot of people angry with them are their coercive, ridiculous methods. The spec curiously didn’t list any polls on that and in the one where they asked for people’s relative concern for the strikers, almost 50% say a 5 or less.

And unlike most polls, there’s no methodological details given–to be expected from amateurs like the spec.
Nothing here indicates support for the strikers.

By: but

but — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 17:17:41 +0000

online comments and internet polls are supposed to be even more biased by self selection, aren’t they? Can we really assume that Bwog commenters are representative of the entire student body?

By: well

well — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 17:11:52 +0000

the answer lies in the small number, 106. but when you consider how online comments are more like 99-1 against the strikers, at least now we know that there’s more than 1 person who supports them

By: Spec Poll

Spec Poll — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 16:48:27 +0000

wasn’t an internet poll. It’s on the front page from a sample of 106. If you think it innacurate, find out who did the poll and critique their methods.

By: these

these — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 16:30:57 +0000

speclines suck. is somebody training for daily editor today? aww. regardless, neither funny nor clear.

By: kulawik fan

kulawik fan — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 16:28:54 +0000

Chris Kulawik really did write a great column today. I especially enjoyed his choice of the word “coterie.”

By: Wait

Wait — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 16:27:07 +0000

I just went and looked at the polls, and they’re actually pretty solidly anti-strike. I still don’t think they’re statistically significant, but now your point is really off base.