Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You just quoted the WSJ editorial page.

Predictably, you can find the actual DOJ letter to Montana quickly with Google, where you'll immediately discover that the letter is the result of a cooperative process following a rash of sexual assaults on campus, and was not in fact a new nationwide speech code for universities.



>>> You just quoted the WSJ editorial page.

Thank you for telling me. I was wondering what those letters WSJ in domain name and those "Wall Street Journal" headers on the site mean... and now I know!

>>> and was not in fact a new nationwide speech code for universities.

The letter itself is not. However, it is intended to be used as a template policy for other places, and it significantly reduces the bar that needs to be cleared before speech can be punished - in part by removing any objective component - and introduces possibility of students being punished before the investigation is even completed. How speech codes could do anything about assault - which, by any sane definition, must involve physical action beyond speech - is completely incomprehensible. Even if change of the rules were necessary to prevent assault - which is doubtful as assault is already illegal so old rules should work just fine - speech limits have nothing to do with assault.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: