• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Harvard boots 10 admitted high schoolers due to their god-awful memes

J

jmood88

Member
The craziest thing to me is that they were in Facebook and not Snapchat. I work with high schoolers and whenever anyone brings up Facebook they roll their eyes and talk about how only old people use it nowadays.
 
K

kswiston

Member
Slayven said:
Folks got to learn the internet is real life now
Click to expand...

It's nuts that current kids, who are basically growing up on the net, don't know these things. No way that you make it to 18 now without having some sort of online drama spill out into real life.
 
C

Cagey

Banned
Snowman Prophet of Doom said:
They're a private university and can kick people out for almost any reason they deem acceptable, but being an edgelord dummy in a private Facebook group is kind of a flimsy one.
Click to expand...

Elite universities' admissions committees see themselves as horticulturists, carefully and artistically devising a garden of students for a delightful mosaic of people*. These kids are like a diseased plant that would negatively effect the surrounding the plants, so Harvard is simply avoiding planting them.

*except for the diverse experiences of the poor because working two jobs in high school out of familial necessity, rather than Model UN and first-chair county violin is just tacky, and East/South Asians are bamboo: once it gets a foothold, it grows much too quickly and threatens to overtake the tulips and daisies, so make sure to keep it strictly under control
 
P

pastrami

Member
"The student spoke only on the condition of anonymity because they did not want to be publicly identified with the messages."

Maybe, just maybe, if don't want to be associated with the things you are saying, you shouldn't be saying those things in the first place?
 
T

Toxi

Banned
pastrami said:
"The student spoke only on the condition of anonymity because they did not want to be publicly identified with the messages."

Maybe, just maybe, if don't want to be associated with the things you are saying, you shouldn't be saying those things in the first place?
Click to expand...
That makes too much sense
 
B

Brawly Likes to Brawl

Member
kswiston said:
It's nuts that current kids, who are basically growing up on the net, don't know these things. No way that you make it to 18 now without having some sort of online drama spill out into real life.
Click to expand...

It was only a few years ago that actual conversations about online behavior have even started, yet alone being taken seriously. A lot of people still think that whatever you do behind a computer screen doesn't matter.
 
S

Snowman Prophet of Doom

Member
Toxi said:
"Being an edgelord dummy" is one way to downplay this I guess.
Click to expand...

I am unconvinced that finding offensive memes to be either funny or a source of competition (i.e. who can ramp things up the most) will necessarily extrapolate to harmful interpersonal behavior in more public spheres. I do not particularly care what people do in private as long as it doesn't affect others, call it the residual libertarian in me from my younger years that lingers despite my growth toward dirty socialism. I read the article, what they were posting disgusts me, but I have the right of non-affiliation and don't particularly desire administrative redress toward that inner feeling of disgust.

Cagey said:
Elite universities' admissions committees see themselves as horticulturists, carefully and artistically devising a garden of students for a delightful mosaic of people*. These kids are like a diseased plant that would negatively effect the surrounding the plants, so Harvard is simply avoiding planting them.

*except for the diverse experiences of the poor because working two jobs in high school out of familial necessity, rather than Model UN and first-chair county violin is just tacky, and East/South Asians are bamboo: once it gets a foothold, it grows much too quickly and threatens to overtake the tulips and daisies, so make sure to keep it strictly under control
Click to expand...

I understand this, which is why I say it is of course their right as a private university (though they'd get the shit sued out of them if they were public, in all likelihood).
 
N

Nowise10

Member
I don't know what is with people and thinking "dank memes" are funny just because they are extremely offensive. Was in a group on Discord with some online buddies who had a meme channel and they just posted the most offensive and sometimes gory/disgusting shit memes, as if they were funny just because they were offensive.
 
X

xenist

Member
Nice job associating Harvard with your stupid shit thereby making sure they're obligated to take action. Idiots.
 
S

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
They could have sidestepped this problem entirely by just asking people on their initial application if they use 4chan and rejecting everyone who answers yes.
 
T

theWB27

Member
Snowman Prophet of Doom said:
I am unconvinced that finding offensive memes to be either funny or a source of competition (i.e. who can ramp things up the most) will necessarily extrapolate to harmful interpersonal behavior in more public spheres. I do not particularly care what people do in private as long as it doesn't affect others, call it the residual libertarian in me from my younger years that lingers despite my growth toward dirty socialism. I read the article, what they were posting disgusts me, but I have the right of non-affiliation and don't particularly desire administrative redress toward that inner feeling of disgust.



I understand this, which is why I say it is of course their right as a private university (though they'd get the shit sued out of them if they were public, in all likelihood).
Click to expand...

I love this line when it's thrown in as if we have a mechanism that can pinpoint that exact moment where private BS becomes harm to others. But carry on.
 
L

louiedog

Member
These poor kids have had their futures ruined! They aren't racists*. They just think all of the stuff that racists believe is amusing and fun to repeat and spread!

*but seriously they are
 
S

Syriel

Member
Deepwater said:
Did I say it was a free speech issue or did I simply insinuate that someone would make it a free speech issue?

Reading is fundamental.
Click to expand...

Sorry. When I first read through the thread, I read that as you wanting someone to make the argument.

So many people misunderstand the first amendment, it's kind of a rote response by now.
 
Z

Zaru

Member
Someone explain to me why students have admission offers for 2021
We're not even halfway through 2017
 
C

Cagey

Banned
Snowman Prophet of Doom said:
I understand this, which is why I say it is of course their right as a private university (though they'd get the shit sued out of them if they were public, in all likelihood).
Click to expand...

I'm sure we'll see lawsuits filed here, but I'm not sure what the relevancy of public v. private would do for an admissions committee rescinding admissions because of offensive material posted online.

Despite "free speech" becoming a meme around here, I don't see rescinding admissions for offensive behavior as involving students' constitutional rights. Maybe there's an argument the students obtained a constitutional property interest upon getting admitted that a public university can't revoke without a level of due process, but that feels like a stretch of the concept.
 
A

Alter_Fridge

Member
Hollywood Duo said:
378877.jpg
Click to expand...

I just figured out what Yalie means lol
 
S

Snowman Prophet of Doom

Member
Cagey said:
I'm sure we'll see lawsuits filed here, but I'm not sure what the relevancy of public v. private would do for an admissions committee rescinding admissions because of offensive material posted online.

Despite "free speech" becoming a meme around here, I don't see rescinding admissions for offensive behavior as involving students' constitutional rights. Maybe there's an argument the students obtained a constitutional property interest upon getting admitted that a public university can't revoke without a level of due process, but that feels like a stretch of the concept.
Click to expand...

I have to imagine that rescinding a (theoretically merit-based) offer of admission on the basis of private, protected speech would likely not look great in a courtroom, based on my understanding of how vigorously protected speech has been protected in public institutions by the courts in the past. Of course, if they had known beforehand and refused the offer with that knowledge, they'd be legally in the clear because nobody could prove it was primarily because of that, but after the admission, it certainly reads as something taxpayer-funded taking punitive action on the basis of protected speech, which seems, in principle, to be the kind of behavior courts have ruled negatively against colleges on in cases I'm aware of. (It's for this same reason that public institutions' "diversity codes" are often window dressing, as courts have ruled students can't be punished for protected speech by schools in the past.) At the very least, I think there would be a case to be made, though of course the smart, moral thing would be for the kids to take the L and not be such morons next time.
 
Grizzlyjin

Grizzlyjin

Supersonic, idiotic, disconnecting, not respecting, who would really ever wanna go and top that
I worked for my university in new student orientation for 4 years and this kinda crap became a big problem for us too. The new class would setup a Facebook group, they'd start off polite asking questions about what school is like and then they'd form online cliques and start attacking people. We had to start preemptively creating the upcoming group ourselves to make sure we had the most popular one and also admin controls.
 
E

excelsiorlef

Member
Snowman Prophet of Doom said:
I have to imagine that rescinding a (theoretically merit-based) offer of admission on the basis of private, protected speech would likely not look great in a courtroom, based on my understanding of how vigorously protected speech has been protected in public institutions by the courts in the past. Of course, if they had known beforehand and refused the offer with that knowledge, they'd be legally in the clear because nobody could prove it was primarily because of that, but after the admission, it certainly reads as something taxpayer-funded taking punitive action on the basis of protected speech, which seems, in principle, to be the kind of behavior courts have ruled negatively against colleges on in cases I'm aware of. (It's for this same reason that public institutions' "diversity codes" are often window dressing, as courts have ruled students can't be punished for protected speech by schools in the past.) At the very least, I think there would be a case to be made, though of course the smart, moral thing would be for the kids to take the L and not be such morons next time.
Click to expand...

Your character factors into admissions.
 
H

Hazmat

Member
Man, you work hard your whole life (or have rich parents) and you fuck up your life because you're still the kind of idiot teenager that thinks offending people is funny. Tough break, Cornell class of 2022.
 
P

Palmer_v1

Member
Title is somewhat misleading right? They weren't booted for memes. They were booted for being sexist, racist, assholes.
 
B

Bronx-Man

Banned
Imagine hearing your kid made it into Harvard and then didn't because they decided be a bigoted dipshit on Facebook.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Snowman Prophet of Doom said:
I have to imagine that rescinding a (theoretically merit-based) offer of admission on the basis of private, protected speech would likely not look great in a courtroom, based on my understanding of how vigorously protected speech has been protected in public institutions by the courts in the past. Of course, if they had known beforehand and refused the offer with that knowledge, they'd be legally in the clear because nobody could prove it was primarily because of that, but after the admission, it certainly reads as something taxpayer-funded taking punitive action on the basis of protected speech, which seems, in principle, to be the kind of behavior courts have ruled negatively against colleges on in cases I'm aware of. (It's for this same reason that public institutions' "diversity codes" are often window dressing, as courts have ruled students can't be punished for protected speech by schools in the past.) At the very least, I think there would be a case to be made, though of course the smart, moral thing would be for the kids to take the L and not be such morons next time.
Click to expand...

Wait, Harvard is not taxpayer funded. Some students are taxpayer funded, but that's not the same thing, unless you're suggesting Harvard kick low-income students out of the school so that they can maintain legal control over their campus.

Bronx-Man said:
Imagine hearing your kid made it into Harvard and then didn't because they decided be a bigoted dipshit on Facebook.
Click to expand...

To be honest, I suspect most of the parents are going to be thinking "Oh, not again."
 
K

KimiNewt

Scored 3/100 on an Exam
Grizzlyjin said:
I worked for my university in new student orientation for 4 years and this kinda crap became a big problem for us too. The new class would setup a Facebook group, they'd start off polite asking questions about what school is like and then they'd form online cliques and start attacking people. We had to start preemptively creating the upcoming group ourselves to make sure we had the most popular one and also admin controls.
Click to expand...

What the hell? I've been a first-year in university for the past two years (changed universities and majors) and I haven't seen any of that sort of behaviour (and every year has their facebook group).

I assume that's in the US?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

What actually happened to Warren Ellis?
14
2K
CGNoire replied
University of California system eliminates SAT and ACT admission requirements
36
2K
daveonezero replied
Satya Nadella: Annual letter to stockholders. Content on new platforms will continue
4 5 6 7 8
352
19K
noob smokes replied
Tomorrow is the 15th anniversary of Mother 3's Japanese release.
20
4K
Velius replied
  • Locked
Students expelled after Facebook group calls for 'execution' of Jews, black people
2 3
108
8K
Dryk replied
Top Bottom