Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marers)
    Calm down "Slightly more fancily than usual". Lol! Who cares whether they are long-planned? That wasn't part of the author's argument for the sociopathy.



    I'm sure the committee members slog like navvies, but are you sure this statement is correct? It would imply that if a student who can't afford to buy a full ticket to their college's May Ball applies to get in by the work route, by doing some paid skivvying, they're told "No, sorry, we'll employ students from other colleges but not members of this one".


    How common of them. I knew there was something that distinguished them from those who try to do one every night who can afford it.
    The difference is that everyone can budget for may balls in advance. If there were a culture in which you were expected to go out and spend £200 in a night without warning I'd understand the complaint, but there isn't.

    They're permitted to, it just doesn't really happen in my experience, partly because of the above factor.

    It's not a criticism, it's just a choice. I didn't do five may balls on the trot because I couldn't justify the expenditure. Others decided to work to reduce it. That's fine. There's nothing oppressive about being given the option to pick up rubbish for a few hours to save a few pounds.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    The difference is that everyone can budget for may balls in advance.
    For example they could eat cheaper food, buy fewer books, write their notes in smaller handwriting, or buy their clothes at jumble sales, to save up £200 over the course of the academic year. And although Cambridge students aren't allowed to do paid work during termtime without special dispensation (unlike most undergraduates elsewhere in Britain, some of whom work in supermarkets), I don't think there is a University regulation that forbids them from begging on the streets either. So the message to poorer students is this. You want to go to a May Ball with the posh kids? And you've got some kind of problem with skivvying for them, picking up the rubbish they chuck on the ground? Then plan ahead, eat less, and save up!
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marers)
    For example they could eat cheaper food, buy fewer books, write their notes in smaller handwriting, or buy their clothes at jumble sales, to save up £200 over the course of the academic year. And although Cambridge students aren't allowed to do paid work during termtime without special dispensation (unlike most undergraduates elsewhere in Britain, some of whom work in supermarkets), I don't think there is a University regulation that forbids them from begging on the streets either. So the message to poorer students is this. You want to go to a May Ball with the posh kids? And you've got some kind of problem with skivvying for them, picking up the rubbish they chuck on the ground? Then plan ahead, eat less, and save up!
    You're describing a world that doesn't exist (in quite silly terms, too). With student loans and (importantly) the Cambridge bursaries people manage to find the money. For those who actually come from poorer backgrounds, with the extra loans and chunk of bursary they'll have they really shouldn't have any problems in setting aside a couple of weeks worth of rent over the course of a year. I'm sure there is the odd exception to this, but I'd wager that most would come from the Squeezed Middle.

    Besides, I'm not really sure what your point is. Yes, in the real world, most people don't have infinite money and have to prioritise their spending and choose some things to forgo. I'm sorry that economic scarcity upsets you but you're going to have to live with it for some years to come yet.

    Apparently people can find reasons to whine about anything. Having a big party at the end of a long period of very stressful exam prep? Very 'problematic'!
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    His LinkedIn says he's an intern with a media company in London now, so he landed back on earth apparently
    An earth where it is possible to live with one's rent exceeding one's salary (if any).


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marers)
    Practically all colleges write to their student members at that time of year to say don't damage the university and college brands by abusing alcohol until you vomit in the street, and don't otherwise behave as if you and your mates own the world where commoners can see you - because a journo might put you in the papers if you do.
    Yes, the critiques seemed to focus on lavishness rather than drunken / arrogant behaviour more in my experience, but perhaps these things change from year to year and ball to ball. It's not like there's a whole army of hard bitten tabloid reptiles hiding in the grass waiting to write up the "toffs behave like toffs" story. Usually the one that hits the national press is the ridiculous Cambridge thing involving drunken acts of nakedness.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    An earth where it is possible to live with one's rent exceeding one's salary (if any).


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Lol, welcome to London. Other cities may be available.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    Very Important Poster
    Out of interest are the Uni or more likely the college taking disciplinary action against the person concerned? I gathered there were people at Pembroke posting on the thread. I only asked as someone bumped it.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    Out of interest are the Uni or more likely the college taking disciplinary action against the person concerned? I gathered there were people at Pembroke posting on the thread. I only asked as someone bumped it.
    The College. Cambridge University's disciplinary processes are very cumbersome and tend to be invoked only if there is no alternative.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    The College. Cambridge University's disciplinary processes are very cumbersome and tend to be invoked only if there is no alternative.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Usually I'd agree but I think given the adverse publicity this has had against the university rather than the college (which in the general public's mind are one and the same thing) I think the Proctors might show a little more interest than usual.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    The College. Cambridge University's disciplinary processes are very cumbersome and tend to be invoked only if there is no alternative.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Do you know if they have been invoked or are they making their minds up? It cant be doing his studies any good.
    • Section Leader
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    Pembroke have said:

    The incident involving Ronald Coyne burning a £20 note in front of a homeless person is now subject to a University disciplinary investigation, according to a statement released today by Pembroke College.

    On the College's Facebook page, the statement reads: "We are aware of an incident that took place in the early hours of Thursday 2nd February 2017. This incident has been referred to the University's disciplinary process. We cannot comment further while this process is underway."



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    Pembroke have said:

    The incident involving Ronald Coyne burning a £20 note in front of a homeless person is now subject to a University disciplinary investigation, according to a statement released today by Pembroke College.

    On the College's Facebook page, the statement reads: "We are aware of an incident that took place in the early hours of Thursday 2nd February 2017. This incident has been referred to the University's disciplinary process. We cannot comment further while this process is underway."



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I am clearly wrong on this.

    However, the University is going to have a job putting the square peg of this student's behaviour into either of the round holes of:-

    1 No member of the University shall intentionally or recklessly disrupt or impede or attempt to disrupt or impede the activities and functions of the University, or any part thereof, or of any College.

    This was never intended to catch the activities of persuading rich benefactors to give Cambridge money or of persuading poor teenagers to apply to study there.

    6 No member of the University shall engage in harassment in the course of an academic, sporting, social, cultural, or other activity either within the Precincts of the University or elsewhere in the context of her or his membership of the University or in circumstances where the victim of the harassment is a member, officer, or employee of the University or a College. Harassment shall include single or repeated incidents involving unwanted and unwarranted conduct towards another person which is reasonably likely to have the effect of (i) violating that other’s dignity or (ii) creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment for that other.

    Was this behaviour in the course of a social activity or following a social activity? Was the behaviour in the context of his membership of the University? Clearly the Ordinance envisages a member of the University harassing within the Precincts of the University but not in the context of his membership of the University.
    • Section Leader
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    I am clearly wrong on this.

    However, the University is going to have a job putting the square peg of this student's behaviour into either of the round holes of:-

    1 No member of the University shall intentionally or recklessly disrupt or impede or attempt to disrupt or impede the activities and functions of the University, or any part thereof, or of any College.

    This was never intended to catch the activities of persuading rich benefactors to give Cambridge money or of persuading poor teenagers to apply to study there.

    No member of the University shall engage in harassment in the course of an academic, sporting, social, cultural, or other activity either within the Precincts of the University or elsewhere in the context of her or his membership of the University or in circumstances where the victim of the harassment is a member, officer, or employee of the University or a College. Harassment shall include single or repeated incidents involving unwanted and unwarranted conduct towards another person which is reasonably likely to have the effect of (i) violating that other’s dignity or (ii) creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment for that other.

    Was this behaviour in the course of a social activity or following a social activity? Was the behaviour in the context of his membership of the University? Clearly the Ordinance envisages a member of the University harassing within the Precincts of the University but not in the context of his membership of the University.
    Isn't there a more general "behaviour likely to bring the university into disrepute"?
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    Isn't there a more general "behaviour likely to bring the university into disrepute"?
    If there is, I couldn't find it
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    Unis are private charities. As part of enrolling you agree to abide by their rules and regs. Oxbridge have comprehensive rules and regs or rather the colleges do. If you behave in a manner which reflects badly on them, then they arent going to be pleased. They didnt ask to be dragged into it. Wait and see what action they take.
    Again, my point wasn't over the legal minutiae of what the university is legally allowed to do, but rather over what I think they ought to be allowed to do.

    Do I agree with his behaviour? No, but it wasn't criminal, it wasn't done in the context of his being a student (which is to say it wasn't done in his college, lecture hall, tutorial etc.). He was a private citizen who did something dickish. I think it is an overreach for any institution to punish him for that. I'm well aware that Oxford and Cambridge are famously controlling over their students personal lives, but I don't think we can draw an is from an ought. Just because these universities ARE this way doesn't mean they should be or that it is right for them to be.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by limetang)
    Again, my point wasn't over the legal minutiae of what the university is legally allowed to do, but rather over what I think they ought to be allowed to do.

    Do I agree with his behaviour? No, but it wasn't criminal, it wasn't done in the context of his being a student (which is to say it wasn't done in his college, lecture hall, tutorial etc.). He was a private citizen who did something dickish. I think it is an overreach for any institution to punish him for that. I'm well aware that Oxford and Cambridge are famously controlling over their students personal lives, but I don't think we can draw an is from an ought. Just because these universities ARE this way doesn't mean they should be or that it is right for them to be.
    It doesnt have to be criminal it just has to bring the college into disrepute, which he has done by dragging the name of the college into matters. It would be exacty the same for an employee doing the same outside their workplace. I have no idea what action is being taken, but will agree to differ with you and think its quite right he is sanctioned, even though you think he shouldnt be.

    I am now looking at the previous posts which appear to identify the rules he may have broken.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    If there is, I couldn't find it
    I'm surprised there isnt a more general disrepute rule. Thanks for posting what you found. I wonder if the person in question is busy scouring the rules? I will wait and see what the uni decide to do, its old news now.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    I'm surprised there isnt a more general disrepute rule. Thanks for posting what you found. I wonder if the person in question is busy scouring the rules? I will wait and see what the uni decide to do, its old news now.
    Interestingly Pembroke has a much more apt rule:-

    "In practice, alcohol consumption, to excess, produces more social damage thanany other factor. Routinely, we impose sanctions for this when it extends to
    the level of infringing the liberty, or well-being, of others. These sanctions can
    be quite severe. It is only logical, therefore, if we impose sanctions upon other
    forms of substance abuse."

    I suspect academics are wary of the "bringing into disrepute" type charge because of the concern that it may be used to limit academic freedom.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    19
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by nulli tertius)
    Interestingly Pembroke has a much more apt rule:-

    "In practice, alcohol consumption, to excess, produces more social damage thanany other factor. Routinely, we impose sanctions for this when it extends to
    the level of infringing the liberty, or well-being, of others. These sanctions can
    be quite severe. It is only logical, therefore, if we impose sanctions upon other
    forms of substance abuse."

    I suspect academics are wary of the "bringing into disrepute" type charge because of the concern that it may be used to limit academic freedom.

    I misread. I missed the fact the rules were from the Uni. I thought Pembroke were in a much better position to issue any sanction. I do feel it is yesterdays news, but will be interesting to see how it pans out. Surely all the attention on the student concerned must have a massive impact on his studies? Maybe he could do with the extra time? I dont think it will have a long lasting effect on his career.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    I misread. I missed the fact the rules were from the Uni. I thought Pembroke were in a much better position to issue any sanction. I do feel it is yesterdays news, but will be interesting to see how it pans out. Surely all the attention on the student concerned must have a massive impact on his studies? Maybe he could do with the extra time? I dont think it will have a long lasting effect on his career.
    Pembroke are in a better position to act but it appears from what
    Doonesbury posted the university is taking the lead.
 
 
 
Poll
Favourite type of bread
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.