Israel vs Palestinians

#24,652
#24,652
EasternVol said:
Did they FA? It would be good to know what the deans wrote that earned them censure. What little I've seen that's been released is snarky but don't seem antisemetic.
Click to expand...
Maybe Columbia expects a higher degree of professionalism and maturity from their deans. Perhaps snarky comments are not part of the University's culture?

The FA assessment was made by the employer. The employees FO
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol since 77, MR_VOL, Rocky_Top_Vol13 and 2 others
#24,653
#24,653
McDad said:
Maybe Columbia expects a higher degree of professionalism and maturity from their deans. Perhaps snarky comments are not part of the University's culture?

The FA assessment was made by the employer. The employees FO
Click to expand...
They're not being censured for snark though. Is the assessment correct?
 
#24,655
#24,655
McDad said:
Your opinion is that it is snark. That obviously isn't Columbia's opinion.

I was taking your opinion and making a case the employer can (or should be able to) terminate if they so choose.
Click to expand...
You're twisting words. I said I haven't seen all the comments in question but what I have seen doesn't seem to be antisemetic.
Employers can and do terminate but not always with justification. We all know that universities, even private ones, are political organizations.
 
#24,656
#24,656
EasternVol said:
You're twisting words.
Click to expand...
Am I?

Here's my view on where you and I are right now.
- Tweet says Columbia releasing 3 deans for disparaging remarks
- I offer FAFO
- You say you think it's snarky but not antisemitic
- I say perhaps Columbia is anti snark
- You say they aren't being censured for snark
- I remind you that snark is your opinion of their comments.

Where exactly is the twist?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MR_VOL, Orangeslice13, Vol8188 and 1 other person
#24,657
#24,657
McDad said:
Am I?

Here's my view on where you and I are right now.
- Tweet says Columbia releasing 3 deans for disparaging remarks
- I offer FAFO
- You say you think it's snarky but not antisemitic
- I say perhaps Columbia is anti snark
- You say they aren't being censured for snark
- I remind you that snark is your opinion of their comments.

Where exactly is the twist?
Click to expand...
The twist is in the difference between 'all i've seen is snark but I haven't seen all of it' and 'you say it's just snark'.
 
#24,658
#24,658
EasternVol said:
The twist is in the difference between 'all i've seen is snark but I haven't seen all of it' and 'you say it's just snark'.
Click to expand...
But you haven't asked me if I believe the remarks to be antisemtic, disparaging, and/or snarky.

I am not saying the comments are snarky or antisemetic. I am saying if they made disparaging remarks, they FAFO.

Please help me understand where this convo got crossed up?
 
#24,659
#24,659
McDad said:
But you haven't asked me if I believe the remarks to be antisemtic, disparaging, and/or snarky.

I am not saying the comments are snarky or antisemetic. I am saying if they made disparaging remarks, they FAFO.

Please help me understand where this convo got crossed up?
Click to expand...
Good question. Columbia says they censured the deans for antisemetic comments. You said they FA&FO. I asked if they really FA. I took your answer to mean 'that's up to Columbia' which to me doesn't answer the question of whether they're guilty as accused.
Do you believe the remarks to be antisemetic, disparaging, and/or snarky?
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#24,660
#24,660
EasternVol said:
Good question. Columbia says they censured the deans for antisemetic comments. You said they FA&FO. I asked if they really FA. I took your answer to mean 'that's up to Columbia' which to me doesn't answer the question of whether they're guilty as accused.
Do you believe the remarks to be antisemetic, disparaging, and/or snarky?
Click to expand...
I don't believe the comments to be anything. I don't remember the comments. I remember at the height of it there were several universities with protests. I couldn't tell you which colleges were involved or what happened at each.

I was taking the NY Post at face value. The headline referenced disparaging remarks. I did not see a reference to antisemitic remarks in the NY Post headline.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EasternVol
#24,661
#24,661
Maybe I'm off base for assuming this, but I would have to assume that they have pretty good evidence to terminate the administration in question.
 
#24,662
#24,662
EasternVol said:
Did they FA? It would be good to know what the deans wrote that earned them censure. What little I've seen that's been released is snarky but don't seem antisemetic.
Click to expand...
I don’t recall you deeming anything that’s come out of the campus tantrums as “antisemitic”, so I personally wouldn’t expect you to find this to rise to that level either.

What they wrote was clearly dismissive, mocking, and filled with contempt for their Jewish students and colleagues pain.

If you want to classify that as “snarky”, that’s certainly your prerogative.

Columbia clearly felt it was theirs to strip them of their posts as Dean.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol8188
#24,663
#24,663
85SugarVol said:
I don’t recall you deeming anything that’s come out of the campus tantrums as “antisemitic”, so I personally wouldn’t expect you to find this to rise to that level either.

What they wrote was clearly dismissive, mocking, and filled with contempt for their Jewish students and colleagues pain.

If you want to classify that as “snarky”, that’s certainly your prerogative.

Columbia clearly felt it was theirs to strip them of their posts as Dean.
Click to expand...
Hey @turbovol isht this your people? They owe you a refund
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol8188, McDad, Orangeslice13 and 1 other person
#24,666
#24,666
85SugarVol said:
I don’t recall you deeming anything that’s come out of the campus tantrums as “antisemitic”, so I personally wouldn’t expect you to find this to rise to that level either.

What they wrote was clearly dismissive, mocking, and filled with contempt for their Jewish students and colleagues pain.

If you want to classify that as “snarky”, that’s certainly your prerogative.

Columbia clearly felt it was theirs to strip them of their posts as Dean.
Click to expand...
I don't think I deemed what's come out of the campus protests much of anything one way or the other, but nice try on the dodge. It's notable that you call protesting mass killing of civilians a tantrum. I suppose you think it's only good if one side does it.
Since you know what they wrote why don't you share it?
Columbia apparently felt it's their prerogative but the question of whether it's justified remains.
 
#24,667
#24,667
EasternVol said:
I don't think I deemed what's come out of the campus protests much of anything one way or the other, but nice try on the dodge. It's notable that you call protesting mass killing of civilians a tantrum. I suppose you think it's only good if one side does it.
Since you know what they wrote why don't you share it?
Columbia apparently felt it's their prerogative but the question of whether it's justified remains.
Click to expand...
Yea, so you didn’t deem any of it as antisemitic. What did I dodge?

I shared what they wrote when it came out - it’s in the thread ;/

If they believe it’s unjustified maybe they’ll challenge it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol8188
#24,668
#24,668
85SugarVol said:
Yea, so you didn’t deem any of it as antisemitic. What did I dodge?

I shared what they wrote when it came out - it’s in the thread ;/

If they believe it’s unjustified maybe they’ll challenge it.
Click to expand...
Truth. I can shorten it to just 'nice try'. You implied I deemed something or things some protesters said that was antisemitic as not antisemitic. I don't recall deeming what protesters said as prosemitic or antisemitic or neutral.
I suppose they will if they don't get an agreeable settlement.
 
#24,669
#24,669
I think if we look comparatively at the decision Columbia made and applied the (disparaging, anti-_______, snarky) remarks to another group of people, we would see the decision was straightforward. If Deans make those same remarks about gay, female, black, immigrant, amish, or physically impaired students, Columbia would have reached the same conclusion.

In any business, It is generally frowned upon by ownership / leadership when staff disparages the customers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rocky_Top_Vol13, MR_VOL, 825VOL and 4 others
#24,670
#24,670
McDad said:
I think if we look comparatively at the decision Columbia made and applied the (disparaging, anti-_______, snarky) remarks to another group of people, we would see the decision was straightforward. If Deans make those same remarks about gay, female, black, immigrant, amish, or physically impaired students, Columbia would have reached the same conclusion.

In any business, It is generally frowned upon by ownership / leadership when staff disparages the customers.
Click to expand...
You're 100% right on this. From what I could dig up in a short period of time on what was actually texted by the deans, I wasn't necessarily convinced there was anything antisemitic involved, but disparaging the students that they were supposed to represent, undoubtedly happened.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#24,671
#24,671
EasternVol said:
Truth. I can shorten it to just 'nice try'. You implied I deemed something or things some protesters said that was antisemitic as not antisemitic. I don't recall deeming what protesters said as prosemitic or antisemitic or neutral.
I suppose they will if they don't get an agreeable settlement.
Click to expand...
I didn’t imply anything.

Why would they get a settlement? I believe they are still employed - just stripped of their positions as Dean
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top