[304] in UA Exec
Re: You are being lied to.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Liz A. Denys)
Sun Apr 4 22:55:49 2010
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2010 22:55:42 -0400
From: "Liz A. Denys" <lizdenys@MIT.EDU>
To: Andrew Lukmann <lukymann@mit.edu>
CC: Ted Hilk <thilk@mit.edu>, Jessica H Lowell <jessiehl@mit.edu>,
hwkns@mit.edu, Nathaniel Fox <natefox@mit.edu>,
Alexandra Jordan <amjordan@mit.edu>,
Anthony Rindone <arindone@mit.edu>, UA Senate <ua-senate@mit.edu>,
UA Executive Board <ua-exec@mit.edu>, cfs@mit.edu
In-Reply-To: <4BB94E3A.6030905@mit.edu>
I have a pretty well established relationship with Muriel. I'll try to
meet with her this week.
-Liz
Andrew Lukmann wrote:
> Hey Ted,
>
> I'm sorry to hear that, but it certainly makes sense given my experience
> with her when she was an Asst. Housemaster at Simmons (5-7 yrs. ago). I
> mentioned her mostly for the fact that she is one of the few people who
> are usually willing to talk with students and who, by the nature of her
> position, has some real leverage over DSL. In general, she's probably
> someone that active student advocates should build a relationship with -
> even if she proves to be altogether unhelpful on the dining front, she
> may be willing to take a stand on other things that students care about.
>
> -Andrew L.
>
>
> Ted Hilk wrote:
>> Hey Andrew,
>>
>> The last time I spoke with Prof. Muriel Medard, she was trying to
>> justify reducing financial aid by $1400 for students opting out of the
>> dining plan when the actual difference in expenses between dining hall
>> food and cooking for oneself over a year is only $500 on average.
>> Nevermind the fact that this would essentially be predicating student
>> aid on student choices (should I get extra financial aid if I want a
>> new computer?). After half an hour she finally admitted that the
>> amount was arbitrary and that the extra deduction was solely intended
>> to 'encourage' students to buy into the dining system. She is very
>> polite and willing to talk at great length about issues, but I'm
>> afraid she does not appear to be in support of the student perspective
>> on this matter.
>>
>> Ted
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Andrew Lukmann <lukymann@mit.edu
>> <mailto:lukymann@mit.edu>> wrote:
>>
>> Hey Jessie (and everybody else)...
>>
>> Like you pointed out, a number of reliable student allies in the
>> administration have moved on and on the whole, less cooperative
>> people have replaced them. Without a guy like Immer or Larry to go
>> to, this generation of student leaders is (I believe) having a
>> harder leveraging their relationships than we did. That said,
>> there are still a number of people who might have a bit of pull in
>> DSL that I would recommend people engage, if they haven't already:
>> Phil Walsh (CAC), Ann McCants (former faculty CSL chair), Muriel
>> Medard (CSL chair - though her opinions on dining might be
>> well-ingrained). Also, even though he is on his way out, I've
>> always found Steve Lerman to be a friend to students and he might
>> be in the position to speak (or act) a little more freely now that
>> he is moving to GWU.
>>
>> I think it's great to see a number of students realizing that they
>> need to hold administrators feet to the fire when they fall short
>> of their own rhetoric/promises regarding meaningfully engaging
>> students on important issues. If you (and I do mean all of you)
>> don't make it difficult (or embarrassing) for them to ignore you,
>> they will never have any incentive to act in your best interest
>> any time it conflicts with the easiest path to their goals (in
>> this case, dining cost effectiveness).
>>
>> Keep it up!
>> -Andrew L.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Jessica H Lowell wrote:
>>
>> Quoting Daniel Hawkins <hwkns@MIT.EDU <mailto:hwkns@MIT.EDU>>:
>>
>> Jessie,
>>
>> We tried coming up with our own proposal last year (DPC).
>> Admins keep
>> calling it "an important piece of student input" and
>> completely ignoring its
>> contents. What's driving this is the desire to eliminate
>> the deficit and
>> "build community" around dining, which involves less
>> choice and more money
>> (but not MIT's money - they need to eliminate the
>> deficit). Those are
>> principles that everyone in the administration (that I'm
>> aware of) agrees
>> on. I haven't talked to Matt - I'll send him an e-mail.
>>
>>
>> Yeah, I saw the proposal. It looked like a good step. It's
>> the same old story
>> with Dining. When I dealt with that, though, it was easier,
>> because larryben
>> (Columbo's predecessor) was still around and he was on our side.
>>
>> Who does Columbo listen to? Presumably Phil Clay, but I doubt
>> Clay's useful
>> here. Immerman's gone, so that's a non-starter. The FSILGs
>> generally have a
>> stake in students not getting screwed over on Dining, since
>> less choice often
>> hurts their frosh and on-campus members - is anyone on the
>> FSILG side of the
>> Student Life staff persuadable and trusted by Columbo? Could
>> any of the RLAs
>> help here? If Admissions has any influence with Columbo,
>> which they may not,
>> they'd likely be willing to help you out with him.
>>
>> It sounds like if you keep working primarily with Columbo,
>> you're not going to
>> get anywhere. Obviously, you have to work with him,
>> communicate with him, not
>> antagonize him too much. But that doesn't mean you can't work
>> with other
>> people (sounds like a good project for a senator or two!).
>> And if you can dig
>> up administrative allies, they might be able to make more
>> progress with Columbo
>> than you can.
>>
>> Have you bugged your rich potential-big-donor alumni? Many
>> FSILGs and some dorm
>> living groups keep in contact with a lot of their alumni, and
>> might be able to
>> dig up a few wealthy folks who would be pissed about students
>> being screwed
>> over on dining.
>>
>> The UA has little real power given to it - it has to find ways
>> to manufacture
>> its own.
>>
>> - Jessie
>>
>>
>>
>
--
Liz A. Denys
lizdenys@mit.edu
