I'd suggest it might be better for communities to figure out how to care for all of their members, even the ones who seem inclined to complain. Ignoring the interests of some members of the community to further general harmony (people get to keep doing things the way they want to, advisors can decide how to treat their grad students and other pieces of lab equipment, etc.) is a risky move. Not only might the trouble-makers you're ignoring have valid concerns -- concerns which would do more to ensure long-term harmony should the community heed them -- but, their reaction at being shut out by the community might be ... bad.
« Stimpy invents Katamari Damacy | Main | Ernie's are better. »
March 17, 2006
Comments
The comments to this entry are closed.
Recent Posts
- Computational topology at SOCG 2013
- Busy busy
- SOCG votes to leave ACM
- Computational Advertising at UIUC
- Applied and computational topology: ATMCS 5
- SOCG(T) 2012
- SOCG 2012 call for papers, videos, and multimedia
- Geometry and topology at SODA 2012
- Geometry and data structures at WADS 2011
- Theory of Computation as a Lens on the Sciences
Recent Comments
- GASARCH on SOCG votes to leave ACM
- David on Applied and computational topology: ATMCS 5
- Guilherme on Geometry and topology at SODA 2012
- Marc on Computational topology at SOCG and EuroCG 2011
- Chandra on Geometry and topology at ICS 2011
- Anon on Geometry and topology at ICS 2011
- Forrest Iandola on Complexity of Rubik's Cube
- Nicholas Petersen on Apple bans modular programming
- Rubi on Apple bans modular programming
- Markus on Apple bans modular programming
I remember when he got out of prison. He sounded like a total nut case saying something about logic, killing and the future. It seems absurd to me that someone can end someone's life and after only seven years the killer can resume his life.
Posted by: The Great Gazoo | March 21, 2006 at 09:44 PM