RSS
Facebook
Twitter
E-PrinceThis paper ran two articles last week covering certain controversies surrounding the Conflict of Interest Reduction (CIR) referendum. As the original sponsor of the referendum, I wish to voice my thoughts on this matter.
It is supposedly ambiguous whether the ...
(back to the article)
The opinions expressed here are those of the individual commenters and do not necessarily represent the views of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. We do not take responsibility for the opinions, facts, or claims presented by individual commenters, and reserve the right to moderate or delete inappropriate comments.
NOBODY CARES
Great article!
The fact that so many USG members have neglected to sign feels like blatant disregard for the desires of the student body.
I completely agree!
It is absurd that USG members will refuse to comply with the official will of the very people who elected them.
I wonder what the solution is, though.
Make the toolshed sign the pledge!
I'm happy to hear the bullshit petition of Yaro's campaign manager was removed. Did Yaro remove his own shitty opinion from his website?
If USG members were not allowed to utilize their office in the pursuit of personal advancement, the USG would dissapear tomorrow morning. Like most Princeton institutions, the USG has nothing to do with selflessness or service, but with the seminal drive of the Princetonian spirit: resume building. The author of this article was obviously naive enough to take the Univerisity's informal motto seriously.
Well-written, Eric! As someone who voted to pass this referendum, I would like to see it upheld and taken seriously. It is simple enough to understand potential conflicts of interest in this situation, and the student body has already made their preference clear on this matter.
"The student body already has this perception"?? really? no one I know subscribes to the USG-people-only-want-recommendations conspiracy theory. in fact, the thought didn't even cross my mind until Kang's referendum . . . and I voted against it, because it's ridiculous.
people should be able to seek recommendations from those who know their work best. If that happens to be a high-level U. administrator, fine. a lot of them have worked hard with the USG; telling them they can't seek recommendations from admins is like telling SVC people that they can't get recs from their associated administrators.