Interactive | The Nealley/Rodriguez case summary

the post "you are all entitled pretentious individuals" is insulting and hypocritical. the author sounds both pompous and incredibly entitled. The accusation to "all you who believe you can't go without alcohol for 5 hours" to join AA is quite out of touch with reality, and it significantly decreases the credibility of your post. While I do not condone the excessively irresponsible drinking and behavior of the students that resulted in the "mass casualty" last year (or ruin other opportunities for students, like senior pub night), Alcoholics Anonymous is not the place for these students - but perhaps a lesson in consideration of others and of moderation is. You are also silly to think that this policy change is going to teach anyone lesson, or change the behavior of anyone, which is its greatest flaw. Preventing drinking at the event does not change the actions of students before they arrive. Perhaps making sobriety or at least lack of excessive inebriation would be a more successful method to reach the desired goal, without punishing responsible drinkers of legal drinking age. The policy must be attacked for its flawed logic and likely ineffectiveness, and frankly, shame on you for writing such an arrogant post yourself and not being in touch enough with reality to see how incredibly wrong you are.

And for goodness sake (to a different post)- stop harping on the extra building in NH - hundreds of different people use the Loj EVERY YEAR, YEAR ROUND, and I have never met a person who hasn't loved going up there and appreciated it - in fact most people tell me they wish that had started going up sooner and more often.

but back the point, this policy is not going to solve the problem. If they administration actually wants to prevent and MCI, the police at entrances should be checking for sobriety more stringently, and adequate water, food, and shade should be provided.