Tonight at 7: Writing to excess about something I have no stake in.
Having heard through the grapevine about the whole hayfield_ap community controversy, I decided to investigate, an obvious byproduct of my inundating myself with Law & Order upon my return to Virginia.
Or I may just be too absorbed in House of Leaves and need to analyze everything.
Anyway.
Aside from first-hand observation, the editorializing below is based the entries of two of my friends and comments on those.
There are 13 members and 7 posts. Of the 13 members, two have graduated and each posted posts to that effect. And those are two of the seven posts (including the post-controversy PSA), at least those of which can be read by the general public.
Continuing in this vein, the third post is completely innocuous.
Part of the fourth could be misinterpreted by anyone who's never actually been in school. Seriously, if I got frustrated enough, I would tell anyone who would listen, including people who had no clue what the hell I was talking about, what it was that was driving me crazy about whatever assignment. The rest of the fourth post is the usual oft-experienced confusion at AP teachers contradicting themselves and then a question about the structure of the assignment.
I'm not really seeing problems here.
The fifth, like the fourth, never directly asks for anything either, if you want to be picky. Note that it got no replies anyway.
The sixth just sounds angsty. Any high school administrator with an angst problem would not have survived to become an administrator; therefore, I find no problems here either.
[While my flow gets tragically lost upon trying to find a satisfactory end for the next sentence, I finally get to responding in the flaws to the other side of the story in a bit.]
I actually have no clue what "concern", exactly, is being expressed over this but if it is truly a "civil war", well, there's no good end to that sentence.
I think after the attendance sham of 2004, though, they've gotten nervous. Perhaps that's not the best word but it's like politics, cracking down after being too soft on something else. Should anyone really be surprised? No.
It's a gross misassumption to include that you can safely publicly post anything online, especially when it's linked to something in which you post personal details of your life and probably to your email address and screenname as well. If the parties involved profess to understand this, by acting outraged by that fact only goes to show that they did not. Because anyone and everyone extends far beyond the world of high school administrators and friends of friends.
And cheating is wrong, etc., and certainly shouldn't be solicited in public venues anyway.
But I think what basically bothers me, not to sound like a mother who is not only overbearing but watches too much Oprah, is that people only seem to be offended by unknown people reading their journals when the unknown people of whom they become aware are given a face. And then it bothers me that the newfound concern only reflects the specifically known readers possibly reading it and, once again, does not extend to realms of unknown people sitting in front of their computers.
The only reachable conclusion here is that both sides are, while perhaps not wrong, not right. Constitutionally, both are within their bounds although ethically, say, both falter although the lapses of both are more in what could potentially happen should each side continue down the road that the other fears they will.
In the end, to quote a dear friend of mine, "College = ♥."
And to include something personal for the whole world to read, in light of all these allegations, I logged out to see what the unfriended world could read. Anyway, I made myself read February. I did. It was a big deal, I promise. And I lied when I said I wasn't upset when my boyfriend broke up with me. Not that the essential parties didn't know that. Okay, now I've passed anything important by several stretches of highway and at least one South-of-the-Border-caliber roadside attraction.
Fini.
Or I may just be too absorbed in House of Leaves and need to analyze everything.
Anyway.
Aside from first-hand observation, the editorializing below is based the entries of two of my friends and comments on those.
There are 13 members and 7 posts. Of the 13 members, two have graduated and each posted posts to that effect. And those are two of the seven posts (including the post-controversy PSA), at least those of which can be read by the general public.
Continuing in this vein, the third post is completely innocuous.
Part of the fourth could be misinterpreted by anyone who's never actually been in school. Seriously, if I got frustrated enough, I would tell anyone who would listen, including people who had no clue what the hell I was talking about, what it was that was driving me crazy about whatever assignment. The rest of the fourth post is the usual oft-experienced confusion at AP teachers contradicting themselves and then a question about the structure of the assignment.
I'm not really seeing problems here.
The fifth, like the fourth, never directly asks for anything either, if you want to be picky. Note that it got no replies anyway.
The sixth just sounds angsty. Any high school administrator with an angst problem would not have survived to become an administrator; therefore, I find no problems here either.
[While my flow gets tragically lost upon trying to find a satisfactory end for the next sentence, I finally get to responding in the flaws to the other side of the story in a bit.]
I actually have no clue what "concern", exactly, is being expressed over this but if it is truly a "civil war", well, there's no good end to that sentence.
I think after the attendance sham of 2004, though, they've gotten nervous. Perhaps that's not the best word but it's like politics, cracking down after being too soft on something else. Should anyone really be surprised? No.
It's a gross misassumption to include that you can safely publicly post anything online, especially when it's linked to something in which you post personal details of your life and probably to your email address and screenname as well. If the parties involved profess to understand this, by acting outraged by that fact only goes to show that they did not. Because anyone and everyone extends far beyond the world of high school administrators and friends of friends.
And cheating is wrong, etc., and certainly shouldn't be solicited in public venues anyway.
But I think what basically bothers me, not to sound like a mother who is not only overbearing but watches too much Oprah, is that people only seem to be offended by unknown people reading their journals when the unknown people of whom they become aware are given a face. And then it bothers me that the newfound concern only reflects the specifically known readers possibly reading it and, once again, does not extend to realms of unknown people sitting in front of their computers.
The only reachable conclusion here is that both sides are, while perhaps not wrong, not right. Constitutionally, both are within their bounds although ethically, say, both falter although the lapses of both are more in what could potentially happen should each side continue down the road that the other fears they will.
In the end, to quote a dear friend of mine, "College = ♥."
And to include something personal for the whole world to read, in light of all these allegations, I logged out to see what the unfriended world could read. Anyway, I made myself read February. I did. It was a big deal, I promise. And I lied when I said I wasn't upset when my boyfriend broke up with me. Not that the essential parties didn't know that. Okay, now I've passed anything important by several stretches of highway and at least one South-of-the-Border-caliber roadside attraction.
Fini.