“That she has lives there for years suggests it isn’t an imminent danger to her”

People are sharing their thoughts about the issue, just like you are. That is what these comment sections are for, after all.

Yeah. Painful.

I think that’s the one.

It’s easy to find, since he uses his name as watermarks on his photos he posted to his kinja account.

You should see the video of his (failed) attempt at open-mic stand up that’s on youtube.

“unless you supplied someone with your name and address, which would be an immensely stupid thing to do on Kinja.”

I’ve had multiple pairs of those, and while they’re decent, I wouldn’t describe them as great. No two pairs had the same volume balance between right & left (unequal in all), the wires break inside the covering, and the sound is definitely not the best I’ve ever heard in an earbud. They’re alright for the price if…

I’ve had multiple pairs of those, and while they’re decent, I wouldn’t describe them as great. No two pairs had the…

No apology necessary, and I am not disagreeing with your comment - but I really have no interest in a discussion about “safe spaces” as a topic. The only mention of student safety in the source article is this one sentence:

Well I’m not making any kind of argument in favor of or against safe spaces here - my point is that if a certain issue is part of the reasoning behind why student leaders pushed for the change, then it is part of the story and should be included in the reportage. The OP here, for some reason, feels it would be better…

I didn’t ask you if she was lying. How is what she said hyperbole?

“Again, of course, people don’t feel safe (or comfortable) with this nomenclature. This still is not the main point to be emphasised.”

“Feeling unsafe implies the student are little kids who should be ignored because what adult is afraid of “names on buildings”.”

“Could you walk me through how that could lead to a lack of safety, or even the feeling of a lack of safety?”

“Frankly, the man wasn’t going to rise from the dead to harass anyone, so that explanation makes it sound like the university is catering to nervous Nellies which is false.”

Why do you ask me? Ask Natalie Fisher (or the writer of the article above, who is actually the one inserting the word “unsafe” into the reasoning here).

So Natalie Fisher was lying when she said that renaming Dunn Hall “was a small thing if it would make UO students feel safer on campus”...?

First of all, nowhere does it say that the students feeling unsafe is the only reason for the change. Secondly, it wasn’t the board of trustees who put forth that reasoning, it was the student leader.

What’s wrong with pointing out that some students might feel unsafe because of the name on the building as part of the reasoning?

“Matt Lauer has sucked for so long and we just . . . accept it.”