This statement made by Thomas Paine can be applied to the state of student life at RPI today. It is a tale of two times, two existences. A tale of the duality that has faced many current and former students’ time at RPI.

This past year we have had a string of policy decisions made in the absence of student input. The common thread in the DOSO move, Commencement policy, and graduate tuition decisions is a quick trigger finger. A decision made early and correctly maximizes the positive benefits of the decision. In short, at RPI, we have a cultural clash between a business acumen which rewards quick decisions and a engineering acumen which rewards the right decision. Problems arise when quick decisions are not the right decisions. In Dr. Jackson’s defense, since coming to RPI she has quickly corrected many of the most promient problems on campus.

Our president benefitted from these decisions with favorable student opinion repercussions towards herself, and by extension to the rest of the Institute. Today, the administration has a public relations problem. It is of their own making. They saw a legitimate problem, well, many legitimate problems with graduate programs and their future at RPI. These problems directly affected the 2,500 graduate students and indirectly affected the entire campus.

A decision was made. While I don’t know exactly what happened behind the scenes, I know do the ramafications of their actions.

The problem in this case is that while expediency and diligent vetting were required, only the quick part was met. A policy appeared out of nowhere. Students and student leaders felt sand-bagged, the faculty thought they had indications of upcoming change, but were still surprised.

Some may blame The Poly, but what is The Poly? What power does The Poly have? Contrary to what some believe, The Poly can not create or invent discontent. Why are people unhappy? They are unhappy because the decision-making process was short-circuited.

In a democratic country, people are wary of such moves that smell of absolutism. If people are unhappy with a policy, should not their discontent show up on the pages of The Poly? If reaction to a policy produces talk of petitions and unionization at RPI, what can the press do? The press can only amplify and illuminate that which already exists. The press has no seat at the decision-making table. We can’t negotiate to win concessions through backroom deals. Our duty is to inform, and through widespread knowledge our readers can react and use knowledge to respond in a position of strength.

“By perseverance and fortitude we have the prospect of a glorious issue; by cowardice and submission, the sad choice of a variety of evils.”