Endorsement? Or No?

The Daily Cal has this endorsement for the GA-MOU referendum. While titled "No Endorsement," the piece ends with "Vote NO on the Graduate Assembly referendum," which I guess makes it a "'NO' endorsement." Or something. I dunno. The RSF endorsement isn't a "Yes Endorsement," though. The endorsement of the RSF referendum is pretty poorly thought-out. It essentially says "helps people, therefore we should fund it," without any consideration of what the role of mandatory student fees should be. The other argument is "everyone else is doing it." Whoopdie fucking do. Everyone else is idiotic. We aren't discussing what everyone else should do, we're discussing what Cal should do.

The comparison to Class Pass is fairly apt, but one could argue that it's tough to engage in academic study when you can't get to campus at all. The same could be argued for many other services. Tutoring services relate pretty closely with the academic mission of campus, for example. The RSF, however, does not. A lack of RSF access will not kill campus academics.

posted by Beetle Aurora Drake 4/25/2006 11:30:00 AM #
Comments (2)

. . .

Comments:

Well, that's a weird apparent mistake by the Daily Cal, but I'm not complaining. :)

# posted by  jimf : 5:43 PM, April 25, 2006

 

Okay, now I AM complaining because what they really intended was truly "No endorsement" and their text didn't match up to that.

Weird!!

# posted by  jimf : 3:50 PM, April 26, 2006

 

Post a Comment