[JJJ]

Mass e-mailing so many of you have this in your inbox:

Dear Stanford Community Member:

Let me start by thanking all of you who have written to President Tessier-Lavigne, incoming Provost Drell, and me about the Stanford Band.  Although for expediency I am writing a single response to all of your messages, I assure you that we have read each and every one.  The love that you have expressed for the Band and for Stanford—though not so much its administrators!—is truly moving.

I have been a fan of the Band since the late 1970s, when I was a student at Stanford.  In 1982 I suffered with other Stanford fans when "The Play" snatched defeat from the jaws of victory—but earned us a treasured place in football history.  I confess to enjoying countless halftime shows at or beyond the edge of propriety, including the famine of ’96 and the drum major’s weddings in 2004.  (You had to be there.)  Hearing the Band play "All Right Now" always tugs at my heartstrings.  And yes, I know when to jump; my sister, who was a Dollie in her own student days, made sure of that.

I see the positive impact of the Band on so many aspects of Stanford life—from the spirited welcome it provides profros as they stream out of Memorial Auditorium on Admit Weekend, to its rousing farewell to graduates and their families at the close of Commencement.  Some would say the Band's quirkiness, irreverence and creativity is the public manifestation of Stanford's DNA, its ethos.  And I am inclined to agree.

No one wants to change that.

The Band has had a history of controversies and regrettable incidents, and for many of its fans, those incidents are themselves part of the Band's appeal.  The current situation, however, is not about that history.  It is not about how "Sexion" is spelled, or about the university’s public image. It is about a set of serious concerns regarding Band actions around sexual harassment, hazing, alcohol and drug use, and about the Band's failure to address the underlying issues effectively.  The complaints that led to the original review came from band members themselves, not members of the administration.

The Band has the option to appeal the decision that has been issued, and should the Band do so, the appeal will come to me, as Provost.  I will consider such an appeal carefully and thoughtfully, and take to heart the input I have received from you.

The university has an obligation to hold student organizations accountable for their conduct, and for its impact on individual students in our community.  I hope on this point we can agree.  I can assure you that the university's goal is not to end the Band, to end the Tree or the Dollies, or to undermine aspects of the Stanford experience that have been important to our students and alumni.  I also can assure you that I fully understand the importance to many people of student leadership of the Band, which has been a common theme in much of the input I have heard.  I would hope a solution can be found that maintains that leadership, with university intervention and guidance only when needed.

Please know how much I appreciate the time you took to provide your thoughts.  Underlying each letter I have received is a commitment to and love of Stanford that I respect and share.  I sincerely hope you will stay engaged in the life of the campus and will continue to share your perspective on issues of importance to you at Stanford.

Sincerely,

John Etchemendy
Provost

[JJJ]

Mass e-mailing so many of you have this in your inbox:

Dear Stanford Community Member:

Let me start by thanking all of you who have written to President Tessier-Lavigne, incoming Provost Drell, and me about the Stanford Band.  Although for expediency I am writing a single response to all of your messages, I assure you that we have read each and every one.  The love that you have expressed for the Band and for Stanford—though not so much its administrators!—is truly moving.

I have been a fan of the Band since the late 1970s, when I was a student at Stanford.  In 1982 I suffered with other Stanford fans when "The Play" snatched defeat from the jaws of victory—but earned us a treasured place in football history.  I confess to enjoying countless halftime shows at or beyond the edge of propriety, including the famine of ’96 and the drum major’s weddings in 2004.  (You had to be there.)  Hearing the Band play "All Right Now" always tugs at my heartstrings.  And yes, I know when to jump; my sister, who was a Dollie in her own student days, made sure of that.

I see the positive impact of the Band on so many aspects of Stanford life—from the spirited welcome it provides profros as they stream out of Memorial Auditorium on Admit Weekend, to its rousing farewell to graduates and their families at the close of Commencement.  Some would say the Band's quirkiness, irreverence and creativity is the public manifestation of Stanford's DNA, its ethos.  And I am inclined to agree.

No one wants to change that.

The Band has had a history of controversies and regrettable incidents, and for many of its fans, those incidents are themselves part of the Band's appeal.  The current situation, however, is not about that history.  It is not about how "Sexion" is spelled, or about the university’s public image. It is about a set of serious concerns regarding Band actions around sexual harassment, hazing, alcohol and drug use, and about the Band's failure to address the underlying issues effectively.  The complaints that led to the original review came from band members themselves, not members of the administration.

The Band has the option to appeal the decision that has been issued, and should the Band do so, the appeal will come to me, as Provost.  I will consider such an appeal carefully and thoughtfully, and take to heart the input I have received from you.

The university has an obligation to hold student organizations accountable for their conduct, and for its impact on individual students in our community.  I hope on this point we can agree.  I can assure you that the university's goal is not to end the Band, to end the Tree or the Dollies, or to undermine aspects of the Stanford experience that have been important to our students and alumni.  I also can assure you that I fully understand the importance to many people of student leadership of the Band, which has been a common theme in much of the input I have heard.  I would hope a solution can be found that maintains that leadership, with university intervention and guidance only when needed.

Please know how much I appreciate the time you took to provide your thoughts.  Underlying each letter I have received is a commitment to and love of Stanford that I respect and share.  I sincerely hope you will stay engaged in the life of the campus and will continue to share your perspective on issues of importance to you at Stanford.

Sincerely,

John Etchemendy
Provost

[JJJ]

Mass e-mailing so many of you have this in your inbox:

Dear Stanford Community Member:

Let me start by thanking all of you who have written to President Tessier-Lavigne, incoming Provost Drell, and me about the Stanford Band.  Although for expediency I am writing a single response to all of your messages, I assure you that we have read each and every one.  The love that you have expressed for the Band and for Stanford—though not so much its administrators!—is truly moving.

I have been a fan of the Band since the late 1970s, when I was a student at Stanford.  In 1982 I suffered with other Stanford fans when "The Play" snatched defeat from the jaws of victory—but earned us a treasured place in football history.  I confess to enjoying countless halftime shows at or beyond the edge of propriety, including the famine of ’96 and the drum major’s weddings in 2004.  (You had to be there.)  Hearing the Band play "All Right Now" always tugs at my heartstrings.  And yes, I know when to jump; my sister, who was a Dollie in her own student days, made sure of that.

I see the positive impact of the Band on so many aspects of Stanford life—from the spirited welcome it provides profros as they stream out of Memorial Auditorium on Admit Weekend, to its rousing farewell to graduates and their families at the close of Commencement.  Some would say the Band's quirkiness, irreverence and creativity is the public manifestation of Stanford's DNA, its ethos.  And I am inclined to agree.

No one wants to change that.

The Band has had a history of controversies and regrettable incidents, and for many of its fans, those incidents are themselves part of the Band's appeal.  The current situation, however, is not about that history.  It is not about how "Sexion" is spelled, or about the university’s public image. It is about a set of serious concerns regarding Band actions around sexual harassment, hazing, alcohol and drug use, and about the Band's failure to address the underlying issues effectively.  The complaints that led to the original review came from band members themselves, not members of the administration.

The Band has the option to appeal the decision that has been issued, and should the Band do so, the appeal will come to me, as Provost.  I will consider such an appeal carefully and thoughtfully, and take to heart the input I have received from you.

The university has an obligation to hold student organizations accountable for their conduct, and for its impact on individual students in our community.  I hope on this point we can agree.  I can assure you that the university's goal is not to end the Band, to end the Tree or the Dollies, or to undermine aspects of the Stanford experience that have been important to our students and alumni.  I also can assure you that I fully understand the importance to many people of student leadership of the Band, which has been a common theme in much of the input I have heard.  I would hope a solution can be found that maintains that leadership, with university intervention and guidance only when needed.

Please know how much I appreciate the time you took to provide your thoughts.  Underlying each letter I have received is a commitment to and love of Stanford that I respect and share.  I sincerely hope you will stay engaged in the life of the campus and will continue to share your perspective on issues of importance to you at Stanford.

Sincerely,

John Etchemendy
Provost

[JJJ]

Mass e-mailing so many of you have this in your inbox:

Dear Stanford Community Member:

Let me start by thanking all of you who have written to President Tessier-Lavigne, incoming Provost Drell, and me about the Stanford Band.  Although for expediency I am writing a single response to all of your messages, I assure you that we have read each and every one.  The love that you have expressed for the Band and for Stanford—though not so much its administrators!—is truly moving.

I have been a fan of the Band since the late 1970s, when I was a student at Stanford.  In 1982 I suffered with other Stanford fans when "The Play" snatched defeat from the jaws of victory—but earned us a treasured place in football history.  I confess to enjoying countless halftime shows at or beyond the edge of propriety, including the famine of ’96 and the drum major’s weddings in 2004.  (You had to be there.)  Hearing the Band play "All Right Now" always tugs at my heartstrings.  And yes, I know when to jump; my sister, who was a Dollie in her own student days, made sure of that.

I see the positive impact of the Band on so many aspects of Stanford life—from the spirited welcome it provides profros as they stream out of Memorial Auditorium on Admit Weekend, to its rousing farewell to graduates and their families at the close of Commencement.  Some would say the Band's quirkiness, irreverence and creativity is the public manifestation of Stanford's DNA, its ethos.  And I am inclined to agree.

No one wants to change that.

The Band has had a history of controversies and regrettable incidents, and for many of its fans, those incidents are themselves part of the Band's appeal.  The current situation, however, is not about that history.  It is not about how "Sexion" is spelled, or about the university’s public image. It is about a set of serious concerns regarding Band actions around sexual harassment, hazing, alcohol and drug use, and about the Band's failure to address the underlying issues effectively.  The complaints that led to the original review came from band members themselves, not members of the administration.

The Band has the option to appeal the decision that has been issued, and should the Band do so, the appeal will come to me, as Provost.  I will consider such an appeal carefully and thoughtfully, and take to heart the input I have received from you.

The university has an obligation to hold student organizations accountable for their conduct, and for its impact on individual students in our community.  I hope on this point we can agree.  I can assure you that the university's goal is not to end the Band, to end the Tree or the Dollies, or to undermine aspects of the Stanford experience that have been important to our students and alumni.  I also can assure you that I fully understand the importance to many people of student leadership of the Band, which has been a common theme in much of the input I have heard.  I would hope a solution can be found that maintains that leadership, with university intervention and guidance only when needed.

Please know how much I appreciate the time you took to provide your thoughts.  Underlying each letter I have received is a commitment to and love of Stanford that I respect and share.  I sincerely hope you will stay engaged in the life of the campus and will continue to share your perspective on issues of importance to you at Stanford.

Sincerely,

John Etchemendy
Provost

[TrumpCard]

I don't remember seeing the announcement that Drell would take over as Provost. Does anyone here know her well enough to say whether she's likely to be sympathetic to the LSJUMB and/or to Stanford Athletics?  Here's the article about her when she was selected for those who missed it: http://news.stanford.edu/2016/11/07/camp...ouncement/

[TrumpCard]

I don't remember seeing the announcement that Drell would take over as Provost. Does anyone here know her well enough to say whether she's likely to be sympathetic to the LSJUMB and/or to Stanford Athletics?  Here's the article about her when she was selected for those who missed it: http://news.stanford.edu/2016/11/07/camp...ouncement/

[TrumpCard]

I don't remember seeing the announcement that Drell would take over as Provost. Does anyone here know her well enough to say whether she's likely to be sympathetic to the LSJUMB and/or to Stanford Athletics?  Here's the article about her when she was selected for those who missed it: http://news.stanford.edu/2016/11/07/camp...ouncement/

[TrumpCard]

I don't remember seeing the announcement that Drell would take over as Provost. Does anyone here know her well enough to say whether she's likely to be sympathetic to the LSJUMB and/or to Stanford Athletics?  Here's the article about her when she was selected for those who missed it: http://news.stanford.edu/2016/11/07/camp...ouncement/

[82lsju]

Drell on football

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38siXF9eNgk

[82lsju]

Drell on football

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38siXF9eNgk

[82lsju]

Drell on football

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38siXF9eNgk

[82lsju]

Drell on football

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38siXF9eNgk

[TreesAndBirds]

I thought the Provost wrote a good letter. He welcomed an appeal and I think basically issued a challenge to the Band to meet him part way. I dont know the details about Band members complaining to the university about how the Band treated them, but that is certainly an important part of the analysis. As much as I enjoy the band's wackiness, etc, they likely can take some steps to reduce the university's concerns. Hopefully all our letters have reinforced to the university that we dont want any substantial changes to the Band, and hopefully the Band recognizes their obligation in all this to not put the university in an untenable position.

[TreesAndBirds]

I thought the Provost wrote a good letter. He welcomed an appeal and I think basically issued a challenge to the Band to meet him part way. I dont know the details about Band members complaining to the university about how the Band treated them, but that is certainly an important part of the analysis. As much as I enjoy the band's wackiness, etc, they likely can take some steps to reduce the university's concerns. Hopefully all our letters have reinforced to the university that we dont want any substantial changes to the Band, and hopefully the Band recognizes their obligation in all this to not put the university in an untenable position.

[TreesAndBirds]

I thought the Provost wrote a good letter. He welcomed an appeal and I think basically issued a challenge to the Band to meet him part way. I dont know the details about Band members complaining to the university about how the Band treated them, but that is certainly an important part of the analysis. As much as I enjoy the band's wackiness, etc, they likely can take some steps to reduce the university's concerns. Hopefully all our letters have reinforced to the university that we dont want any substantial changes to the Band, and hopefully the Band recognizes their obligation in all this to not put the university in an untenable position.

[TreesAndBirds]

I thought the Provost wrote a good letter. He welcomed an appeal and I think basically issued a challenge to the Band to meet him part way. I dont know the details about Band members complaining to the university about how the Band treated them, but that is certainly an important part of the analysis. As much as I enjoy the band's wackiness, etc, they likely can take some steps to reduce the university's concerns. Hopefully all our letters have reinforced to the university that we dont want any substantial changes to the Band, and hopefully the Band recognizes their obligation in all this to not put the university in an untenable position.

[teejers1]

I accept that actions giving rise to original investigation of the LSJUMB were based on reports from actual band members (i.e., the ones being - or at least feeling - harassed).  But that was in 2011 and 2012, right?

So I'd like to know what triggered the suspension?  Have there been more recent claims of such harassment?  (The letter from the 113 LSJUMB women at least suggest that is NOT the case, nor have I heard/read anything about that).  Rather, this has been a drawn out investigation where the Administration makes demands, over time, in an effort to "clean things up" to its satisfaction.  Call me biased, but I believe that the Open Letter from the LSJUMB is accurate (it rings truthful, where Administration comments/actions do not).

For example, if this "isn't about signs or terminology" then (a) why have the signs confiscated, and (b) why demand that "Sexion" and SMUT and other terms be removed for band lexicon?  I still can't believe the Admin actually took these actions . . . AYFKM???

Dean Wormer is alive and well and residing on the Stanford Campus. And it SUCKS!

P.S. I'm NOT equating Etchemendy to Wormer - I actually think he is one of the good guys.  But I'd bet good money a couple other Wormers are involved in this process, and they all want to be "the foot."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tfK_3XK4CI

[teejers1]

I accept that actions giving rise to original investigation of the LSJUMB were based on reports from actual band members (i.e., the ones being - or at least feeling - harassed).  But that was in 2011 and 2012, right?

So I'd like to know what triggered the suspension?  Have there been more recent claims of such harassment?  (The letter from the 113 LSJUMB women at least suggest that is NOT the case, nor have I heard/read anything about that).  Rather, this has been a drawn out investigation where the Administration makes demands, over time, in an effort to "clean things up" to its satisfaction.  Call me biased, but I believe that the Open Letter from the LSJUMB is accurate (it rings truthful, where Administration comments/actions do not).

For example, if this "isn't about signs or terminology" then (a) why have the signs confiscated, and (b) why demand that "Sexion" and SMUT and other terms be removed for band lexicon?  I still can't believe the Admin actually took these actions . . . AYFKM???

Dean Wormer is alive and well and residing on the Stanford Campus. And it SUCKS!

P.S. I'm NOT equating Etchemendy to Wormer - I actually think he is one of the good guys.  But I'd bet good money a couple other Wormers are involved in this process, and they all want to be "the foot."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tfK_3XK4CI

[teejers1]

I accept that actions giving rise to original investigation of the LSJUMB were based on reports from actual band members (i.e., the ones being - or at least feeling - harassed).  But that was in 2011 and 2012, right?

So I'd like to know what triggered the suspension?  Have there been more recent claims of such harassment?  (The letter from the 113 LSJUMB women at least suggest that is NOT the case, nor have I heard/read anything about that).  Rather, this has been a drawn out investigation where the Administration makes demands, over time, in an effort to "clean things up" to its satisfaction.  Call me biased, but I believe that the Open Letter from the LSJUMB is accurate (it rings truthful, where Administration comments/actions do not).

For example, if this "isn't about signs or terminology" then (a) why have the signs confiscated, and (b) why demand that "Sexion" and SMUT and other terms be removed for band lexicon?  I still can't believe the Admin actually took these actions . . . AYFKM???

Dean Wormer is alive and well and residing on the Stanford Campus. And it SUCKS!

P.S. I'm NOT equating Etchemendy to Wormer - I actually think he is one of the good guys.  But I'd bet good money a couple other Wormers are involved in this process, and they all want to be "the foot."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tfK_3XK4CI

[teejers1]

I accept that actions giving rise to original investigation of the LSJUMB were based on reports from actual band members (i.e., the ones being - or at least feeling - harassed).  But that was in 2011 and 2012, right?

So I'd like to know what triggered the suspension?  Have there been more recent claims of such harassment?  (The letter from the 113 LSJUMB women at least suggest that is NOT the case, nor have I heard/read anything about that).  Rather, this has been a drawn out investigation where the Administration makes demands, over time, in an effort to "clean things up" to its satisfaction.  Call me biased, but I believe that the Open Letter from the LSJUMB is accurate (it rings truthful, where Administration comments/actions do not).

For example, if this "isn't about signs or terminology" then (a) why have the signs confiscated, and (b) why demand that "Sexion" and SMUT and other terms be removed for band lexicon?  I still can't believe the Admin actually took these actions . . . AYFKM???

Dean Wormer is alive and well and residing on the Stanford Campus. And it SUCKS!

P.S. I'm NOT equating Etchemendy to Wormer - I actually think he is one of the good guys.  But I'd bet good money a couple other Wormers are involved in this process, and they all want to be "the foot."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tfK_3XK4CI

[martyup]

The complaints that led to the original review came from band members themselves, not members of the administration.

Someone got "offended" and apparently complained to the administration.  We certainly cannot have anyone feel offended by our band.  ::)  So, now we have no band, no tree, and no dollies at games.  What a pile of horse poop.  >:(

[martyup]

The complaints that led to the original review came from band members themselves, not members of the administration.

Someone got "offended" and apparently complained to the administration.  We certainly cannot have anyone feel offended by our band.  ::)  So, now we have no band, no tree, and no dollies at games.  What a pile of horse poop.  >:(

[martyup]

The complaints that led to the original review came from band members themselves, not members of the administration.

Someone got "offended" and apparently complained to the administration.  We certainly cannot have anyone feel offended by our band.  ::)  So, now we have no band, no tree, and no dollies at games.  What a pile of horse poop.  >:(

[martyup]

The complaints that led to the original review came from band members themselves, not members of the administration.

Someone got "offended" and apparently complained to the administration.  We certainly cannot have anyone feel offended by our band.  ::)  So, now we have no band, no tree, and no dollies at games.  What a pile of horse poop.  >:(

[JJJ]

Etchemendy's letter, to me, is very reasonable. And he is the right person to hit the right notes, having lived through many shared experiences with us. However, I don't have the same faith in the others, and what he says and what the Administration has done don't mesh, as pointed out by other commenters here. Feels like there's a bait-and-switch going on here. "Subsequent violations" include the pitcher of beer by 3 of-age members at a friend's farewell (before a rehearsal--ALCOHOL VIOLATION) and use of Band travel funds for a Tahoe band retreat (they aren't being allowed to travel to away games, how else are you going to use your funds? they even chartered buses for Big Game for students to take, since they couldn't go...TRAVEL VIOLATION).

And Band HAS has changed a lot, addressed many issues, fixed original wrongs, etc. I'd like to believe that Etchemendy would be reasonable when judging a Band appeal, and that he will overturn the ban. It's our only hope right now.

[JJJ]

Etchemendy's letter, to me, is very reasonable. And he is the right person to hit the right notes, having lived through many shared experiences with us. However, I don't have the same faith in the others, and what he says and what the Administration has done don't mesh, as pointed out by other commenters here. Feels like there's a bait-and-switch going on here. "Subsequent violations" include the pitcher of beer by 3 of-age members at a friend's farewell (before a rehearsal--ALCOHOL VIOLATION) and use of Band travel funds for a Tahoe band retreat (they aren't being allowed to travel to away games, how else are you going to use your funds? they even chartered buses for Big Game for students to take, since they couldn't go...TRAVEL VIOLATION).

And Band HAS has changed a lot, addressed many issues, fixed original wrongs, etc. I'd like to believe that Etchemendy would be reasonable when judging a Band appeal, and that he will overturn the ban. It's our only hope right now.

[JJJ]

Etchemendy's letter, to me, is very reasonable. And he is the right person to hit the right notes, having lived through many shared experiences with us. However, I don't have the same faith in the others, and what he says and what the Administration has done don't mesh, as pointed out by other commenters here. Feels like there's a bait-and-switch going on here. "Subsequent violations" include the pitcher of beer by 3 of-age members at a friend's farewell (before a rehearsal--ALCOHOL VIOLATION) and use of Band travel funds for a Tahoe band retreat (they aren't being allowed to travel to away games, how else are you going to use your funds? they even chartered buses for Big Game for students to take, since they couldn't go...TRAVEL VIOLATION).

And Band HAS has changed a lot, addressed many issues, fixed original wrongs, etc. I'd like to believe that Etchemendy would be reasonable when judging a Band appeal, and that he will overturn the ban. It's our only hope right now.

[JJJ]

Etchemendy's letter, to me, is very reasonable. And he is the right person to hit the right notes, having lived through many shared experiences with us. However, I don't have the same faith in the others, and what he says and what the Administration has done don't mesh, as pointed out by other commenters here. Feels like there's a bait-and-switch going on here. "Subsequent violations" include the pitcher of beer by 3 of-age members at a friend's farewell (before a rehearsal--ALCOHOL VIOLATION) and use of Band travel funds for a Tahoe band retreat (they aren't being allowed to travel to away games, how else are you going to use your funds? they even chartered buses for Big Game for students to take, since they couldn't go...TRAVEL VIOLATION).

And Band HAS has changed a lot, addressed many issues, fixed original wrongs, etc. I'd like to believe that Etchemendy would be reasonable when judging a Band appeal, and that he will overturn the ban. It's our only hope right now.

[82lsju]

of course Etchemendy will be provost only until Feb 1......

>> Drell starts on February 1.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/11/07/ph...-stanford/

[82lsju]

of course Etchemendy will be provost only until Feb 1......

>> Drell starts on February 1.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/11/07/ph...-stanford/

[82lsju]

of course Etchemendy will be provost only until Feb 1......

>> Drell starts on February 1.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/11/07/ph...-stanford/

[82lsju]

of course Etchemendy will be provost only until Feb 1......

>> Drell starts on February 1.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/11/07/ph...-stanford/

[JJJ]

of course Etchemendy will be provost only until Feb 1......

>> Drell starts on February 1.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/11/07/ph...-stanford/

Exactly. Band had better appeal as soon as they get back from winter break.

[JJJ]

of course Etchemendy will be provost only until Feb 1......

>> Drell starts on February 1.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/11/07/ph...-stanford/

Exactly. Band had better appeal as soon as they get back from winter break.

[JJJ]

of course Etchemendy will be provost only until Feb 1......

>> Drell starts on February 1.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/11/07/ph...-stanford/

Exactly. Band had better appeal as soon as they get back from winter break.

[JJJ]

of course Etchemendy will be provost only until Feb 1......

>> Drell starts on February 1.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/11/07/ph...-stanford/

Exactly. Band had better appeal as soon as they get back from winter break.

[JJJ]

And an appeal from Band to current students--don't clog up the system with unnecessary requests. From their facebook page https://www.facebook.com/lsjumb/

In the past few days, we have been heartened by the outpouring of support for the Band and what we stand for from some of our most respected students and alumni on and off campus. We would like to thank everyone for their powerful stories and fond memories that have been shared.

While we appreciate the sentiment of all of the actions people have taken on our behalf, we think that it is vital to consider the intent and outcome especially in relation to the recent effort by the FoHo to promote the use of your rights as a student, under FERPA, to request documents related to your activity on campus. This option has been communicated to the Stanford community as a way to show support for the Band and to pressure the University into reversing their decision. We believe that this endeavor is counterproductive and potentially harmful to our position and our future appeal. We would like to discourage students from filing their requests under FERPA and ask that any that have already done so to withdraw their requests. We feel that it demonstrates ill will regardless of whether or not the student submitting the request is a member of the Band or not. Also, as the FoHo said themselves “the staff reading and processing these emails are not the ones that banned Band,” by submitting these requests we feel that students will be punishing University employees who had no hand in this decision and will in no way address the problems in question and hinder the important discussions that need to be had in order to confront the disparities in student and University opinion.

Right now it is imperative that we show that we are willing and capable of working with the administration and that ultimately, hopefully, we want the same thing: a Band that is able to continue to support communities on and off campus, a Band that doesn’t keep getting in trouble, believe it or not, it's not fun for us either, a Band that challenges people to keep an open mind, learn from their peers, and grow in the process, and a Band that supports its community with an open and welcome culture that is accepting and supportive of everybody, students, alumni, community members, men, women, gender non-binary individuals, and so many more descriptors it would be impossible to list them all here.

When deciding the future of this organization we want to be able to advocate for all of the things that make the Band such a uniquely inclusive and genuinely fun place. One of the ways you can help us ensure this is to not request, on the behalf of the Band, the documents pertaining to your activity on campus under FERPA and to withdraw your request if you have already done so. We appreciate your want to support us but at this point, we feel that your FERPA request would do more harm, to Student/Administration relations, than good.

Band Management

[JJJ]

And an appeal from Band to current students--don't clog up the system with unnecessary requests. From their facebook page https://www.facebook.com/lsjumb/

In the past few days, we have been heartened by the outpouring of support for the Band and what we stand for from some of our most respected students and alumni on and off campus. We would like to thank everyone for their powerful stories and fond memories that have been shared.

While we appreciate the sentiment of all of the actions people have taken on our behalf, we think that it is vital to consider the intent and outcome especially in relation to the recent effort by the FoHo to promote the use of your rights as a student, under FERPA, to request documents related to your activity on campus. This option has been communicated to the Stanford community as a way to show support for the Band and to pressure the University into reversing their decision. We believe that this endeavor is counterproductive and potentially harmful to our position and our future appeal. We would like to discourage students from filing their requests under FERPA and ask that any that have already done so to withdraw their requests. We feel that it demonstrates ill will regardless of whether or not the student submitting the request is a member of the Band or not. Also, as the FoHo said themselves “the staff reading and processing these emails are not the ones that banned Band,” by submitting these requests we feel that students will be punishing University employees who had no hand in this decision and will in no way address the problems in question and hinder the important discussions that need to be had in order to confront the disparities in student and University opinion.

Right now it is imperative that we show that we are willing and capable of working with the administration and that ultimately, hopefully, we want the same thing: a Band that is able to continue to support communities on and off campus, a Band that doesn’t keep getting in trouble, believe it or not, it's not fun for us either, a Band that challenges people to keep an open mind, learn from their peers, and grow in the process, and a Band that supports its community with an open and welcome culture that is accepting and supportive of everybody, students, alumni, community members, men, women, gender non-binary individuals, and so many more descriptors it would be impossible to list them all here.

When deciding the future of this organization we want to be able to advocate for all of the things that make the Band such a uniquely inclusive and genuinely fun place. One of the ways you can help us ensure this is to not request, on the behalf of the Band, the documents pertaining to your activity on campus under FERPA and to withdraw your request if you have already done so. We appreciate your want to support us but at this point, we feel that your FERPA request would do more harm, to Student/Administration relations, than good.

Band Management

[JJJ]

And an appeal from Band to current students--don't clog up the system with unnecessary requests. From their facebook page https://www.facebook.com/lsjumb/

In the past few days, we have been heartened by the outpouring of support for the Band and what we stand for from some of our most respected students and alumni on and off campus. We would like to thank everyone for their powerful stories and fond memories that have been shared.

While we appreciate the sentiment of all of the actions people have taken on our behalf, we think that it is vital to consider the intent and outcome especially in relation to the recent effort by the FoHo to promote the use of your rights as a student, under FERPA, to request documents related to your activity on campus. This option has been communicated to the Stanford community as a way to show support for the Band and to pressure the University into reversing their decision. We believe that this endeavor is counterproductive and potentially harmful to our position and our future appeal. We would like to discourage students from filing their requests under FERPA and ask that any that have already done so to withdraw their requests. We feel that it demonstrates ill will regardless of whether or not the student submitting the request is a member of the Band or not. Also, as the FoHo said themselves “the staff reading and processing these emails are not the ones that banned Band,” by submitting these requests we feel that students will be punishing University employees who had no hand in this decision and will in no way address the problems in question and hinder the important discussions that need to be had in order to confront the disparities in student and University opinion.

Right now it is imperative that we show that we are willing and capable of working with the administration and that ultimately, hopefully, we want the same thing: a Band that is able to continue to support communities on and off campus, a Band that doesn’t keep getting in trouble, believe it or not, it's not fun for us either, a Band that challenges people to keep an open mind, learn from their peers, and grow in the process, and a Band that supports its community with an open and welcome culture that is accepting and supportive of everybody, students, alumni, community members, men, women, gender non-binary individuals, and so many more descriptors it would be impossible to list them all here.

When deciding the future of this organization we want to be able to advocate for all of the things that make the Band such a uniquely inclusive and genuinely fun place. One of the ways you can help us ensure this is to not request, on the behalf of the Band, the documents pertaining to your activity on campus under FERPA and to withdraw your request if you have already done so. We appreciate your want to support us but at this point, we feel that your FERPA request would do more harm, to Student/Administration relations, than good.

Band Management

[JJJ]

And an appeal from Band to current students--don't clog up the system with unnecessary requests. From their facebook page https://www.facebook.com/lsjumb/

In the past few days, we have been heartened by the outpouring of support for the Band and what we stand for from some of our most respected students and alumni on and off campus. We would like to thank everyone for their powerful stories and fond memories that have been shared.

While we appreciate the sentiment of all of the actions people have taken on our behalf, we think that it is vital to consider the intent and outcome especially in relation to the recent effort by the FoHo to promote the use of your rights as a student, under FERPA, to request documents related to your activity on campus. This option has been communicated to the Stanford community as a way to show support for the Band and to pressure the University into reversing their decision. We believe that this endeavor is counterproductive and potentially harmful to our position and our future appeal. We would like to discourage students from filing their requests under FERPA and ask that any that have already done so to withdraw their requests. We feel that it demonstrates ill will regardless of whether or not the student submitting the request is a member of the Band or not. Also, as the FoHo said themselves “the staff reading and processing these emails are not the ones that banned Band,” by submitting these requests we feel that students will be punishing University employees who had no hand in this decision and will in no way address the problems in question and hinder the important discussions that need to be had in order to confront the disparities in student and University opinion.

Right now it is imperative that we show that we are willing and capable of working with the administration and that ultimately, hopefully, we want the same thing: a Band that is able to continue to support communities on and off campus, a Band that doesn’t keep getting in trouble, believe it or not, it's not fun for us either, a Band that challenges people to keep an open mind, learn from their peers, and grow in the process, and a Band that supports its community with an open and welcome culture that is accepting and supportive of everybody, students, alumni, community members, men, women, gender non-binary individuals, and so many more descriptors it would be impossible to list them all here.

When deciding the future of this organization we want to be able to advocate for all of the things that make the Band such a uniquely inclusive and genuinely fun place. One of the ways you can help us ensure this is to not request, on the behalf of the Band, the documents pertaining to your activity on campus under FERPA and to withdraw your request if you have already done so. We appreciate your want to support us but at this point, we feel that your FERPA request would do more harm, to Student/Administration relations, than good.

Band Management