Lawsuit-free since 9/14/05

Friday, February 25, 2005

SLU to Make SATs Optional

Unsurprisingly, Take Back Our Campus Not Cited

In a press release earlier this week, SLU announced that the SATs would be optional for admission in the fall of 2006. Explaining the decision, the announcement read:
University staff has noted much concern from guidance counselors, admissions professionals and families about the SAT Reasoning Test (formerly the SAT-I), ranging from lack of confidence in the scoring system to worries that the skills tested on the exam do not relate to the skills needed in college.
We at Take Back Our Campus think this is a great idea. After all, we suggested it.

On May 15, 2004, Take Back Our Campus posted article detailing the racist origins of the SAT as well as its present outcome (still racist, in case you were wondering-- Blacks and Latinos score lower than their White counterparts even within the same economic class). We also suggested (in retrospect, with language heavy-handed and a little silly), "[i]f SLU wishes to shed the racist skins of yesteryear, it must be rid of the SAT." We continued through June 2004 to host a debate on the subject, with our (at the time, very small) readership.

Though we're pleased that President Sullivan and the administration have taken another of our suggestions, we're a little vexed as to why TBOC is still banned on the SLU campus. If, as the administration suggests, TBOC cannot possibly be used for research purposes (unlike, as the President Sullivan claims, websites for pedophiles and neo-Nazis), why are they taking credit for our ideas? After all, they can't claim not to have read our articles. They surely came across our SAT scribblings while looking for excuses to sue us.

But we owe the administration a (we admit, not ungrudging) congratulations. They've taken a big step toward ending the discrimination inherent in the pursuit of higher education.

Now then, if the administration is still taking our suggestions, about that lawsuit...

Tuesday, February 22, 2005

SLU Goes From Stupidity to McCarthyism

And it doesn't come cheap!

The SLU Administration can be accused of many things. Stupidity (sure), indolence (fine), arrogance (that's certain)-- even more specifically a lack of tolerance for the lower classes, a lack of compassion (or even basic duty) to victims of sexual assault, topped with Cissy Petty's strange commitment to proselytizing to Jewish student-workers for conversion to Christianity.

But they can never be accused of discretion or thrift. Besides hiring one of the most expensive law firms in Syracuse to file suit against us, they've spent more than "$3000 to have hard drives replaced with new ones, re-imaged, and the old ones shipped back here from one of our abroad programs (kenya?) because they suspect some of the posts are coming from there."

Hoo boy! But the dudgeon of the administration extends even beyond that. It seems that they're keeping dossiers on most of the liberal/leftist students, staff and faculty, fitted with reasons about why each might be involved with Take Back Our Campus. There are currently three lists of names-- one extends to over three typed pages. Gimme an H! Gimme a U! Gimme an A! Gimme a C! What does that spell? To be sure, something resembling the wasteful and paranoid activities of the SLU administration.

How do I know this? I received an anonymous letter yesterday detailing the expenses and lengths that President Dan "Sullen" Sullivan, Cissy "Convert to Christianity!" Petty and the rest of their cronies in the SLU administration have gone to uncover the identities of those at Take Back Our Campus. For your fun, dear reader, I've reprinted (most of) the letter below:

While SLU doesn't have enough money to pay employees
well or buy necessary equipment, there is plenty of
money for this investigation.

They've spent > $3,000 to have hard drives replaced
with new ones, re-imaged, and the old ones shipped
back here from one of our abroad programs (kenya?)
because they suspect that some of the posts are coming
from there.

Several people high up really hate you and don't care
how much of the student's tuition they waste to
permanantly shut down TBOC. I don't think they have
enough to win any law suits and I think they know
that, but if any of you are current students, you
should seriously think about transfering.

Once they know who is involved, they will receive the
wrath of the frustration caused by those that SLU's
administration can't touch.

I really don't think that anyone in a position to
really help you would want to and even if there are
any sympathizers, if they're in a position to be of
any help, they've been around long enough to know that
if they are even suspected of betraying the
administration, they're totally fucked.

I am in a unique position such that I occasionally
come across bits of usefull info. Anything I can
provide to you I guarentee is reliable but the
frequency at which I come by the info could be
described as sporadic at best.

Also, I don't really have a reliable way of fishing
for specific info. If there's anything specific you
want to know, feel free to ask but don't hold your

You're the only one who has this address and I left my
memory at a Dead show somewhere so I can't guarantee
that I'll remember to check regularly.

I'm not sure what it is but you've touched on a
subject that they really don't want brought to the
public's attention and are willing to do just about
anything to keep secret. I've heard vague references
being whispered and everybody involved in the
conversation knows what it is but nobody ever says the
words. I've overheard a few such conversations but I
couldn't even begin to guess what they're talking

Also, I don't know who it is but you attacked the
daughter of someone very rich and powerfull and daddy
has been "encouraging" SLU to make sure it never
happens again.

I got a brief glimpse of a list of current students
that they suspect of posting. I only recognized three
names on it: Carla Hunter, Rayluca (don't remember her
last name but I'm pretty sure there's only one Rayluca
on campus) and Anton M.

There are actually three lists they have going...
Chezum's past students that don't like him, Security's
suspects and "the main list". The first two lists are
each less than a page. The third is about three
pages. I have no idea what the criteria are to get
placed on the second or third list.

I fucking hate the incompetance, corruption and
favoritism that defines the way SLU is run so I'll do
what I can to help.
If you think these funds may be better spent say, improving HEOP and reinstating Upward Bound, well, so do we. But fear not and keep reading. In the next few days, the very kind people at Take Back Our Campus will be sponsoring a contest that we guarantee you'll find most intriguing.

Wednesday, February 16, 2005

Dogs, Dregs and the Dastardly Quietus of the SLU Admins

Well, the dogs of the administration have set to their work, ripping and tearing flesh with bare and white incisors fit only for that kind of sanguine business. It wasn't enough to simply ban Take Back Our Campus from the University network-- now they're using University monies to sue us.

For what are we being sued? Copyright infringement. It seems that SLU has no idea about the concept of fair use. Further, it seems that they have suddenly objected to our use of several images from the SLU website. However, if all they wanted was for us to take down the pictures (which we have voluntarily done), they could have sent us a nice cease and desist order. They did no such thing. President Sullivan and his administration, in ordering the suit, are not concerned with protecting SLU's copyright (which we never actually challenged). They want revenge.

While some might say the timing of the suit is curious, I would term it bare-fanged. A short timeline for those unfamiliar:

SLU blocked Take Back Our Campus from being seen on the SLU network on 12/22/05, in response to our criticisms of the administration slashing Upward Bound, a program meant to encourage children from lower-class backgrounds to pursue higher education.

However, when we reported on the ban and more importantly, on President Sullivan's unilateral change to the Acceptable Use of Computer Resources Policy, which allowed Sullivan to order monitoring of e-mails and personal files of any student, staff or faculty member, we were suddenly hit with a lawsuit.

The lawsuit (for copyright infringement) came without any cease and desist letter, which is the norm for any website using images under "fair use." And even if "fair use" is in dispute, SLU's lawyers should be aware of "innocent infringement," found here: http://assembler.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00001114----000-.html
"Innocent infringement" would only necessitate that we take down the pictures in question (which we have already done).

Thus, in persisting with the lawsuit against Take Back Our Campus, it is clear that Dan Sullivan and the SLU administration are interested in one thing: revenge.

We criticized them for valid reasons: for Dean M.L. "Cissy" Petty's proselytizing to Jewish student-workers, for the classist implications of eliminating Upward Bound at SLU, for the Stalinist monitoring and restriction of information access that is (a unilateral work of Dan Sullivan) the new AUCRP, etc.

But it was not enough for them to ban Take Back Our Campus. Now they've mobilized SLU's lawyers (and expended precious University funds) because they can't stand to be criticized. Edmund Spenser himself never imagined any beast so single-minded and vicious.

Saturday, February 12, 2005

Look! We're On TV!

Okay, so we're not actually on television (we still have to keep our
identities secret). But they are talking about us.

There's a front page story in the Central New York Business Journal,
found here: http://www.cnybj.com/fullstory.cfm?article_id=1980&return=frontpage.cfm

There are also two television news stories, which can be found here:


The legal complaint against us can be found here:

More updates to come tomorrow. Thanks for continuing to read Take Back Our Campus.

Monday, February 07, 2005

Tell the Truth But Tell It Slant

Some of our readers have expressed consternation that we have not been updating recently. We ask them not to worry-- we've had some troubles with which to deal. We'll be back in full form this weekend.

As Emily Dickinson wrote, "The truth must dazzle gradually or every man be blind."

Thank you for your patience. We assure you that the dazzle will be worth your while.