List of demands at Mizzou

[DvlDog4WVU]

The president quit when he was pressured to quit--that's on him. He could have decided to stay on and exhaust his legal remedies, but he quit. He quit, admitted fault, and he didn't need more examples/incidents to come to light before he quit; why do you demand more? I recall a small number of people recently assembling together and threatening to ban an entire network, future debates, and jettison the vetting process over a handful of questions asked them by some soft journalists at a debate a few weeks ago; why is this ok but the minority students need more proof to exercise their constitutional rights to assemble and protest?

There is a difference.

For one, the decision for a debate is made by the RNC Reince Priebus. NBC wasn't
"banned" as you say. The RNC chose to not utilize them as the RNC Chairman did not agree with their method and format. This was a business decision by the RNC. 100% of the candidates disagreed with the format of the debate and questions posed and the decision to switch network coverage of the debate did not interfere with anyone other than the candidates who all agreed with the move. In the case of Mizzou, there are 30k other students being affected by this. Teachers were threatening cancellation of classes, all of which would have impacted the student body.

No one is saying they have no right assemble and protest. I haven't seen one person comment on trying to stop them from doing it. What I have seen at least on this board is people question their motives, and look for what would indicate an epidemic warranting the demands that were issued. Additionally, the group demanding the changes at Mizzou even acknowledged there was no fault of the individuals in question. They were figure heads and symbolic lambs to be slaughtered. Once the story caught national attention, does anyone really think a University is NOT going to make changes so as to not tarnish the brand?

 

[dave]

The president quit when he was pressured to quit--that's on him. He could have decided to stay on and exhaust his legal remedies, but he quit. He quit, admitted fault, and he didn't need more examples/incidents to come to light before he quit; why do you demand more? I recall a small number of people recently assembling together and threatening to ban an entire network, future debates, and jettison the vetting process over a handful of questions asked them by some soft journalists at a debate a few weeks ago; why is this ok but the minority students need more proof to exercise their constitutional rights to assemble and protest?

It is pretty simple really, the poster I replied to keeps suggesting there were more incidents than the couple mentioned so like a free person that I am I simply asked for him to tell us what incidents he was referring too. I am still waiting on the answer to that question. Thank you for trying to police the board for us but in the future please understand that I am an adult and I can ask whatever questions I choose.

 

[KTeer]

I think the Mizzou movement lost credibility in their fight against white privilege in light of the fact that their leader's family is worth $20 million.