top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 188 points 2 years ago (17 children)

Thanks for the 4 years tuition though!

I could see them barring them from walking for their degree, but to hold it completely is messed up. Bullshit that ‘the corporation’ overruled the faculty vote.

  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 57 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    The fun thing is that people say "I graduated" or "I'm graduating" but it's technically more correct to say "I am being graduated (by the university)." I might be mixing it up a bit, but the idea is that the university always has the final say over whether or not you get that important piece of paper at the end.

    One of my teachers in high school taught us this, but I never actually thought I'd see it in action. It's cruel.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 35 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    Which is bullshit. If you got the grades and paid your tuition, a university should not be able to withhold your degree. They can ban you from the graduation ceremony, but that's it.

    It is crazy that a university hold such power over someone.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago*

    Harvard doesn't give grades. You either pass, fail, or pass with honors, more or less entirely at the whim of your professors.

    It's much more of a social club than a school, and being denied a degree is more akin to having your country club membership revoked than your credentials refuted.

    It's almost pro-forma, as the real benefit of attending Harvard is rubbing shoulders with the children of billionaires. The goal is to find someone willing to become your financial patron, not to hold a piece of paper confirming that you did all your homework.

    If these kids are on the outs with the school board, they've already been blacklisted by anyone that matters.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • [–] 23 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    Headline is misleading. The article notes that they arent necessarily withholding them permanently, but because they are going through the disciplinary process, and so currently not in good standing, they can't get them at graduation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 134 points 2 years ago (11 children)

    This is what happens at Harvard when you try to do good. Look at their alumni. Filled with IRL super villains.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    Super villains and comedians. Sometimes combinations of both, as in the case of BJ Novak.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    BJ Novak is a supervillain...?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 92 points 2 years ago

    Fucking pathetic

  • source
  • [–] 65 points 2 years ago

    Look, the most important voices are the non-scholastic billionaire donors. Why would you care about the opinions of those engaged in pedagogy? This is a business, not a school!

  • source
  • [–] 48 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    Vile. I hope those students sue those bigoted, genocidal pigs into the dirt.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Ah, technically no grounds for lawsuit. Protesting on the institution's private property was against their code of conduct. Hopefully people start withdrawing support for Harvard, leading to declining business.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 40 points 2 years ago (27 children)

    If a dropout from Harvard starts a company doing literally anything then I would like to invest, please.

  • source
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 2 years ago (23 children)

    Dude. You just said you wanted to invest in Facebook 😬

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (21 children)

    Even now doing so would still be profitable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (2 children)
  • [–] 36 points 2 years ago

    Outrageous.

  • source
  • [–] 35 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    McCarthyism is well alive.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 33 points 2 years ago

    I can just see an alumni from another institution waiving their fees just to go after Harvard for this "decision".

  • source
  • [+] 31 points 2 years ago
    [removed by mod]
  • source
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago

    My read on the article was that this was the corporation tipping their hand on how that process was going to play out, but I could certainly be wrong. read to me like the faculty voted for them to graduate, but this was the board vetoing that and affirming that they were still to be dealt with, and that the consequences were going to be grim. Hopefully that’s not the case.

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago (4 children)
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago
    [–] 10 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    So they aren't being given their first amendment rights... Oh boy I can't wait to see how this plays out at other companies.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Harvard isn't a government funded organization, so the first amendment doesn't apply. Hopefully the students find a way to sue based on the college's own rules though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Well, technically, they do receive some government funding but the terms of the funds being allotted don't include adherence to the first amendment. It's not an entity controlled by state or federal government directly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Then all gov't funding should stop immediately.

    If a business doesn't want to follow the Constitution, it gets zero tax dollars.

    Btw as a Canadian I'm amazed that private businesses have this option at all. It makes no logical sense.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago*

    Businesses "follow the constitution" here. The nuance is that the first amendment (freedom of speech) explicitly only applies to consequences from government. As a private corporation, the people running Harvard have the right to their own speech, in this case: a policy denying graduation, without consequence from the government.

    I in no way endorse the speech that Harvard is expressing, but I do have the right to impose my own consequences on them for it (I.E not supporting things they do financially, disparaging them in an online forum like Lemmy, etc). The constitution prevents the US government from punishing Harvard for these actions in the same ways, unless a law has explicitly been broken.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›