Wed 28 Feb 2007
Responding to anonymous complaints is a fool’s mission. Perfect for me! Consider:
[A]s someone who’s spent a fair amount of time with the clc’s and who reads this blog only very rarely, but i was astonished to see all of the personal attention given to sara. i don’t think what she does is all that different from the other clc’s, i just think it might be getting a little more press. it’s hard for me to imagine that she’s robbing students of the ability to lead themselves… that seems like a huge overreaction.
you must have better things to do than spend this much time criticizing a very sweet, intelligent, hardworking, sincere woman who’s trying to make the campus a better place.
Think I am overreacting (and too lazy to read previous commentary)? Your mistake! Blame students like former Record editor-in-chief Ainsley O’Connell ‘06. She (not me!) claims that:
“So out with the old and in with the new: If Williams were to stop changing, it would never be the same.” Those words, which I wrote in May 2004 as part of the Record’s farewell to Baxter Hall, paid fond tribute to the past and looked ahead to the promise of the future. “It’s a shame to see the old girl go,” the editorial read, “but at the same time, it seems a fitting testament to the way the College reinvents itself every year for 500 bright-eyed new Ephs.”
Two years later, with graduation just weeks away, I look back on that moment and wish I could recreate the hopefulness of that vision of Williams as a beacon and vehicle of positive growth. Instead, I am frustrated by many of the ways in which the campus has changed, most particularly the sudden prominence of the well-intentioned but detrimental Office of Campus Life, which is locked in a stagnating cycle of its own design. By in effect naming itself “the decider” when it comes to student life, the campus life office has alienated the College’s best leaders. As a result of this rift, the office has become inwardly-focused, self-promotional and deeply resistant to constructive criticism. Student life is student-driven no longer.
Read the whole thing, you silly anonymous reader. The more educated you are about the history of Williams, the more informed your opinion will be. There is no doubt that Sara Ansell is a “sweet, intelligent, hardworking, sincere woman.” But that fact, true as it may be, does not guarantee that the institution of CLCs improves Williams. O’Connell doesn’t think so.
March 1st, 2007 at 12:17 am
I am certainly no fan of the Office of Campus Life, but at least I can see that this anonymous complainant’s post and Ainsley’s piece in the Record are not mutually exclusive. The anonymous “complainant” is defending Sara Ansell, not her position; once you start equating current officeholders with the office itself, you start having all kinds of problems.
March 1st, 2007 at 8:40 am
Did you read my piece critiquing O’Connell? Read it. The central point is that even though Sara Ansell and Jess Gulley are good, nice, motivated people, the structure and function of the OCL means that their activities will inevitably be detrimental to the vibrancy of student life. I do not think that the College needs better CLCs. I am happy to agree that Sara Ansell is the best CLC we could possibly hire. The College needs to abolish the office of CLC.
Imagine that the College hired 50 wonderful versions of Sara Ansell and had them replace the JAs. Wouldn’t Sara Ansell be a great JA? Wouldn’t she be supportive and nurturing? Isn’t it likely that she would do a better job (being older and more experienced) than most JAs? Of course! (This is, more or less, what Harvard does.)
But would Williams be a better college with paid non-student employees serving as JAs. No! The same is true for CLCs. Everything that CLCs do used to be done by students (or it wasn’t really worth doing at all).
March 1st, 2007 at 9:10 am
“The central point is that even though Sara Ansell and Jess Gulley are good, nice, motivated people…”
Nice try. For months you’ve been singling out Sara Ansell specifically for criticism (though yes, you clearly hate the CLC as well). Now you’re trying to make out like you’ve had great respect for her personally but… I’ve not sure what’s more pathetic, this dishonesty or the fact that you’re obsessed with the day to day details of student life in college you graduated from almost 20 years ago. Grow up.
March 1st, 2007 at 9:26 am
The first time that Sara’s name appears on EphBlog is December 5th. Although I do criticize her role in the formation of the Women’s Center, I also write:
What more do I need to say?
And, by the way, you are concerned that “you’re obsessed with the day to day details of student life in college you graduated from almost 20 years ago. Grow up.”
Many male finance Ephs my age are obsessed with golf. I am obsessed with Williams — not just student life, but faculty hiring, alumni relations, capital spending and so on. They spend as much time golfing as I spend blogging. You think that the former is more praise-worthy than the latter? Why? What do you expect to be obsessed with when you’re 40?
March 1st, 2007 at 9:42 am
“What do you expect to be obsessed with when you’re 40?”
You assume I have yet to see 40. In any case, something that doesn’t involve me trolling around student websites looking for things that piss me off so that I can write nasty comments around 18-22 year olds. Oh, and definitely not golf.
March 1st, 2007 at 10:03 am
“[T]rolling around student websites looking for things that piss me off” does not seem to me a fair description of most, even many, of my posts at EphBlog. And, to the extent that I appear pissed off, it is my fault as a writer. On occasion, I do get angry with something that someone has done at Williams, e.g., the firing of Dave Barnard. But, overwhelmingly, I am a bemused spectator, finding endless interest in the community of Ephs.
In the last year, I have written tens of thousands of words and, perhaps, 5 nasty comments (which I regret and hope to decrease the incidence of in 2007).
But reader feedback is always welcome! If there were any posts that you liked, please let us know.
March 1st, 2007 at 10:30 am
Some hedge fund managers should entertain themselves by examining the betas of their equity holdings during the start of a bear market ;-).
Just kidding of course, you can continue blogging away. I apparently still read it despite the fact that I’ve been out of school for almost a year. Wow, time flies.
March 1st, 2007 at 10:42 am
David: You don’t have to explain, much less justify, yourself.
March 1st, 2007 at 11:38 am
Especially to an anonymous student.
March 1st, 2007 at 11:56 am
“anonymous student”
Note the contradiction there, anonymous ephmom?
March 1st, 2007 at 1:41 pm
At least I’ve admitted to being the female parent of an Eph — “anonymous” won’t even admit he is a student.
March 1st, 2007 at 2:09 pm
Wow, you took such a risk, Ephmom. Telling everyone that you are someone’s mom, that’s crazy! Way to put yourself out there!
EphStudent
March 1st, 2007 at 2:17 pm
Would you want to be associated with the opinions of your parents?
March 1st, 2007 at 2:40 pm
anonymous commenters: There is no way to know how long you have been reading EphBlog, but in case you don’t know, ephmom is a recurring presence on EphBlog. Because she calls herself ephmom, we can track who she is from comment to comment and there is a coherent thread. Another example is eph ‘11, who (to the best of my knowledge) is the same person every time.
If you sign off with a consistent name, even a pseudonym like O RLY or EphStudent, it would give you more legitimacy. Without checking the IP address, it is difficult to even know whether the anonymous comments on this thread are all by the same person (though it is pretty evident by context).
March 1st, 2007 at 2:52 pm
I think the “contradition” he or she was pointing to was that you were assuming s/he is a student when, of course, you have no way of knowing as the person is anonymous. But that person is not me, so I don’t know.
March 1st, 2007 at 4:05 pm
I’m the same person every time except when the moon is full.
March 1st, 2007 at 4:22 pm
Ephblog was featured in a North Adams Transcript article on this topic:
http://www.thetranscript.com/headlines/ci_5331452
Slowly making it’s way up the food chain, first Williams Record a ways back, now Transcript, next year the Boston Globe …
March 1st, 2007 at 5:02 pm
The convention on Slashdot (which is an originator of online comment forums like this) has long been to label unregistered comments with the moniker “Anonymous Coward.”
In this forum, anonymous comments currently receive no label at all, which is a) confusing in the sense that nothing at all is displayed where a ‘name’ label usually ‘is’ and ‘is expected’; b) confusing in the sense that it is very difficult to be tell if the same person, or different people {is|are} posting; thus, a series of cues and sense of voice and continuity is lost.
And to quote some random whitepaper, “online users tend to scan for the information they want, not to read.” Lack of effective labels prevents this scanning process.
Of course, maybe I shouldn’t post that; maybe I shouldn’t reveal that I have a Slashdot account (in the 5-digits); maybe…
But “I digress…”
March 1st, 2007 at 6:40 pm
Ken… did you say Slapshot?
Yeah yeah yeah, I know, violence in athletics is no laughing matter… pffffft.
March 1st, 2007 at 6:54 pm
Implicitly consensual physical violence is the mother’s milk of certain athletics.