527
submitted 5 months ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] KnitWit@lemmy.world 188 points 5 months ago

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.

[-] Etterra@lemmy.world 70 points 5 months ago

And that's why nobody should ever go to a fot-profit school.

[-] spamfajitas@lemmy.world 57 points 5 months ago

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.

[-] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 35 points 5 months ago

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.

[-] jaybone@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago

Seems like a lawsuit waiting to happen.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months 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.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 23 points 5 months ago

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.

[-] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 15 points 5 months ago

Similar to Israel telling Palestinians that they can't have a state "right now" and have to come to "agreeable" terms first.

If there is no term given it means permanently.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 134 points 5 months ago

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

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 29 points 5 months ago

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

[-] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

BJ Novak is a supervillain...?

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago

Nah, just being silly lol.

The REAL Harvard educated comedian who's also a super villain is Conan O'Brien, of course 😉

[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago

How dare you insult the 11th president of Finland like that.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Juice@midwest.social 11 points 5 months ago

I will reluctantly admit that there are good activists who come from Harvard. I work with some and know of many more. But the vast majority is just like you describe

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ChihuahuaOfDoom@lemmy.world 92 points 5 months ago

Fucking pathetic

[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 65 points 5 months 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!

[-] Veraxus@lemmy.world 48 points 5 months ago

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

[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 24 points 5 months ago

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.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

Lol bullshit. This board decision is literally unprecedented. Even in the face of previous student protests. It's a complete rug pull after a massive time and financial investment. I can't remember the name right now but that's 100 percent actionable in US courts.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 40 points 5 months ago

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

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 21 points 5 months ago

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

[-] echodot@feddit.uk 10 points 5 months ago

Even now doing so would still be profitable.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 10 points 5 months ago

Yeah, but you'd be profiting from a platform that has repeatedly enabled genocide and other human rights violations, election fraud and the like. And Zuckerberg shows no sign of ever letting them stop as long as it continues to drive engagement and therefore be profitable.

Do you really want that blood money?

load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] YtA4QCam2A9j7EfTgHrH@infosec.pub 36 points 5 months ago

Outrageous.

[-] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 35 points 5 months ago

McCarthyism is well alive.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] vk6flab@lemmy.radio 33 points 5 months ago

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

[-] KnitWit@lemmy.world 20 points 5 months 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.

[-] snooggums@midwest.social 19 points 5 months ago
[-] Eyck_of_denesle@lemmy.zip 9 points 5 months ago

High time people use this word

[-] Gerudo@lemm.ee 9 points 5 months ago

I don't even think you have to go that far. You paid money, you earned grades, you graduate. It's almost like a contract?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] metaStatic@kbin.social 5 points 5 months ago

I remember that word

[-] FaizalR@kbin.social 17 points 5 months ago
[-] Warjac@lemmy.world 10 points 5 months ago

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.

[-] the_joeba@lemmy.world 32 points 5 months ago

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.

[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 7 points 5 months ago

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.

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 4 points 5 months ago

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.

[-] Dran_Arcana@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months 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.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 23 May 2024
527 points (98.3% liked)

News

23296 readers
928 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS