If you’re going to send Gulley anyplace, send him back to Shaker Heights, Ohio, and force him to become a conservative richie-rich Republican.

THAT will be torture.

Tasers…hmmm…they’re really out of the picture?

I know students who came to her to get shit done - who had real issues they wanted to solve and implement, and she literally ignored these people. That’s her style.

Look at what she campaigned on, then look at what she did. Why doesn’t the OC do some research here and write an article?

Remember the “leaky roofs”? What about the “bundled textbook” legislation she was going to campaign for in Salem? Remember her whole thing on making student government more open? She couldn’t even departmentalize ethnic studies or Women’s Gender Studies!! That was like her big issue. She ignored anyone she didn’t want to deal with and burned big bridges.

Name ONE thing her administration did for the students.

In other words, strike while the iron is hot or just give up on accountability after…TBD.

“A complaint for non-fulfillment of duties should be
raised when a duty is unfulfilled, not held in reserve as
part of a political, retributive game plan played long
after the problem is corrected.”

Is the complaint something that was really held in reserve or is that speculation? It seems like the dissenting opinion is bringing in some information that is personal, background and could be chalked up to hearsay. That is, the heart of the complaint and questions about it should be whether or not people are held to account for what they did wrong. Perhaps in some cases there are scenarios where punishment for something done in the past is unmerited, but which are they? Aren’t all wrongdoings, crimes, misdemeanors, etc. committed in the past? What is, after all, the statute of limitations on wrongdoings…and the subject of this complaint?

I know these questions might play into the dissent in ways that I am ignorant of, but for me the dissenting argument begs the question as to whether or not it’s a good idea to hold people accountable for past actions…even if things have been ’solved’ since the transgression first took place. I agree that people shouldn’t hold things in reserve to use politically, but even in this case it seems that if one wanted to damage McLain he or she would have brought the complaint forward when she would have had maximum punishment/humiliation.

Anyway, when people screw up they screw up. They should be held accountable. Dissenting to this weak punishment for McLain while admitting that you would agree with the majority if the timing were different is just weird to me.

Thoughts?