And there was much rejoicing in frats and sororities across America: anonymous gossip forum JuicyCampus has gone out of business.

JuicyCampus is best (and only) remembered on Columbia’s campus for briefly surging in popularity after former CCSC president Michelle Diamond explored banning the site. When opposed on the grounds that this was “a university, not communist China,”  (not to mention that it would be nearly impossible to block) Diamond quickly backed off, and the site returned to obscurity.

In the end, though, the recession killed JuicyCampus. “In these historically difficult economic times, online ad revenue has plummeted and venture capital funding has dissolved,” wrote JuicyCampus “founder and CEO” Matt Ivester in a press release. “JuicyCampus’ exponential growth outpaced our ability to muster the resources needed to survive this economic downturn.” Every cloud really does have a silver lining.

UPDATE 2:42 PM: Damooei just called Bwog to inform us that the final word from Robert Taylor is that the Elections Board is not going to consider Krebs’ rules violation complaint because of the deal struck between Ness, Krebs, and Damooei. No idea what we’re talking about? Read on… 

The front page of today’s Spectator features an article about George Krebs’ plan to file a rules violation against Alidad Damooei in response to a comment made by outgoing CCSC President Michelle Diamond’s that Damooei and his party were “a stronger ticket.”

The Spec article (and Damooei, when Bwog spoke with him) claims that a rules violations deal was struck between Damooei and Krebs. The deal, which was facilitated by Elections Board Chair Andrew Ness, specified that Krebs would not file a rules violation against Diamond’s statements (Diamond is not allowed to endorse any candidate), if Damooei would not file a rules violation against Krebs’ party for posting a campaign flyer on the glass window of an EC computer lab, which is a violation.

According to Damooei, Ness explained to Krebs and him that if either of them were to file rules violations this late in the game, hours-long judicial hearings would prevent them from going outside and getting people to vote. Krebs and Damooei agreed that avoiding this was appealing, and the three shook hands.

Read more…

Bwog heard rumors from CCSC higher-ups that President Michelle Diamond has spoken to Dean Colombo about the feasibility of banning Juicy Campus from Columbia’s servers. He informed her that it’s both expensive and impossible to do—though Zach van Schouwen could have told her that weeks ago. Also, Columbia’s lawyers have advised against it—though, of course, the writers of the Constitution could have told her that hundreds of years ago. Mystery: solved. 

Anyway, Diamond is reportedly hoping to kick-start a campus-wide “pledge” against Juicy Campus, which would basically involve its signees agreeing to avoid reading the site. 

It’s really all just PR 101: If you circulate a campus-wide petition against something, it will quietly fade away.  

UDAPTE: Gothamist has a screen shot of Juicy Campus (!), and links to our coverage of the upheaval. You can read about it here. 

- JNW

Another certain gossipy website was the focus of last night’s CCSC meeting. Satow Room bureau chief Martha Turewicz reports. 

From the first few minutes of last night’s CCSC meeting, there some early indications of the intensity to come. Proceedings started a few minutes past 8, and while the next hour was lost to constitutional review, VP of Campus Life Lindsey Lazopoulos (who is always good for a quote) noted, “This is going to get heated.”

CCSC President Michelle Diamond, coming straight from a bridal shower, explained that she was going on 2 hours of sleep and had a thesis draft due the next day. If she became snappy, she warned: “It’s not personal.”

But around 9 PM the room suddenly filled with people eager to discuss the night’s pressing topic: juicycampus.com.   

Neda Navab and Diamond opened the discussion with unbiased terms, and asked that audience members’ comments go off the record, an attempt to establish a calm forum  swiftly undermined by John Davisson (former Spec Editor-in-Chief), who retorted that since this was a public forum, it couldn’t be treated as a closed discussion. Diamond rather tersely responded matter-of-factly that you could keep things off the record. Eventually, some sort of nebulous compromise was reached on the matter.

Read more…

The 2006-07 school year has contained multitudes. In fact, it may just be the most eventful year Columbia’s had since… well, the year before. Remember Matthew Fox? The Chung-Diamond “scandal”? “Don’t Be a Pussy”? “Epilogue to Our Crime & Punishment: A Petition“? Bwog certainly does, so step into the Wayback machine – you’re about to relive nine months of Columbia in a single post.

August

First-years move in. Orientation yields a legendary (to Bwog’s mind, at least) week-long burst of posting. Addison Anderson went to a bunch of bars in the name of “journalism.” Most literary post: “And now for some disorientation,” which reads like early Bret Easton Ellis, if he knew about Koronet’s. Orientation week was the best.

 

September

Facebook went literally insane. Then calmed down somewhat. Harvard abandoned ED; Columbia did not. Columbia Football had as-yet uncrushed high hopes, later crushed. Seth Flaxman declared victory. Best villains: Zuckerberg! Murphy! Ahmadinejad! You know, one of those.

October

Everything was coming up roses for Mark Modesitt. 1968 spirit was invoked by Jim Gilchrist. The fallout was immense – shady disciplinary letters, “news” coverage of all sorts (Jon Stewart, Fox News). Even Bwog had an opinion. But October wasn’t all about relevant television coverage of Columbia issues with high production values – we also had “The Gates”!

Best correspondence to Bwog: “Subject: terrorists. your worse then the mooselums who flew the planes into the buildings” Read more…

The debate among e-board candidates Tracy Chung, Michelle Diamond, and Natali Segovia took place Monday night in Carman lounge, redolent with the scent of JJ’s chicken fingers. All parties presented initially campaigns centered around a rhetorical motif of sorts. Chung’s Rebel CC campaign spoke first, with the theme of “rebelling against the status quo and bureaucratization of a body that should be a true representation of student activities.” Segovia’s Voice spoke to themes of “diversity,” consistently hitting upon the diversity of experience and backgrounds of the ticket members. The party even tied advising reform into diversity: “We all have diverse interests that can be better served by the advising system.” One Columbia, the most polished of the three parties, wanted a stronger and more connected Columbia, with each member introducing themselves by saying, “My name is ____, and I want to build a stronger community by…” The ideas were not earth-shatteringly different (though neither of the other two parties introduced environmental issues) but the tableau was hard to ignore.
After the jump, the major promises made by each ticket:

Read more…

One Columbia Presidential candidate Michelle Diamond has informed Bwog that she was cleared of all three rules violations filed against her. Spec has the story here. Bwog will update shortly with a recap of the debate.

A Diamond Under Pressure

Diamond is a Campus Paper’s Best Friend 

Diamonds in the rough not worth breaking the rules 

It is hard to make any more “Diamond” puns, but read about this chess grandmaster.

“Columbia got some wood at the 2007 NCAA Championships.”

Having garnered seven big-name endorsements, including that of the Columbia Political Union, Michelle Diamond ’08 is widely considered the frontrunner in the upcoming CCSC elections. However, it is just those endorsements that have placed her and her party, One Columbia, under fire for accusations of wrongdoing.

Rebel CC Presidential candidate Tracy Chung ’08 filed three rules violations against Diamond at midnight on Monday. The primary violation, which was provided to Bwog, alleges that SGB treasurer Jonathan Siegel (also the CC 2008 class treasurer) and SGB representative Jessie Leiken had approached Diamond with an “endorsement deal” early in the campaign.

In a previously unpublished Bwog interview that took place in February, Siegel discussed past funding difficulties: “In the past, the relations between the SGB [which provides funding for groups such as the College Democrats and the Columbia Political Union] and the Council haven’t been very good.”

The Student Council cut the SGB budget at the end of 2002-2003 school year and had continued to cut $20,000 each subsequent year, forcing the SGB into debt. Last May, the SGB told Seth Flaxman’s administration that $140,000 was the smallest number they could survive on. According to Siegel, the group was given $139,000. Sunday night, he said, “SGB groups are independent and wouldn’t take their marching orders from us.” But, he added, “SGB groups do care about how SGB is funded.” Read more…

Bwog presents the second of our three interviews with CCSC candidates – tonight, One Columbia’s Michelle Diamond (pictured, third from left, with running mates).

How have you been doing?

I’m doing very well. It’s a crazy, crazy crunch time – but the part of the campaign I really like. I get to present to different clubs, and see what people like.

What clubs in particular?

We’ve gotten endorsements from the Blue Key Society, College Democrats, Korean Students Association, Political Science Students Association, SEEJ, and the Econ Society. Tonight, we’re presenting to the CPU, CQA, and IGC. [Editor’s Note: This interview took place March 21 – in the interim, the Columbia Political Union has endorsed One Columbia.]

What ideas have the clubs responded to most strongly?

The idea of building a stronger community really struck a chord with these clubs. The fact that there’s not enough intergroup communication is even a bigger issue than I had originally realized.

Read more…