[Goose]

IMO the Cal Trans authority along 82 in Burlingame regarding trees should be limited to questions of traffic obstruction. It the city wants to do something that obstructs traffic, Cal Trans could possibly veto it. If the City wants to remove trees, that doesn't obstruct traffic and Cal Trans should stay out of it. It just isn't the States business IMO. It makes everything harder when you get more agencies involved, many of which have no obvious interest in the issue at hand.

I suspect some or perhaps many of those trees are within State right-of-way.

I wouldn't be surprised if they all are. That gives Cal Trans the power to intervene as they see fit. My opinion is that they should let the city do what it wants unless there is some overwhelming transportation related reason to intervene and stop it. Intervening for esthetic reasons is, IMO, unnecessary and unwise. The people of Burlingame should be allowed to decide what they like and what they don't like. Cal Trans shouldn't have to pay for such actions (unless they have reason to), but shouldn't get in the way without "good reason".

[Goose]

IMO the Cal Trans authority along 82 in Burlingame regarding trees should be limited to questions of traffic obstruction. It the city wants to do something that obstructs traffic, Cal Trans could possibly veto it. If the City wants to remove trees, that doesn't obstruct traffic and Cal Trans should stay out of it. It just isn't the States business IMO. It makes everything harder when you get more agencies involved, many of which have no obvious interest in the issue at hand.

I suspect some or perhaps many of those trees are within State right-of-way.

I wouldn't be surprised if they all are. That gives Cal Trans the power to intervene as they see fit. My opinion is that they should let the city do what it wants unless there is some overwhelming transportation related reason to intervene and stop it. Intervening for esthetic reasons is, IMO, unnecessary and unwise. The people of Burlingame should be allowed to decide what they like and what they don't like. Cal Trans shouldn't have to pay for such actions (unless they have reason to), but shouldn't get in the way without "good reason".

[BostonCard]

As you can read from the "tree presentation" that CalTrans made, both the density and thickness of trees planted along a road contribute to the road's visibility.  The roots of the trees can affect drainage of the road.

https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/dis...3-a11y.pdf

BC

[BostonCard]

As you can read from the "tree presentation" that CalTrans made, both the density and thickness of trees planted along a road contribute to the road's visibility.  The roots of the trees can affect drainage of the road.

https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/dis...3-a11y.pdf

BC

[cardcrimson]

I have to say, of all the thread drifts in the past, this one has to be a the top of the list. . . .

[cardcrimson]

I have to say, of all the thread drifts in the past, this one has to be a the top of the list. . . .

[82lsju]

the Caltrain bridge next to "El Palo Alto" in need of emergency repairs due to the rains...with some interesting constraints on timing and coordinating approval of eight agencies to proceed....

Any work would need to be finished within a narrow window of about four months, from June 1 through Oct. 15, when it would not interfere with the fish migration [of the Central California Coast steelhead, a federally protected endangered fish species living in San Francisquito Creek], Bernard said. Caltrain would need to prepare its plans and have them and the permitting approved in the next two months, he added. Eight agencies would review the design.

https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2023...-palo-alto

[82lsju]

the Caltrain bridge next to "El Palo Alto" in need of emergency repairs due to the rains...with some interesting constraints on timing and coordinating approval of eight agencies to proceed....

Any work would need to be finished within a narrow window of about four months, from June 1 through Oct. 15, when it would not interfere with the fish migration [of the Central California Coast steelhead, a federally protected endangered fish species living in San Francisquito Creek], Bernard said. Caltrain would need to prepare its plans and have them and the permitting approved in the next two months, he added. Eight agencies would review the design.

https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2023...-palo-alto

[Goose]

As you can read from the "tree presentation" that CalTrans made, both the density and thickness of trees planted along a road contribute to the road's visibility.  The roots of the trees can affect drainage of the road.

https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/dis...3-a11y.pdf

BC

BC, what I see in the document is two graphics comparing the visibility of different configurations of trees, showing that one is better than the other, but by implication both configurations are "worse", visibility wise, than no trees at all. That alternative is not explicitly considered as far as I can find, and there really is very little to "read". This study is built around several "Overarching Goals", as stated at the beginning of the document. One of these goals is "Retain the character and health of the Grove". Given that, no trees is certainly off the table, as well as many other alternatives. This goal may come from "public input", but I suspect it is almost entirely derived from the effects of the National Historic Preservation Act and the status of "The Grove". Even Cal Trans refers to "ill effects" of said regulations.

IMO this is an example of too many "rules" interacting in ways they were never intended. The Grove was created by the work of a "Master Gardner, John McLaren" operating without many constraints in a very different time. The current regulations create a situation where a bureaucratic organization is trying to "follow the rules" to preserve the original work while at the same time changing it in ways that will render it unrecognizable to it's creator. It is in some ways the worst of both worlds, where Burlingame can't rip up the old plan and start over, but also can't continue with the old plan because of changed circumstances. Instead they will get a result with most of the bad aspects of the alternative approaches and only those good aspects that can be somehow shoehorned in.

[Goose]

As you can read from the "tree presentation" that CalTrans made, both the density and thickness of trees planted along a road contribute to the road's visibility.  The roots of the trees can affect drainage of the road.

https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/dis...3-a11y.pdf

BC

BC, what I see in the document is two graphics comparing the visibility of different configurations of trees, showing that one is better than the other, but by implication both configurations are "worse", visibility wise, than no trees at all. That alternative is not explicitly considered as far as I can find, and there really is very little to "read". This study is built around several "Overarching Goals", as stated at the beginning of the document. One of these goals is "Retain the character and health of the Grove". Given that, no trees is certainly off the table, as well as many other alternatives. This goal may come from "public input", but I suspect it is almost entirely derived from the effects of the National Historic Preservation Act and the status of "The Grove". Even Cal Trans refers to "ill effects" of said regulations.

IMO this is an example of too many "rules" interacting in ways they were never intended. The Grove was created by the work of a "Master Gardner, John McLaren" operating without many constraints in a very different time. The current regulations create a situation where a bureaucratic organization is trying to "follow the rules" to preserve the original work while at the same time changing it in ways that will render it unrecognizable to it's creator. It is in some ways the worst of both worlds, where Burlingame can't rip up the old plan and start over, but also can't continue with the old plan because of changed circumstances. Instead they will get a result with most of the bad aspects of the alternative approaches and only those good aspects that can be somehow shoehorned in.

[ADPinWDC]

The administrators who have no sense of Stanford's core values are only concerned with protecting the Stanford brand rather than protecting the students.  I think we need to make this known to Howard Wolf...and he needs to take appropriate action.

 

AGREE, BECAUSE HOWIE IS AN ALUM ('78) -- He can't do much with ONE letter / email; he can do a more with 100 emails.
Especially from donors and Season Ticket holders.  
Attach Victor Davis Hanson's trenchent analysis of March 19, 2023. 
What Happened to Stanford ?
https://amgreatness.com/2023/03/19/what-...-stanford/

Tirien Steinbach, so-called Diversity Dean at Stanford Law School (not diversity of thought), is an "Infiltrant" from East Bay.  
https://law.stanford.edu/directory/tirien-steinbach/
... Find a more "GOVT FIRST", left-wing C.V. if you can:
Undergrad from UC Santa Cruz (Socialist at a minimum), then UC Zerkeley Law School (1999) 
Followed by East Bay Community Law Center
Served for two years as the Chief Program Officer at the ACLU of Northern California.
She has been recognized for her social justice legal work, receiving both Equal Justice Works and Berkeley Law Foundation fellowships

Has not EVER set foot in Business, let alone high tech.  Not even manufacturing hemp oil.  
She is to the Left of Sanders.  Stanford has allowed those hostile to its values of freedom and enterprise to just infiltrate and multiply.   
ADP

[ADPinWDC]

The administrators who have no sense of Stanford's core values are only concerned with protecting the Stanford brand rather than protecting the students.  I think we need to make this known to Howard Wolf...and he needs to take appropriate action.

 

AGREE, BECAUSE HOWIE IS AN ALUM ('78) -- He can't do much with ONE letter / email; he can do a more with 100 emails.
Especially from donors and Season Ticket holders.  
Attach Victor Davis Hanson's trenchent analysis of March 19, 2023. 
What Happened to Stanford ?
https://amgreatness.com/2023/03/19/what-...-stanford/

Tirien Steinbach, so-called Diversity Dean at Stanford Law School (not diversity of thought), is an "Infiltrant" from East Bay.  
https://law.stanford.edu/directory/tirien-steinbach/
... Find a more "GOVT FIRST", left-wing C.V. if you can:
Undergrad from UC Santa Cruz (Socialist at a minimum), then UC Zerkeley Law School (1999) 
Followed by East Bay Community Law Center
Served for two years as the Chief Program Officer at the ACLU of Northern California.
She has been recognized for her social justice legal work, receiving both Equal Justice Works and Berkeley Law Foundation fellowships

Has not EVER set foot in Business, let alone high tech.  Not even manufacturing hemp oil.  
She is to the Left of Sanders.  Stanford has allowed those hostile to its values of freedom and enterprise to just infiltrate and multiply.   
ADP

[jonnyss]

The administrators who have no sense of Stanford's core values are only concerned with protecting the Stanford brand rather than protecting the students.  I think we need to make this known to Howard Wolf...and he needs to take appropriate action.

 

AGREE, BECAUSE HOWIE IS AN ALUM ('78) -- He can't do much with ONE letter / email; he can do a more with 100 emails.
Especially from donors and Season Ticket holders.  
Attach Victor Davis Hanson's trenchent analysis of March 19, 2023. 
What Happened to Stanford ?
https://amgreatness.com/2023/03/19/what-...-stanford/

Tirien Steinbach, so-called Diversity Dean at Stanford Law School (not diversity of thought), is an "Infiltrant" from East Bay.  
https://law.stanford.edu/directory/tirien-steinbach/
... Find a more "GOVT FIRST", left-wing C.V. if you can:
Undergrad from UC Santa Cruz (Socialist at a minimum), then UC Zerkeley Law School (1999) 
Followed by East Bay Community Law Center
Served for two years as the Chief Program Officer at the ACLU of Northern California.
She has been recognized for her social justice legal work, receiving both Equal Justice Works and Berkeley Law Foundation fellowships

Has not EVER set foot in Business, let alone high tech.  Not even manufacturing hemp oil.  
She is to the Left of Sanders.  Stanford has allowed those hostile to its values of freedom and enterprise to just infiltrate and multiply.   
ADP

the overwhelming majority of censoring and cancelling these days is by the right - book banning link, course banning, word banning, phrase banning, medical procedure banning, medication banning, cancelling employees like steinbach.  plus stanford is a private institution and therefore not bound by the first amendment, whereas florida, led by ron desantis, is very much a government entity subject to the first amendment.

[jonnyss]

The administrators who have no sense of Stanford's core values are only concerned with protecting the Stanford brand rather than protecting the students.  I think we need to make this known to Howard Wolf...and he needs to take appropriate action.

 

AGREE, BECAUSE HOWIE IS AN ALUM ('78) -- He can't do much with ONE letter / email; he can do a more with 100 emails.
Especially from donors and Season Ticket holders.  
Attach Victor Davis Hanson's trenchent analysis of March 19, 2023. 
What Happened to Stanford ?
https://amgreatness.com/2023/03/19/what-...-stanford/

Tirien Steinbach, so-called Diversity Dean at Stanford Law School (not diversity of thought), is an "Infiltrant" from East Bay.  
https://law.stanford.edu/directory/tirien-steinbach/
... Find a more "GOVT FIRST", left-wing C.V. if you can:
Undergrad from UC Santa Cruz (Socialist at a minimum), then UC Zerkeley Law School (1999) 
Followed by East Bay Community Law Center
Served for two years as the Chief Program Officer at the ACLU of Northern California.
She has been recognized for her social justice legal work, receiving both Equal Justice Works and Berkeley Law Foundation fellowships

Has not EVER set foot in Business, let alone high tech.  Not even manufacturing hemp oil.  
She is to the Left of Sanders.  Stanford has allowed those hostile to its values of freedom and enterprise to just infiltrate and multiply.   
ADP

the overwhelming majority of censoring and cancelling these days is by the right - book banning link, course banning, word banning, phrase banning, medical procedure banning, medication banning, cancelling employees like steinbach.  plus stanford is a private institution and therefore not bound by the first amendment, whereas florida, led by ron desantis, is very much a government entity subject to the first amendment.

[76lsjumb]

The administrators who have no sense of Stanford's core values are only concerned with protecting the Stanford brand rather than protecting the students.  I think we need to make this known to Howard Wolf...and he needs to take appropriate action.

 

AGREE, BECAUSE HOWIE IS AN ALUM ('78) -- He can't do much with ONE letter / email; he can do a more with 100 emails.
Especially from donors and Season Ticket holders.  
Attach Victor Davis Hanson's trenchent analysis of March 19, 2023. 
What Happened to Stanford ?
https://amgreatness.com/2023/03/19/what-...-stanford/

Tirien Steinbach, so-called Diversity Dean at Stanford Law School (not diversity of thought), is an "Infiltrant" from East Bay.  
https://law.stanford.edu/directory/tirien-steinbach/
... Find a more "GOVT FIRST", left-wing C.V. if you can:
Undergrad from UC Santa Cruz (Socialist at a minimum), then UC Zerkeley Law School (1999) 
Followed by East Bay Community Law Center
Served for two years as the Chief Program Officer at the ACLU of Northern California.
She has been recognized for her social justice legal work, receiving both Equal Justice Works and Berkeley Law Foundation fellowships

Has not EVER set foot in Business, let alone high tech.  Not even manufacturing hemp oil.  
She is to the Left of Sanders.  Stanford has allowed those hostile to its values of freedom and enterprise to just infiltrate and multiply.   
ADP

the overwhelming majority of censoring and cancelling these days is by the right - book banning link, course banning, word banning, phrase banning, medical procedure banning, medication banning, cancelling employees like steinbach.  plus stanford is a private institution and therefore not bound by the first amendment, whereas florida, led by ron desantis, is very much a government entity subject to the first amendment.

How to end a thread…

[76lsjumb]

The administrators who have no sense of Stanford's core values are only concerned with protecting the Stanford brand rather than protecting the students.  I think we need to make this known to Howard Wolf...and he needs to take appropriate action.

 

AGREE, BECAUSE HOWIE IS AN ALUM ('78) -- He can't do much with ONE letter / email; he can do a more with 100 emails.
Especially from donors and Season Ticket holders.  
Attach Victor Davis Hanson's trenchent analysis of March 19, 2023. 
What Happened to Stanford ?
https://amgreatness.com/2023/03/19/what-...-stanford/

Tirien Steinbach, so-called Diversity Dean at Stanford Law School (not diversity of thought), is an "Infiltrant" from East Bay.  
https://law.stanford.edu/directory/tirien-steinbach/
... Find a more "GOVT FIRST", left-wing C.V. if you can:
Undergrad from UC Santa Cruz (Socialist at a minimum), then UC Zerkeley Law School (1999) 
Followed by East Bay Community Law Center
Served for two years as the Chief Program Officer at the ACLU of Northern California.
She has been recognized for her social justice legal work, receiving both Equal Justice Works and Berkeley Law Foundation fellowships

Has not EVER set foot in Business, let alone high tech.  Not even manufacturing hemp oil.  
She is to the Left of Sanders.  Stanford has allowed those hostile to its values of freedom and enterprise to just infiltrate and multiply.   
ADP

the overwhelming majority of censoring and cancelling these days is by the right - book banning link, course banning, word banning, phrase banning, medical procedure banning, medication banning, cancelling employees like steinbach.  plus stanford is a private institution and therefore not bound by the first amendment, whereas florida, led by ron desantis, is very much a government entity subject to the first amendment.

How to end a thread…

[2006alum]

The administrators who have no sense of Stanford's core values are only concerned with protecting the Stanford brand rather than protecting the students.  I think we need to make this known to Howard Wolf...and he needs to take appropriate action.

 

AGREE, BECAUSE HOWIE IS AN ALUM ('78) -- He can't do much with ONE letter / email; he can do a more with 100 emails.
Especially from donors and Season Ticket holders.  
Attach Victor Davis Hanson's trenchent analysis of March 19, 2023. 
What Happened to Stanford ?
https://amgreatness.com/2023/03/19/what-...-stanford/

Tirien Steinbach, so-called Diversity Dean at Stanford Law School (not diversity of thought), is an "Infiltrant" from East Bay.  
https://law.stanford.edu/directory/tirien-steinbach/
... Find a more "GOVT FIRST", left-wing C.V. if you can:
Undergrad from UC Santa Cruz (Socialist at a minimum), then UC Zerkeley Law School (1999) 
Followed by East Bay Community Law Center
Served for two years as the Chief Program Officer at the ACLU of Northern California.
She has been recognized for her social justice legal work, receiving both Equal Justice Works and Berkeley Law Foundation fellowships

Has not EVER set foot in Business, let alone high tech.  Not even manufacturing hemp oil.  
She is to the Left of Sanders.  Stanford has allowed those hostile to its values of freedom and enterprise to just infiltrate and multiply.   
ADP

the overwhelming majority of censoring and cancelling these days is by the right - book banning link, course banning, word banning, phrase banning, medical procedure banning, medication banning, cancelling employees like steinbach.  plus stanford is a private institution and therefore not bound by the first amendment, whereas florida, led by ron desantis, is very much a government entity subject to the first amendment.

How to end a thread…

You mean both of them? We'll time out for half a day and restart things tomorrow.

[2006alum]

The administrators who have no sense of Stanford's core values are only concerned with protecting the Stanford brand rather than protecting the students.  I think we need to make this known to Howard Wolf...and he needs to take appropriate action.

 

AGREE, BECAUSE HOWIE IS AN ALUM ('78) -- He can't do much with ONE letter / email; he can do a more with 100 emails.
Especially from donors and Season Ticket holders.  
Attach Victor Davis Hanson's trenchent analysis of March 19, 2023. 
What Happened to Stanford ?
https://amgreatness.com/2023/03/19/what-...-stanford/

Tirien Steinbach, so-called Diversity Dean at Stanford Law School (not diversity of thought), is an "Infiltrant" from East Bay.  
https://law.stanford.edu/directory/tirien-steinbach/
... Find a more "GOVT FIRST", left-wing C.V. if you can:
Undergrad from UC Santa Cruz (Socialist at a minimum), then UC Zerkeley Law School (1999) 
Followed by East Bay Community Law Center
Served for two years as the Chief Program Officer at the ACLU of Northern California.
She has been recognized for her social justice legal work, receiving both Equal Justice Works and Berkeley Law Foundation fellowships

Has not EVER set foot in Business, let alone high tech.  Not even manufacturing hemp oil.  
She is to the Left of Sanders.  Stanford has allowed those hostile to its values of freedom and enterprise to just infiltrate and multiply.   
ADP

the overwhelming majority of censoring and cancelling these days is by the right - book banning link, course banning, word banning, phrase banning, medical procedure banning, medication banning, cancelling employees like steinbach.  plus stanford is a private institution and therefore not bound by the first amendment, whereas florida, led by ron desantis, is very much a government entity subject to the first amendment.

How to end a thread…

You mean both of them? We'll time out for half a day and restart things tomorrow.

[2006alum]

Let's try this again. :)

[2006alum]

Let's try this again. :)

[BostonCard]

If you think that your post might be construed as political (even if you don't think it is), please, please, please ask yourself if there might not be a better forum for it.  If you are not sure, feel free to PM a mod (though, if you have to ask, it probably is).  Generally speaking, if a post contains a reference to a political figure, it is going to be very high risk.  Likewise, if your post contains a reference to a political party, elections, socialism, fascism, nazis, snowflakes (in any context other than winter sports), liberals, conservatives, social justice, the term "woke", cancel culture, Fox News, CNN, MSNBC (or, pretty much any television channel other than ESPN or Pac-12 networks, LOL), or any television personalities employed by them, or similar terms, there is a very high chance that it will get a thread locked and you issued a warning.  The above list is meant to be an example and is not exhaustive.  If you are not sure, my advice is "don't post it".  If someone else did it first, turn the other cheek.

Right now, the only exception is news about the war in Ukraine, and only in the dedicated thread.  The exception for all things COVID expired a year ago.  There are no other exceptions.

While we all recognize that there is going to be an intersection between Stanford, sports, and politics where political topics might be unavoidable (for example, a Santa Clara County decision that directly impacts the construction of a Stanford sports venue or a Stanford athlete who makes a political statement), be very careful about wading into the topic; the less it is about Stanford sports, the more likely it is to become problematic.

This thread was originally about Stanford policies; it is fine as long as it continues to be about Stanford policies on conduct (or tree removal).  If it becomes a debate about the wider political climate, it will be locked permanently.

BC

[BostonCard]

If you think that your post might be construed as political (even if you don't think it is), please, please, please ask yourself if there might not be a better forum for it.  If you are not sure, feel free to PM a mod (though, if you have to ask, it probably is).  Generally speaking, if a post contains a reference to a political figure, it is going to be very high risk.  Likewise, if your post contains a reference to a political party, elections, socialism, fascism, nazis, snowflakes (in any context other than winter sports), liberals, conservatives, social justice, the term "woke", cancel culture, Fox News, CNN, MSNBC (or, pretty much any television channel other than ESPN or Pac-12 networks, LOL), or any television personalities employed by them, or similar terms, there is a very high chance that it will get a thread locked and you issued a warning.  The above list is meant to be an example and is not exhaustive.  If you are not sure, my advice is "don't post it".  If someone else did it first, turn the other cheek.

Right now, the only exception is news about the war in Ukraine, and only in the dedicated thread.  The exception for all things COVID expired a year ago.  There are no other exceptions.

While we all recognize that there is going to be an intersection between Stanford, sports, and politics where political topics might be unavoidable (for example, a Santa Clara County decision that directly impacts the construction of a Stanford sports venue or a Stanford athlete who makes a political statement), be very careful about wading into the topic; the less it is about Stanford sports, the more likely it is to become problematic.

This thread was originally about Stanford policies; it is fine as long as it continues to be about Stanford policies on conduct (or tree removal).  If it becomes a debate about the wider political climate, it will be locked permanently.

BC

[winflop]

I hear you BC, but I'd suggest a different approach that focuses on the individual rather than the collective. The vast majority of us not only get that we need to keep the politics out of it, and I would reckon that we also appreciate that. But there are a few who recently have made explicit comments. Why should those of us who keep the politics out of it be punished? Rather, punish those who make them political.

[winflop]

I hear you BC, but I'd suggest a different approach that focuses on the individual rather than the collective. The vast majority of us not only get that we need to keep the politics out of it, and I would reckon that we also appreciate that. But there are a few who recently have made explicit comments. Why should those of us who keep the politics out of it be punished? Rather, punish those who make them political.

[2006alum]

I hear you BC, but I'd suggest a different approach that focuses on the individual rather than the collective. The vast majority of us not only get that we need to keep the politics out of it, and I would reckon that we also appreciate that. But there are a few who recently have made explicit comments. Why should those of us who keep the politics out of it be punished? Rather, punish those who make them political.

Can you clarify what makes you feel punished? We closed the thread temporarily because sometimes cooler heads just need to prevail in a thread that otherwise has value (ie this one). But the only people who were warned were those who clearly violated the board rules, and as I will reiterate yet again, we don't single people out publicly with warnings, we handle it privately. Other than the temporary thread closure, for everyone else, it should be back to business as usual.

[2006alum]

I hear you BC, but I'd suggest a different approach that focuses on the individual rather than the collective. The vast majority of us not only get that we need to keep the politics out of it, and I would reckon that we also appreciate that. But there are a few who recently have made explicit comments. Why should those of us who keep the politics out of it be punished? Rather, punish those who make them political.

Can you clarify what makes you feel punished? We closed the thread temporarily because sometimes cooler heads just need to prevail in a thread that otherwise has value (ie this one). But the only people who were warned were those who clearly violated the board rules, and as I will reiterate yet again, we don't single people out publicly with warnings, we handle it privately. Other than the temporary thread closure, for everyone else, it should be back to business as usual.

[winflop]

Sorry if I gave the impression that I feel punished, and by no means was I suggesting public warnings. My impression from BC's post was that threads would be locked for good if they went political, and my point was that the individuals who make political posts should be held accountable rather than preventing those of us who refrain from politicizing from continuing to discuss/comment. Locking threads temporarily does make sense.

[winflop]

Sorry if I gave the impression that I feel punished, and by no means was I suggesting public warnings. My impression from BC's post was that threads would be locked for good if they went political, and my point was that the individuals who make political posts should be held accountable rather than preventing those of us who refrain from politicizing from continuing to discuss/comment. Locking threads temporarily does make sense.

[2006alum]

Sorry if I gave the impression that I feel punished, and by no means was I suggesting public warnings. My impression from BC's post was that threads would be locked for good if they went political, and my point was that the individuals who make political posts should be held accountable rather than preventing those of us who refrain from politicizing from continuing to discuss/comment. Locking threads temporarily does make sense.

Got it, thanks! Our dividing line, always evolving, has been to lock for good threads that seem inherently political beyond salvaging, and/or have little intrinsic relationship to Stanford/Stanford sports. For the rest, we try to temporarily lock before folks feel tempted to double down with their posts. But we do try to leave thread lock as a last resort, and usually only when it's been several posters in a role taking us down that rabbit hole. Thanks!

[2006alum]

Sorry if I gave the impression that I feel punished, and by no means was I suggesting public warnings. My impression from BC's post was that threads would be locked for good if they went political, and my point was that the individuals who make political posts should be held accountable rather than preventing those of us who refrain from politicizing from continuing to discuss/comment. Locking threads temporarily does make sense.

Got it, thanks! Our dividing line, always evolving, has been to lock for good threads that seem inherently political beyond salvaging, and/or have little intrinsic relationship to Stanford/Stanford sports. For the rest, we try to temporarily lock before folks feel tempted to double down with their posts. But we do try to leave thread lock as a last resort, and usually only when it's been several posters in a role taking us down that rabbit hole. Thanks!

[BostonCard]

If a thread has enough relevant content and can be salvaged after a time out, I (speaking for myself) would prefer not to permanently lock it.  There are some threads where I think it is just too hard to try to keep out of politics.  I think this thread is at a high risk, but managed to go 5 pages long before a couple posts crossed the line.  I think as long as it focuses on Stanford policy, it's fine.

BC

[BostonCard]

If a thread has enough relevant content and can be salvaged after a time out, I (speaking for myself) would prefer not to permanently lock it.  There are some threads where I think it is just too hard to try to keep out of politics.  I think this thread is at a high risk, but managed to go 5 pages long before a couple posts crossed the line.  I think as long as it focuses on Stanford policy, it's fine.

BC

[82lsju]

about those 10,000 administrators...

"Public discussion earlier this year on the growth of Stanford’s administrative staff was misleading and simplistic, as it failed to recognize the complexity and breadth of Stanford, which essentially operates as a municipality, Provost Persis Drell told the Faculty Senate during her annual budget report on Thursday.

When properly accounted for, staff growth has in fact been measured and fully in keeping with the growth in operations that supports the university’s key activities, Drell said."

https://news.stanford.edu/report/2023/05...affnumbers

[82lsju]

about those 10,000 administrators...

"Public discussion earlier this year on the growth of Stanford’s administrative staff was misleading and simplistic, as it failed to recognize the complexity and breadth of Stanford, which essentially operates as a municipality, Provost Persis Drell told the Faculty Senate during her annual budget report on Thursday.

When properly accounted for, staff growth has in fact been measured and fully in keeping with the growth in operations that supports the university’s key activities, Drell said."

https://news.stanford.edu/report/2023/05...affnumbers

[76lsjumb]

"Public discussion earlier this year on the growth of Stanford’s administrative staff was misleading and simplistic, as it failed to recognize the complexity and breadth of Stanford, which essentially operates as a municipality, Provost Persis Drell told the Faculty Senate during her annual budget report on Thursday.

When properly accounted for, staff growth has in fact been measured and fully in keeping with the growth in operations that supports the university’s key activities, Drell said."

https://news.stanford.edu/report/2023/05...affnumbers

Spoken like a true administrator…

[76lsjumb]

"Public discussion earlier this year on the growth of Stanford’s administrative staff was misleading and simplistic, as it failed to recognize the complexity and breadth of Stanford, which essentially operates as a municipality, Provost Persis Drell told the Faculty Senate during her annual budget report on Thursday.

When properly accounted for, staff growth has in fact been measured and fully in keeping with the growth in operations that supports the university’s key activities, Drell said."

https://news.stanford.edu/report/2023/05...affnumbers

Spoken like a true administrator…

[cardcrimson]

"Public discussion earlier this year on the growth of Stanford’s administrative staff was misleading and simplistic, as it failed to recognize the complexity and breadth of Stanford, which essentially operates as a municipality, Provost Persis Drell told the Faculty Senate during her annual budget report on Thursday.

When properly accounted for, staff growth has in fact been measured and fully in keeping with the growth in operations that supports the university’s key activities, Drell said."

https://news.stanford.edu/report/2023/05...affnumbers

Spoken like a true administrator…

Well, pretty apt comparison. How often are municipalities accused of being light on administration?

[cardcrimson]

"Public discussion earlier this year on the growth of Stanford’s administrative staff was misleading and simplistic, as it failed to recognize the complexity and breadth of Stanford, which essentially operates as a municipality, Provost Persis Drell told the Faculty Senate during her annual budget report on Thursday.

When properly accounted for, staff growth has in fact been measured and fully in keeping with the growth in operations that supports the university’s key activities, Drell said."

https://news.stanford.edu/report/2023/05...affnumbers

Spoken like a true administrator…

Well, pretty apt comparison. How often are municipalities accused of being light on administration?

[Chupacabra]

As a proud slug, I both take pride in and offense to this characterization. More accurately, the offense taken is in its tone.

Tirien Steinbach, so-called Diversity Dean at Stanford Law School (not diversity of thought), is an "Infiltrant" from East Bay.  
https://law.stanford.edu/directory/tirien-steinbach/
... Find a more "GOVT FIRST", left-wing C.V. if you can:
Undergrad from UC Santa Cruz (Socialist at a minimum), then UC Zerkeley Law School (1999) 

[Chupacabra]

As a proud slug, I both take pride in and offense to this characterization. More accurately, the offense taken is in its tone.

Tirien Steinbach, so-called Diversity Dean at Stanford Law School (not diversity of thought), is an "Infiltrant" from East Bay.  
https://law.stanford.edu/directory/tirien-steinbach/
... Find a more "GOVT FIRST", left-wing C.V. if you can:
Undergrad from UC Santa Cruz (Socialist at a minimum), then UC Zerkeley Law School (1999)