Skip to main content

Fwd: An Open Letter to the MSU Community

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Lou Anna K Simon <presmail@msu.edu>
Date: Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 11:07 AM
Subject: An Open Letter to the MSU Community
To: STUDENTS@list.msu.edu


AN OPEN LETTER TO THE MSU COMMUNITY

 

The events of the last couple of weeks involving several racial incidents on our campus led me to send a letter on October 4 to MSU students. Like others, I was outraged by the complete lack of regard for how these incidents would impact our students, faculty and staff, and those within the greater community. Racial epithets and derogatory terms used to demean others shock the senses. They divert our attention from the academic work that brings us together. They have no place at MSU. Our goal is to foster a dynamic learning community for all; therefore, we must establish an environment of respect for all.

 

In my October 4 letter, I alerted students to what happened, outlined our responses, including law enforcement investigations by MSU Police in consultation with the FBI, and communicated that we take such matters seriously. I also asked for the community's help in finding out what happened and identifying those responsible. I wrote directly to the student body, not only because these incidents engender anger, hurt, fear, and feelings of intimidation by those directly impacted as individuals, but also because these incidents tear at the fundamental fabric of an inclusive learning community. 

 

In the intervening time, I've been heartened by the dialogue that has begun. Many within our community have discussed how each of us has a responsibility that extends beyond respect and tolerance to being an active part of shaping the community we want MSU to be. I must also say that I was disheartened by reports of incidents that continue to emerge. Even though such incidents do happen elsewhere, they do not have to happen here and require reflection on who we are as a community. We want MSU to be exceptional and represent for all what it means to be a Spartan.

 

I applaud the student leaders who have already organized a number of important dialogues, and I look forward to working with them and others within and outside the campus as we deal with the incidents and their impact. I have asked administrators, faculty, and staff from Student Affairs and Services, Inclusion and Intercultural Initiatives, Residential and Hospitality Services, International Studies and Programs, and the Office of the Provost to continue to dialogue with the community to assure that we are dealing effectively with the needs of our students. But dialogue is not enough; we must find ways to improve what we do. These conversations must result in tangible, positive changes in our shared learning community.

 

In closing, we may all come from different places, but we are all part of one community. I intend to provide updates and further details on our progress to address these incidents, and I encourage you to follow our efforts on the following websites: 

 

·         Office of the President  president.msu.edu

·         Office of the Provost  provost.msu.edu

·         Student Affairs and Services  vps.msu.edu

·         Inclusion and Intercultural Initiatives  inclusion.msu.edu

·         Residential and Hospitality Services  rhs.msu.edu

·         International Studies and Programs  isp.msu.edu

Lou Anna K. Simon, President


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

OWASP Top 10 Threats and Mitigations Exam - Single Select

Last updated 4 Aug 11 Course Title: OWASP Top 10 Threats and Mitigation Exam Questions - Single Select 1) Which of the following consequences is most likely to occur due to an injection attack? Spoofing Cross-site request forgery Denial of service   Correct Insecure direct object references 2) Your application is created using a language that does not support a clear distinction between code and data. Which vulnerability is most likely to occur in your application? Injection   Correct Insecure direct object references Failure to restrict URL access Insufficient transport layer protection 3) Which of the following scenarios is most likely to cause an injection attack? Unvalidated input is embedded in an instruction stream.   Correct Unvalidated input can be distinguished from valid instructions. A Web application does not validate a client’s access to a resource. A Web action performs an operation on behalf of the user without checking a shared sec

CKA Simulator Kubernetes 1.22

  https://killer.sh Pre Setup Once you've gained access to your terminal it might be wise to spend ~1 minute to setup your environment. You could set these: alias k = kubectl                         # will already be pre-configured export do = "--dry-run=client -o yaml"     # k get pod x $do export now = "--force --grace-period 0"   # k delete pod x $now Vim To make vim use 2 spaces for a tab edit ~/.vimrc to contain: set tabstop=2 set expandtab set shiftwidth=2 More setup suggestions are in the tips section .     Question 1 | Contexts Task weight: 1%   You have access to multiple clusters from your main terminal through kubectl contexts. Write all those context names into /opt/course/1/contexts . Next write a command to display the current context into /opt/course/1/context_default_kubectl.sh , the command should use kubectl . Finally write a second command doing the same thing into /opt/course/1/context_default_no_kubectl.sh , but without the use of k

标 题: 关于Daniel Guo 律师

发信人: q123452017 (水天一色), 信区: I140 标  题: 关于Daniel Guo 律师 关键字: Daniel Guo 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Apr 26 02:11:35 2018, 美东) 这些是lz根据亲身经历在 Immigration版上发的帖以及一些关于Daniel Guo 律师的回 帖,希望大家不要被一些马甲帖广告帖所骗,慎重考虑选择律师。 WG 和Guo两家律师对比 1. fully refund的合约上的区别 wegreened家是case不过只要第二次没有file就可以fully refund。郭家是要两次case 没过才给refund,而且只要第二次pl draft好律师就可以不退任何律师费。 2. 回信速度 wegreened家一般24小时内回信。郭律师是在可以快速回复的时候才回复很快,对于需 要时间回复或者是不愿意给出确切答复的时候就回复的比较慢。 比如:lz问过郭律师他们律所在nsc区域最近eb1a的通过率,大家也知道nsc现在杀手如 云,但是郭律师过了两天只回复说让秘书update最近的case然后去网页上查,但是上面 并没有写明tsc还是nsc。 lz还问过郭律师关于准备ps (他要求的文件)的一些问题,模版上有的东西不是很清 楚,但是他一般就是把模版上的东西再copy一遍发过来。 3. 材料区别 (推荐信) 因为我只收到郭律师写的推荐信,所以可以比下两家推荐信 wegreened家推荐信写的比较长,而且每封推荐信会用不同的语气和风格,会包含lz写 的research summary里面的某个方面 郭家四封推荐信都是一个格式,一种语气,连地址,信的称呼都是一样的,怎么看四封 推荐信都是同一个人写出来的。套路基本都是第一段目的,第二段介绍推荐人,第三段 某篇或几篇文章的abstract,最后结论 4. 前期材料准备 wegreened家要按照他们的模版准备一个十几页的research summary。 郭律师在签约之前说的是只需要准备五页左右的summary,但是在lz签完约收到推荐信 ,郭律师又发来一个很长的ps要lz自己填,而且和pl的格式基本差不多。 总结下来,申请自己上心最重要。但是如果选律师,lz更倾向于wegreened,