以下是引用苞米在2007-5-5 4:18:00的发言：First, we may first look into the procedure to see if there is any procedural violation. To my personal experience, many Americans are very bureaucratic and hypocritical. And I strongly suspect that whole the investigation and decision making process are impeccable. Second, we move to examine the substantive regulations to see if they are fair and neutral, not only according to Americans, but to Chinese as well. If they are not, then it is probably the time to make a change. If both the procedure and the regulations are free of any challenge, here is the bottom line: we might recommend, although not always succeed, the committee to reconsider the equitable consequence of such as harsh punishment. This tragedy also strongly indicates Fuqua inadequate ethic and disciplinary education and negligent supervision. Isn’t it time for all committee and the whole business school to sit down and ponder their own faults and what should have been done yet has never be done, rather than to ferociously search for some scapegoats?
Disclaimer: not a Duke student nor affiliated to Duke or Fuquar whatsoever. " I " and " we " are used as a matter of convenience. 对美国人是否bureaucratic和在这件事情处理上的合理性，是没有直接联系的。受牵连同学，我相信他们一定已经在努力争取把事情解释清楚，然后希望学校能公正处理。把当时真实情况弄清楚是很重要的。如果是做错了，一味强调错误理由能改变事实吗？希望在和学校协商时，在处罚力度上还有商讨的可能。 我理解的支持是在一些同学受到处分后，即成事实情况下，如何帮助他们继续走下去。 | 
[复制链接]
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2007-5-5 05:07:00
楼主
：
