April Fools' Day at the 'Prince'

Precisely one week ago today, I was chuckling quietly while reading the April 1 issue of The Daily Princetonian. I thought it a pretty good April Fools’ Day issue. Though I found the satire a bit too unbelievably outrageous at times, I figured it might just manage to fool a few dozen fatigued minds over breakfast. Turns out I was the fool: There were no jokes.

In addition to the outrageous article about the new “Princeton College of Medicine,” I was convinced that two other articles couldn’t be real: “ACC proposes policy revision for room parties” and “University to crack down on early move-in.”

The first article was about a proposal from the Alcohol Coalition Committee (ACC) for a revision to the University’s current party registration policy. Apparently there exists a University policy mandating “[t]hose who are of legal drinking age and who wish to host a gathering with alcohol … obtain approval from … the Office of the Dean of the Undergraduate Students.” Of course, this regulation isn’t currently enforced. Now enter the all-fearful undergraduate student “party checkers” to whom we would be subject. These party checkers would supposedly stop by once or twice on the party to make sure that it was under control. And what if it’s not under control? Who knows? It’s not like they would have any disciplinary authority whatsoever. The only thing they could do is call Public Safety and tell on us: “If Public Safety finds you in your room with alcohol and your party is not registered, you’re going to get in trouble,” sternly warned ACC member Laurie Frey ’09.

The analysis of this idiotic proposition is extremely simple. Those that participate in problematic drinking would not register since they are guaranteed to be reported by these party checkers for such acts or for noncompliance. Without reporting, their chance of being caught by Public Safety is the same with or without this new policy. Seeing as such behavior exists despite the current risk, the new policy won’t change that. On the other hand, those that participate in responsible drinking must go through the trouble of registering parties and being subject to random visits by strangers. This revision serves no function.

The latter article reports on the University’s declaration that it will crack down on early move-in; because, you know, moving in early is just so criminal. My personal welcome to the new War on Early Move-In squad: the Early Arrival Policy Committee (EAPC)!

It really isn’t our lifelong dream to come to Princeton a few days early. The relevant students, which include RCAs, orientation volunteers, athletes and those doing summer research, total around 500 students. They all require early housing for completely legitimate reasons of working to contribute to the University in their own ways.

Director of Campus Life Initiatives Amy Campbell and Assistant Vice President for Facilities Chad Klaus clearly do not understand and did not seek representative students’ perspectives. They noted that they didn’t think students would be inconvenienced by the “co-mingling” initiative. How could it not inconvenience students to move all of their belongings around? And what is this “co-mingling” business? Either one of those meddlesome Big Brother-esque social engineering policies or an ex post facto justification for an unpopular policy that conveniences the administration. Further, Klaus notes that the campus is ill-equipped to handle students so early, as many University services don’t start up until the beginning of the academic year. Well, the great majority of the 500 students in fact stay over the entire summer and figure out how to survive. It seems evident that there was no sufficient student input, and it is disturbing that this policy was simply “announced.”

In keeping with the Big Brother trend, the EAPC also plans to create a website where students are required to register to stay on campus over breaks. Seeing as the University does not rent out its dormitories during these breaks, the rationale behind this initiative is opaque. Campbell explained, “We … don’t know who’s on campus over winter break … Should there be a weather event, the power goes out, someone’s really sick, someone’s on campus who shouldn’t be — we don’t know who is where.” First, the University does know who’s on campus with their tracking of our prox uses. Second, in case of a weather event or power outage, the University can just send out a campus-wide email. Third, if someone’s really sick but isn’t registered, is the University not going to provide assistance? Last, in case of serious emergencies, it would make use of the campus-wide emergency warning system, which need not distinguish between registered and unregistered students.

The point is that we are no longer in primary school, and insofar as these policies primarily affect our student lives, one would hope that the administration would seek student input and trust that we are not too stupid as to be incapable of judging and expressing our perspectives. The University proclaims independent thought and our becoming responsible citizens and decision-makers of the future. Then surely it’s not too much to ask to let us be a part of decision making processes regarding our campus life.

Eric Kang is a math major from Christchurch, New Zealand. He can be reached at eakang@princeton.edu.