January 15, 2018

Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998

Monday January 15, 2018 vol. CXLI no. 124

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } STUDENT LIFE

U . A F FA I R S

USG reflects on past year, talks transition

By Linh Nguyen contributor

The final Undergraduate Student Government meeting of the Jemison administration took place on Sunday, Jan. 14, at 5 p.m. in Frist Multipurpose Room B. USG Vice President Daniel Qian ’19 convened the meeting and covered the President’s Report for president Myesha Jemison ’18.

Neither president-elect Rachel Yee ’19 nor Jemison was able to attend the meeting due to personal conflicts.

The newly elected officers under Yee will officially take over from their predecessors on Feb. 5, the first day of the spring semester.

Qian briefly discussed the Honor Code Referenda and quoted Jemison’s report, which notes a spike in student engagement since the Honor Code vote. An example of this engagement is the uptake in emails to Vice President for Campus Life W. Rochelle Calhoun, Yee, and Jemison in the last weeks.

Academics Committee Chair Patrick Flanigan ’18 read his final report and confirmed developments in discussion between USG and administration in terms of financial aid and admissions, the academic calendar, and general education requirements.

Flanigan dissolved the Honor System Subcommittee, effective immediately, but extensively praised the subcommittee for its work in getting all four referenda passed through “record-shattering 64 percent turnout by the student body,” with even “the least

agreeable proposal supported by 87 percent of the voting students.”

In addition, Flanigan acknowledged that although many students may be “disheartened by the administration’s actions on the reform,” he urged all students to “continue to uphold the Honor Code and to maintain civility in their discourse with the administration and faculty on the Code.”

“Despite this administrative overrule, I believe these common-sense reforms will prevail because they represent the fundamental values of our university,” said Flanigan. “We need a system where no student is put on trial without sufficient evidence, a system where a student who is convicted of cheating on a quiz in the first week of school is given a second chance, and a system where no student is put through a trial and sentenced to permanent academic probation for writing ‘see back’ on the front of her exam.”

Flanigan also encouraged all continuing USG senate members to “continue to advocate for justice.”

“The movement lives on because injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere,” said Flanigan.

After Flanigan concluded his report, Social Committee chair Lavinia Liang ’18 presented the final Social Committee update.

“The Social Committee’s work is not done yet,” said Liang.

“Dean’s Date is our last project for the semester to provide this alternative celebration for students at night.”

See USG page 3

COURTESY OF SUSTAIN.PRINCETON.EDU

Beginning in February, campus food scraps will be turned into soil in this biodigester.

New biodigester recycles food

By Victor Hua contributor

In February, the University will feature an important addition to promote its sustainability goals on campus: an in-vessel aerobic digester, according to the University’s Biodigester Blog.

According to the blog, the biodigester, from the food waste management organization Food, Organics, Recycling Solutions, can process some of the campus’s food scraps into useful soil. This is done by facilitating the decomposition process to a time span of approximately five days after mixing the waste with wood shavings to enhance resulting soil with nutrients, which can then be utilized in the University’s soil processing yard.

Though food recycling already takes place at the University, it is managed by a com-

pany off campus and requires a means of delivery, the blog indicates. With a biodigester directly on campus, the carbon emissions released during delivery can be reduced.

“There’s no industrial compost facility in the region, which means that zero-waste events aren’t possible,” explained Erin Mooz ’19, a member of the Princeton University Ecology Representative Program. “The on campus biodigester will create a lot of opportunities in terms of expanding types of materials that can be composted.”

The biodigester will also further improve the ecosystem on campus overall by providing high-quality, nutrient-rich soil on campus. This soil can promote the health of plants, which, in turn, is expected to reduce air pollution and increase the availability of freshwater on campus, accord-

ing to the blog.

In addition to improving the physical health of the campus, the biodigester will serve as an educational opportunity, providing research opportunities to interested students, explained Campus as Lab fellow Gina Talt ’15 in an interview.

Campus as Lab is a program at the University that provides opportunities to students to use the entire campus as a resource to study sustainability issues.

“The biodigester has the potential to serve as junior or senior thesis research projects for anyone interested in getting involved with the operation of the system,” Talt said.

Research projects can involve studying the effectiveness of the biodigester in processing plastics such as compostable utensils and investigating different combinations of food See COMPOST page 3

STUDENT LIFE

Resources for mental health and support Counseling and Psychological Services: 609-258-3141 (emergency: 609-258-3333 — there is an on-call counselor available every day, even after hours) CONTACT of Mercer County: 609-896-2120 or 609-585-2244 — call to talk

Forbes ’zee group two years later heavily involved in residential college life

By Benjamin Ball contributor

As the fall semester draws to a close, students reflect on the semesters, years, and memories for which they are thankful. For one group of juniors in Forbes College, one good memory stands out among the rest: their freshman year advisee group.

“I think definitely my ’zee group was just very, very tight,” said Hyejin Jang ’19.

“We had a wonderful time our freshman year. I feel like for ev-

eryone it was a great way to transition into Princeton.”

Jang’s ’zee group is somewhat of an anomaly on campus. This academic year, two members of the 13-strong group are residential college advisers, two are assistant residential college advisers, and two are peer academic advisers.

Six members were PAAs last year.

The number of students from this relatively small ’zee group involved in residential college life is indeed remarkable. However, to Jang and the other members of her ’zee group, it comes naturally.

“I had a very close ’zee group my freshman year, and I would say most of that was due to my RCA,” said Samvida Venkatesh ’19, now an ARCA in Forbes. “I wanted to give that back to incoming first-years in Forbes because I realized that not everyone has an equal experience, and since mine was so good, I wanted to make sure that other first-years could have something similar.”

All ’zees shared this motivation, several said, even those who didn’t become RCAs, ARCAs, See ’ZEES page 3

STUDENT LIFE

Suicide Prevention Lifeline: 800-273-8255 — call anytime

Spoofed New York TigerTrek email throws E-Club listserv into confusion

By Sarah Warman Hirschfield senior news writer

On Friday, an email sent out to the Princeton Entrepreneurship Club listserv encouraged the New York TigerTrek team to artificially lower acceptance rates. The email appeared to have been sent from the address of Theodor Marcu ’20, the director of New York TigerTrek, a trip that allows 20 selected University undergraduates to meet entrepreneurial leaders at start-ups, venture capital firms, and other companies in New York City.

The Office of Information Technology opened an investigation and

found that the email was forged in order to mislead the recipients about the origin of the message.

Such an email is commonly referred to as a spoof. Email spoofing is used in phishing and scam campaigns. It is possible because core email protocols do not provide a mechanism for address authentication.

“It was disheartening because we put in a lot of effort in this trip,” explained Marcu, emphasizing that the selection process is fair to all applicants. New York TigerTrek’s selection committee is made up of both students and faculty members.

“We genuinely try to get as many people who otherwise wouldn’t

In Opinion

Today on Campus

Editor-in-Chief Sarah Sakha writes her final Letter from the Editor, Connor Pfeiffer and Ryan Born write in support of the University’s handling of the Honor Code referenda, and more. PAGE 4

10 a.m.: Students in the fall visual arts course taught

by Joe Scanlan display hanging light fixtures made of ashwood in the Extraordinary Process Exhibition.

Hurley Gallery, 122 Alexander Street.

have applied to these things to apply and to get them on the trip,” he said, noting that the trip is not just for STEM majors, but for “anybody who is interested in meeting fantastic people who are building the world that we live in.”

Applications were due Jan. 14, for the 2018 spring break trip to New York.

Marcu encourages all interested students to apply, citing the uniqueness of the opportunity to meet top professionals, find mentors and job opportunities down the road, and bond with students on the trip.

“We want to reach out to as many See E-CLUB page 3

WEATHER

Princeton Peer Nightline: 609-258-0279 or princetonpeernightline.com — open Tuesdays and Fridays 9 p.m. to 1 a.m.

HIGH

31˚

LOW

24˚

Partly cloudy chance of rain:

10 percent

page 2

The Daily Princetonian

Monday January 15, 2018

Monday January 15, 2018

The Daily Princetonian

page 3

Liang: Student body has been pleased with Lawnparties headliners USG

Continued from page 1

.............

Liang confirmed that the Senate “generously allocated $75,000 for Lawnparties for the fall semester, $5,000 for committee events, and $54,000 for Dean’s Date,” although she anticipates a significant surplus for the Dean’s Date celebration featuring Gryffin.

Shifting the focus to the 2017 Lawnparties Report, Liang noted 380 responses in a three-day period from the last week of November, with 90 to 100 responses from

each class.

“Through a limited timeframe and a limited number of responses, we found that people’s favorite Lawnparties acts from the past few years have been [in order] Big Sean, Tinashe, and Jeremih,” said Liang. “The latter two were the two Lawnparties from 2017, so I’m really happy that the student body has been pleased with this committee’s selections.”

Liang also referenced the fall 2017 Jade Bird concert, the Social Committee’s first-ever open house in Frist, and the Dean’s Date concert.

“We wanted to make sure that we weren’t just about Lawnparties,” said Liang. “The Social Committee is about holding events that all undergraduate students can enjoy.”

Liang described the Dean’s Date concert as “an important part of our mission as USG and as the Social Committee to find alternatives to high-risk drinking on these sorts of nights.”

Currently, the Social Committee Chair and Campus and Community Affairs Chair positions are still open and seeking applicants.

President-elect Yee and class sena-

tor Nate Lambert ’20 will be interviewing candidates in the coming weeks to find suitable successors.

Each USG Senate member is required to create a “playbook” for their successor to be reviewed by Qian and executive secretary Traci Mathieu ’20 during Intersession.

Student Groups Recognition Committee co-chair Aaron Sobel ’19 recognized eight new student organizations: Vexillological Society, Princeton Chamber Music Society, Pasifika American & Islander Student Coalition, Princeton Calisthenics, The Bread-fast Club, Dunder Mifflin, Princeton

Electronica, and Machine Learning, Big Data, and Finance.

USG voted unanimously to approve all eight organizations.

At the end of the meeting, Qian officially presented the final sendoff on behalf of the Jemison administration, retiring Flanigan, Liang, Mathieu, Director of Communications Maya Wesby ’18, class senator Eli Schechner ’18, class senator Soraya Morales Nuñez ’18, class senator Andrew Ma ’19, and class senator June Philippe ’20.

Wesby is a former chief copy editor for The Daily Princetonian.

Soil will help environment Email reached over 1,600 subscribers COMPOST Continued from page 1

.............

waste and carbon agents.

Other educational opportunities apart from research are also made available with the introduction of the biodigester on campus, such as classroom learning. ENV 200: The Environmental Nexus and ENE 202: Designing Sustainable Systems are two such courses that will utilize the biodigester to facilitate learning, both of which are offered in the spring.

The biodigester is also expected to contribute to the presence of sustainability efforts on campus. With an

abundance of educational opportunities as well as guided tours revolved around the composter, the introduction of the biodigester should raise environmental awareness and spark conversation about handling food waste on campus.

While the biodigester has been on campus since last December, it is only expected to begin composting starting next month, according to Talt.

“The biodigester has been installed, but is not yet operational,” Talt explained. “We still have a few remaining operational logistics to sort out, but we expect to begin operating the system shortly after the start of the spring semester.”

E-CLUB

Continued from page 1

.............

people as possible who are from different backgrounds,” he said.

Rachel Yee ’19 participated in the program last year, calling it “the definitive turning point” of her year.

Before the trip, she was uninspired and unmotivated professionally. Once on the trip, she was exposed to new concepts, learned about innovative approaches, and gained new perspectives.

“I am very thankful that it introduced me to a very different group of people at Princeton,” she said.

“Tiger Trek was a great way to get to know people with vastly different interests in a meaningful way.

It shook things up in a good way

for me.”

The forged email was sent to over 1,600 subscribers of the E-Club listserv. The message encouraged recipients to spam promotional emails in order to increase the number of applicants and reduce the acceptance rate so “all of this looks more legit.”

“Don’t worry we will make sure that you guys are selected anyways,” the message ended, apparently targeted at members of the TigerTrek team. Kevin Wu ’19 replied all to express his concern about the last line.

In response, Marcu asserted that the email did not come from him and that it was in no way affiliated with TigerTrek.

On top of deterring students from applying, Marcu worries that the act of identity impersonation casts a shadow on his personal repu-

tation. He does not know who was behind the email spoofing, a tactic used in phishing and scams.

Marcu participated in New York TigerTrek last year, when the trip was but a pilot. Modeled on Silicon Valley TigerTrek, the fall break trip in its seventh year, the New York version was a resounding success. This year, participants will meet with Jennifer Hyman, CEO of Rent the Runway; Alan Patricof, CoFounder of Greycroft Capital; and Justin Connolly of EVP, Disney, and ESPN, among others.

The trip is sponsored by the Department of Computer Science, the Department of Operations Research and Financial Engineering, the School of Engineering and Applied Science, the Keller Center, the Bendheim Center for Finance, and Career

Two RCAs, two ARCAs, and two PAAs inspired by their RCA ’ZEES

Continued from page 1

.............

or PAAs. Michael Hecht, head of Forbes College, said he was unsurprised by the group’s involvement in residential leadership and more than happy to have them aboard.

“I was not surprised when they applied to be RCAs, and I was delighted when they got it. They’re all four of them outgoing people, and fun too,” Hecht said.

“How meaningful my RCA’s presence was” provided “an awesome first-year experience and an unusually close ’zee group, and also a motivation to want to forward that to other incoming students who might feel like they’re not prepared and are searching for someone to connect to,” said Fares Marayati ’19, another former ’zee turned ARCA. Hecht added that the group’s first-year experience not only gave them the motivation to become RCAs but also helped develop them into people who were great candidates for the job.

“They were a group in their freshman year who developed a sense of community and a sense of belonging,” said Hecht. “Those are the very same things we look for in RCAs, because those are the people who set the tone for the next generation of the community.”

“Our RCA from freshman year did an amazing job engaging and always being present,” said Kyle Lang ’19, now a Forbes PAA. “That inspired a lot of us to give back to the Forbes community.”

Consistently, when the juniors spoke of what motivated them, many of them mentioned their RCA Jordan Lubkeman ’16, whose own motivations came from her less-than-impressive freshman experience and left her determined to make that introduction to the University better for others.

“What prompted me to be an RCA was really a host of negative social experiences I went through as an underclassman, and how I felt that if I had a community or a mentor to which I could have turned, those could have been avoided,” said Lubkeman. “It’s the RCA’s task to be able to forge a community from very different people.”

Lubkeman specified that her tactics in fostering community involved having discussions about issues on campus, making sure everyone had their voice heard, and having those discussions nearly every week. In addition, Lubkeman made intentional attempts to encourage her ’zees to support each other.

“I get to be there for a year, but

it’s the community that I build [that] hopefully lasts four years,” Lubkeman said.

According to the now-juniors, there’s little doubt of Lubkeman’s success.

Many of her former ’zees have learned from Lubkeman’s example to foster community naturally and warmly.

“What I think Jordy did really well that I try to model is just sometimes having your door open and letting people just come in.

Naturally a great conversation will get going and that sense of community will be fostered really well and really strongly if you just let people, who are good people, interact with each other and get to know each other better,” said Colin Yost ’19, now an RCA in Forbes.

The members of her ’zee group have not only gone on to be leaders in the Forbes community but have also stayed very close to each over the last few years; eight members even took a trip to Puerto Rico together last fall break.

“What I think Jordy did so well was she didn’t just build a community where everyone felt welcome and everyone felt accepted, but she also built a community where we could support each other,” said Yost. “She not only fostered an inclusive community that year, but she fostered an inclusive community that was strong enough that we still continually support each other now and help each other years after.”

For Jang, the closeness of the ’zee group is the natural byproduct of their common, positive experiences.

“A lot of my group members were invested enough to take the time to stick together,” said Jang. “It just kind of naturally happened. I’m not consciously thinking ‘I need to keep in touch with my ’zee group.’ They’re my friends.”

Although many in the group credit their cohesion to how special their RCA was, they also agree that making an active effort to stay close was essential to the results they achieved.

“Obviously a big part of why we’re so close is because of our RCA, but the rest of it is just because all of us were very committed to making sure that we had a good ’zee group dynamic, and even those who hadn’t put as much time into it made an effort to reach out,” said Venkatesh. “I think everyone as a group has been really supportive, and that’s what helped us all go beyond being supportive for each other and extend that to other groups on campus like RCAs and PAAs.” According to Lubkeman, their

closeness and leadership roles were definitely no surprise: She could see something special in them from the beginning.

“I’d say there’s definitely an interest in all of them to make an impact at Princeton, and I’m not at all surprised that so many of them are being campus leaders in their own ways,” said Lubkeman.

“It’s sweet of them to give me a lot of the credit, but in their own right I just really lucked out with a really incredible group of men and women.”

As an ARCA, one way Venkatesh tries to foster community and follow Lubkeman’s model is to host weekly study breaks that are activity-oriented, like building gingerbread houses or writing letters, rather than just getting together and eating food.

“Coming home at the end of a long day, having my door open, and having people pop in to say hi and be friendly…. It’s just nice to see those comforting faces over and over again,” said Venkatesh.

“If I had just been living in a single my junior year, I wouldn’t have been as social, but this is just like going home.”

Lang attempts to apply these same social principles to his PAA duties as well. He chooses to focus on three main aspects: having actual knowledge of University resources, being able to convey those resources and advise adequately, and — what he says is most important — making sure first-years know he’s there for them. He recommended reaching out to ’zees for one-on-one meetings or during study breaks, going beyond just talking about academics to create a deeper connection.

“The most important [quality] is being a peer and letting your ’zees know you’re there for them,” said Lang.

According to Marayati, as an ARCA he gets to take the work of an RCA one step further, making sure the community and connections that happen freshman year continue for his sophomores.

“I think my favorite part of the job so far has been [being] able to reach out to sophomores who I feel like think that they are not necessarily cared for in the traditional ’zee group way,” said Marayati.

Ultimately, the mentoring experience at the University for both Lubkeman and her former ’zees has proven to be a two-way street: It grows and cultivates advisers and advisees alike.

“I think one of the great things about being an RCA is that you get as much as you give. I was being brought into this community myself, totally new people with different passions, and I got to learn

IMAGE COURTESY OF MARCIA BROWN

Thirteen lucky first-years were assigned to the advisee group of Jordan Lubkeman ’16.

just as much from them as they did from me,” said Lubkeman. “I think about my time at Princeton.

Getting to be an RCA was definitely the most meaningful experience I got to have.”

The leaders that Lubkeman helped develop also attest to the idea of the two-way-street: acting as a leader in the University community may stretch them, but it’s because of those challenges that they grow and become better mentors themselves.

“I feel like when you’re in the RCA or ARCA role, you carry the weight of other people with you,” continued Marayati. “Your responsibilities are so much greater than just yourself.”

Yost explained that being a good leader in the residential college community is an inherently transformative experience: The more one reflects and grows through their leadership experience, the better a leader they will be.

“While advising often feels like a lot of talking to other people and telling other people what to do, you need to really sort out your own thoughts and emotions and feelings and really do a lot of internal reflection in order to be the best possible advisor,” Yost explained

All the juniors in the group agreed that their various roles in the student community certainly were not without their stresses but were more focused on their joys. When it came to what was most important for leaders in the residential community, according to ARCA Matthew Barrett ’19, the best gift a community leader could give is their time.

“Be available. Be around. Genuinely want to be involved in someone’s life,” said Barrett. “If you have a strong desire to facilitate a welcoming community for incoming freshmen, be as available as possible.”

Just as this ’zee group copied their RCA, it will be up to the next generation of residential college leaders to do the same.

Ultimately being present and giving time and effort to the community is what made these juniors’ experiences, their nowalum RCA’s experience, and no doubt the experience for so many others a gift that keeps on giving.

“I’d really like to thank them for being who they are and doing what they do, and, I know it sounds corny, but for making me so proud,” said Lubkeman. “I honestly don’t think I would’ve gotten through my senior year if it wasn’t for my ’zee group.”

Monday January 15, 2018

Opinion

page 4

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Letter from the Editor: It’s not goodbye, but see you later Sarah Sakha

editor-in-chief

A

few weeks ago, I came across the first hard copy of The Daily Princetonian that I’d saved. (For reference, my bookshelf is now overf lowing with copies.) It was from October 2014; I was a first-year, and I’d written my second-ever column for the ‘Prince.’ It was a piece on the official repeal of grade def lation, and a columnist from the Yale Daily News had even quoted me, complimenting my writing. The Prince had been the first extracurricular I’d joined, and I already had two print bylines. I was so proud.

I can’t say I’m necessarily proud of every single piece I’ve written over the years (but hey, all press is good press, right?). I’ve certainly learned a lot since freshman year, both in my writing and life experience. But I am unequivocally proud of how we’ve served our community, from the dining hall workers to students affected by recent immigration policies to the township of Princeton — in spite of ceaseless attacks on the free press. Now, more than ever, we need college journalists to help counter this culture.

I am proud to look back on the narratives we’ve shared, the communities we’ve brought forth, the individuals we’ve held accountable. I am proud of the people who joined the ‘Prince’ without any prior experience and are now some of the best, most impassioned, hardestworking student journalists I have had the honor to work with. It is inspiring and humbling to see

so many people constantly push themselves to write two, three, four stories a week, spend full nights ’til 2 a.m. in the newsroom, or edit stories in class and over the holidays.

We introduced some big changes not only in our content but also in our leadership structure — most infamously, dare I say, with the Editorial Board. Our newsroom was barraged with anonymous calls; our columnists with derogatory, misogynistic, racist comments. This was alarming, so I personally thank those who not just supported us as individuals and journalists, but also chose to personally engage with us to understand the decision.

After all, journalism is — and should be, first and foremost — a public service, and that requires accountability. Just like any other institution, any other media organization, we need to be held accountable, and thus I’ve appreciated pushback of all forms over the last year.

But, I would be remiss not to acknowledge the emotional toll being a journalist takes on a person. On one level, society at large is mistrustful of media as a whole, with the proliferation of misinformation and news media that report out of a pursuit of clicks — and hence money — more than the pursuit of the truth. In fact, according to a 2017 Gallup poll, only 41 percent of Americans trust news media. But on another level, the subjects we’ve reported on this year are difficult, particularly for those who have personal connections, be it to sexual assault and gender discrimination, Title IX and the Honor Code, the loss of an alumnus veteran or a

beloved classmate. On top of all that, the news cycle takes no days off. Through personal crises and professional ones, sickness and health, reading period and the holidays, a dedicated staff never relents.

So to you all, the staff and editors of the 141st Board, I say thank you.

Above all, the newsroom has become a “safe space” for so many people on this campus, as one staffer put it. This makes me proud and grateful, to have helped engender a culture and environment — with other editors — to make an often high-stress, fastpaced work environment into a place where people can come and feel like they belong, regardless of the time of night or whether they’re working on a story.

Frankly, such a place is rare at Princeton. Everyone is welcome, and that’s what has made this community so special, and what has made working at this paper for almost four years now such an honor and a privilege.

In today’s day and age, a school newspaper should not turn down or away interested, earnest people who want to make a contribution. We need to lower the barriers to entry for journalism because we need good people to invest in journalism for the sake of journalism. We have welcomed and mentored anyone who has expressed willingness to work hard and learn, and I cannot wait to see what some of these people will accomplish this next year.

Allow me to offer some advice, first to student journalists: Our convictions rise from our values, and guide our reporting. A recent conversation I had with a ‘Prince’ reporter — a friend of mine whom I

admire very much — reminded me that opinions do have a place in journalism, beyond the editorial page. Thus, I hope to remind you to hold on to your convictions, for they do not hurt your work; in fact, they can make it better. Judge your work not by arbitrary standards of objectivity or impartiality; rather, judge it by standards of fairness, balance, ethics, and veracity.

But my greatest hope — for all of our community, not just journalists — is a realization of our shared humanity, and our ability to inspire, to make a positive impact, to effect real change. This applies to all of us, inside and outside of the media. That drove me this past year, and I hope that will drive you throughout your time at Princeton and beyond.

I will end with a sobering reminder: Our work is far from over, and the conversation continues. We reported on abuses of power, but those same abuses of power occur within our own circles — within newsrooms and classrooms here and across the country. We need to share the responsibility, to hold others accountable. And I am hopeful that our community will continue to do that in 2018.

With that, I mark a bittersweet departure from 48 University Place back into mainstream society, and I pass on the torch to Marcia Brown ’19 and the 142nd Managing Board. I am incredibly humbled, and incredibly excited.

Sarah Sakha is Editor-in-Chief of The Daily Princetonian. This letter represents the views of the Editor-in-Chief only; she can be reached at eic@dailyprincetonian.com.

We need to be more politically active off campus Samuel Aftel

contributing columnist

O

n a campus like Princeton’s, which teems with tranquility, socioeconomic insulation, and seclusion, it is often too easy to lose sight of the profound troubles facing the outside world. Over winter break, the isolating impact of Princeton’s campus became all too clear as I began to fully reengage with the political, social, and cultural crises that are plaguing American society. I realized through this reengagement that the isolation of Princeton life inadvertently limits the off-campus sociopolitical activism of Princetonians, which prevents Princeton students from making a more substantive difference in the outside world.

Admittedly, the isolating power of Princeton’s campus is a testament to the University’s abundance of opportunities, resources, social outlets, and academic demands. There is so much to do on campus that the outside world can feel like an afterthought. Homin Sam Ban put it best in a 2016 Daily Princetonian article: “When you are going about taking five classes, dancing away at [Tiger Inn], and miraculously finishing your problem sets, the outside world fades from your peripheral vision.”

But as Sam Ban confirms, we must remain a part of the wider world beyond Princeton; otherwise, we risk inadvertently limiting our engagement with society-wide crises.

It’s healthy to remind ourselves that we live privileged lives at Princeton. Although many Princetonians have been personally exposed to hardship, discrimination, and dispossession, many of us are far too unfamiliar with such suffering.

It is easy to forget about the profound systematic inequities of the world when you are cooped up writing a paper in a dorm room or attending study breaks.

One may ask, what exactly is so vital about Princeton students being politically active off campus? Of course, activism on campus regarding Princetonrelated issues is undoubtedly important. But many sociopolitical issues that are incredibly relevant to Princeton and college life more generally — such as sexual assault and harassment, racial and gendered exclusion, and cultural marginalization — are also relevant in a broader societal context. Hence, along with on-campus activism, social engagement off campus is unquestionably crucial for fighting injustice at Princeton and well beyond.

To truly combat injustice, one must be active on as broad a scale as possible be-

cause injustice is pervasive, geographically and otherwise. On-campus activism is highly needed and noble, but only a synthesis of oncampus and off-campus activism can destroy deepseated inequality, exclusion, and hardship.

Similarly, Princeton students are some of the most intelligent, politically savvy, culturally diverse, and socially aware college students in the United States.

It is a shame that a more unified and substantial cohort of the Princeton student body has not been mobilized to address the endless stream of political injustices and dysfunction created by the Trump administration. Princeton students, in other words, could have a larger voice on a national scale, which, given our experiences and intellectual backgrounds, could make a meaningful difference and inspire other cohorts of college students and young people to engage politically.

Moreover, increasing the political engagement of the Princeton student body starts with the Undergraduate Student Government.

‘Prince’ head opinion editor Nicholas Wu asserts in a powerful op-ed, “Our undergraduate government can, and should, do more to represent the interests of our students to the world outside of Princeton.” Wu goes on to state rightfully

that “what happens in the outside world affects [Princeton students] just as much as anyone else.” Thereafter, Wu highlights steps USG could take to engage more on issues that affect Princeton students and U.S. society at large, such as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and immigration as well as tax reform.

I absolutely concur with Wu. USG, as a governmental entity of one of the most prestigious, wealthy, and well-resourced educational institutions in the world, must consistently advocate for policy initiatives that are in the moral and ideological interest of the majority of Princetonians.

USG, therefore, has a large role to play in the effort to increase off-campus political activism.

Regardless of USG involvement, we, as Princeton students, must take it upon ourselves to engage more consistently with the outside world. The diversity of experience and intellectual orientation within the Princeton student body must be harnessed to address sociopolitical crises beyond the confines of the Orange Bubble. Activism and engagement of any lesser scope is insufficient.

Samuel Aftel is a sophomore from East Northport, N.Y. He can be reached at saftel@ princeton.edu.

vol. cxli

Sarah Sakha ’18

editor-in-chief

Matthew McKinlay ’18 business manager

BOARD OF TRUSTEES president Thomas E. Weber ’89 vice president Craig Bloom ’88 secretary Betsy L. Minkin ’77 treasurer Douglas J. Widmann ’90 Kathleen Crown William R. Elfers ’71 Stephen Fuzesi ’00 Zachary A. Goldfarb ’05 John Horan ’74 Joshua Katz Kathleen Kiely ’77 Rick Klein ’98 James T. MacGregor ’66 Alexia Quadrani Marcelo Rochabrun ’15 Richard W. Thaler, Jr. ’73 Lisa Belkin ‘82 Francesca Barber trustees emeriti Gregory L. Diskant ’70 Jerry Raymond ’73 Michael E. Seger ’71 Annalyn Swan ’73

141ST MANAGING BOARD managing editors Samuel Garfinkle ’19 Grace Rehaut ’18 Christina Vosbikian ’18 head news editor Marcia Brown ’19 associate news editors Kristin Qian ’18 head opinion editor Nicholas Wu ’18 associate opinion editors Samuel Parsons ’19 Emily Erdos ’19 head sports editor David Xin ’19 associate sports editors Christopher Murphy ’20 Claire Coughlin ’19 head street editor Jianing Zhao ’20 associate street editors Lyric Perot ’20 Danielle Hoffman ’20 web editor Sarah Bowen ’20 head copy editors Isabel Hsu ’19 Omkar Shende ’18 associate copy editors Caroline Lippman ’19 Megan Laubach ’18 head design editors Samantha Goerger ’20 Quinn Donohue ’20 cartoons editor Tashi Treadway ’19

NIGHT STAFF copy Paige Allen ’21 Jade Olurin ’21 design Diana Tang ’21 Charlotte Adamo ’21

Done reading your ‘Prince’?

Recycle

Monday January 15, 2018

Opinion

page 5

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

The University’s response to the Honor Constitution referenda was both predictable and prudent Connor Pfeiffer

guest contributor

T

he backlash to the University’s decision on the Honor Constitution referenda has been growing since the January 4 announcement. There are now calls for protests in February by the Honor Code Reform campaign, and the USG Executive Committee has vowed to “[actively pursue] other avenues of action available to us.” These responses demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding both of how the University operates and of the relationship between the faculty and the Honor System. The University’s decision is consistent with its authority over academic policy and was a prudent response to a highly f lawed attempt to alter the Honor System. Going forward, students should focus on participating in the work of the Honor System Review Committee, not protesting a legitimate exercise of authority.

The University’s decision was predictable because of the process that

Rachel Kennedy

contributing columnist

H

oliday party small talk can be summed up in three questions: Do you love college? Do you know your major yet? And how long are you home for?

My responses were typical: Yes, I love college. No, I do not know what I am majoring in, but people were shocked to find out that us Princetonians get three weeks off.

“Only three weeks! Wow, that’s too bad!” was the comment I received the most, but I think the shorter winter break actually benefits students, particularly first-years.

To begin with, we are one of the few schools that is given a weeklong fall break toward the end of October. This time away, fairly early in the year, was crucial. It helped quell my homesickness, while my friends at other schools had to hold out until Thanksgiving, but that chance to go home also made me realize that I was more comfortable at Princeton than I had thought.

Within a few days, I was surprised to find myself missing the omelets in RoMa dining hall, the Sunday cinnamon buns in Wu Hall, the Street, and my new friends. Stepping away from something often makes you appreciate it more, and having that chance early on in my college experience helped me value my time at Princeton. If the Registrar’s Office were to consider removing that week in October and attaching it to the beginning or end of winter break, it’d be a huge mistake.

Three weeks is enough time to see the important people

led to the referenda and substantive issues with the proposed reforms. In the email to the student body, the University highlighted the “accelerated timetable” of the referenda campaign and why “changes this significant cannot be implemented without the engagement and support of the faculty.” As an op-ed I co-authored pointed out on December 10, these referenda were proposed in less than two months by a newly formed USG subcommittee without consulting many stakeholders, most importantly the faculty and administration. Further, the immediate disparity that the change in standard penalty would have created with the Committee on Discipline (CoD) was not acceptable to the University. A proponent of the referendum argued that the burden was on the University to change the CoD penalty should Question 1 pass. As I pointed out during the campaign, however, “as someone who has sat on two different faculty committees over the past three years, I can tell you that the faculty will not react well to the

student body dictating that they should support a more lenient penalty for cheating.” While these arguments were dismissed or ignored during the campaign, the University has now made clear that it will protect the right of the faculty to be involved in important changes to the Honor Constitution.

Contrary to assertions by some students, the University’s decision falls clearly within its authority over academic policy and gives the faculty an opportunity to consider these proposals. This process, indeed, circumvents the formal amendment procedure in Article VI of the Honor Constitution, and some have argued that doing so violates the University’s own rules.

But this ignores how the University is governed and the origins of the Honor System. The Honor System is a contract between the faculty and students.

While students can make changes to the Honor Constitution, the faculty still maintains ultimate authority over the disciplinary powers it conditionally delegated to the student body. In addition,

the Administration is responsible for ensuring that students prudently exercise their delegated authority. The President of the University “is charged [by the Board of Trustees] with the general supervision of the interests of the University,” including the interests of faculty, students, and other members of the University community. After conducting a thorough review, the Administration concluded that there were significant procedural and substantive concerns raised by the Honor Constitution referenda. These included the lack of faculty and administrative input into the process. This stands in contrast to “prior changes to the Honor Constitution, which were adopted with the support of the faculty.” Judging that these changes were too important to go into effect without allowing the faculty an opportunity to participate in the policymaking process, President Eisgruber, accordingly, remanded three of the referenda to the faculty committee with jurisdiction over these matters. To be clear, this decision was

not a veto of the three referenda by the Administration. Instead, it empowers the faculty to decide, in an orderly process, whether it consents to these changes and to consider other potential reforms to the Honor System.

Since it is almost certain that the University will not reverse its decision on the three referenda, students should move on and focus on how they can play a role in the formal process taking place to review the Honor System. As Dean Dolan said recently, “Change simply has to be accomplished in the right way, with the appropriate voices involved in the process.” Students have a critical role in the work of the Honor System Review Committee, and I encourage my classmates to participate productively in discussions about potential reforms to the Honor System.

Connor Pfeiffer, a senior in the history department from San Antonio, Texas, is a member of the USG Academics Committee and The Daily Princetonian Editorial Board. He can be reached at connorp@princeton.edu.

The case for a short break in one’s life, but not enough to fully slip into the routines of home again. As I’m getting older, I’m beginning to understand how precious time is, and I would not be disciplined enough to take this lesson to heart if I had eight or even six weeks home. I’ve had to be really thoughtful about how I’m spending my time, and with whom. These are not fun lessons to learn but are good to get a handle on earlier, rather than being shocked by the tough reality later.

This prioritization disrupts the way I used to interact with people at home, underscoring the fact that it is not the default anymore. Having to put this kind of thought and effort into what was once quite simple really drives home the idea that Princeton is now the reality of my life. I never really thought I would feel that way freshman year, but the shorter break keeps Princeton on my mind, rather than allowing it to drift back into being a foreign place again.

While a shorter break teaches some necessary life lessons, another scheduling change would help facilitate enjoyment. We could have reading period and exams before the winter break. Three weeks is a great amount of time to be home — if you are not working for parts of it, and if your mind doesn’t occasional brew with panic about the work waiting for you when you get back. I’m sure I am not the first student to raise this concern, but in terms of the students who say that our break is too short, this would be the best way to counter that argument.

We don’t need a lot of time away from Princeton, but time away meaning no work for a bit

Oop s, sorly, Dos theeS butherr u?

Join the ‘Prince’ copy department.

would be much appreciated.

Catching up with friends, sleep, and Netflix over the three weeks of break was great.

We all need a break, especially at a place like Princeton. This

may change as I go through the years at Princeton, but I firmly believe that our staggered breaks throughout the fall semester helped my transition into college life much

more than a longer winter break would have.

Rachel Kennedy is a first-year from Dedham, Mass. She can be reached at rk19@princeton.edu.

Monday January 15, 2018

Opinion

page 6

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Honor in solidarity

Ryan Chavez

contributing columnist

A

majority of the undergraduate student body voiced the need — not the desire, not the want, but the need — to reform a broken Honor Code system through democratic processes. But the administration of President Eisgruber, along with Dean of the College Jill Dolan, Dean of the Faculty Sanjeev Kulkarni, and Vice President for Campus Life W. Rochelle Calhoun, pulled the rug out from under Princetonians. For all the debate and discussion that appeared on the pages of The Daily Princetonian, nothing happened. Recently, Micah Herskind, one of the loudest voices for reform, advocated for student mobilization in response. The HC Reform movement naively thought that a majority vote would

work, but embracing the University’s processes, as one can learn from the history of the Black Justice League and minority student activism on campus, doesn’t do a damn thing.

From the start, you have to grab the University’s attention, force it to listen, and refuse to let go until your demands are heard.

The mobilization of the BJL and Occupy Nassau movement of the 2015–16 academic year did just this.

While the BJL advocated for a different reform than the Honor Code Reform movement, they also pursued a vastly different strategy.

The model that the BJL used to put pressure on the University included a sit-in, active protests, and press coverage from national media outlets.

It also coincided with the larger narrative of societal inequities and systemic oppression of Black people in America. It’s not unlikely that the negative press

resulting from the protests caused the cash stream of donations from alumni to take a hit, too. Within the context of the BJL, a small cadre of students fighting for justice used the disincentive of negative press and publicity on Princeton to accomplish its goals.

But this model unfortunately won’t work now.

The Honor Code issue is so endemic to our institution that the BJL-style, unilateral actions against the University — which realistically can do whatever it wants policy-wise — will not garner support in a larger context.

With this leverage over the University out of the picture, the question left is how to use the advantages of the scope and scale of the support for the referenda. The mass of the student body is critical. In the absence of the external pressure of negative publicity, utilizing the popular support of the referenda to

start a collective bargaining process is our strongest position.

If the student body as a whole wants the University to play ball, the best move forward is massive collective action. Or, as it might better be manifested, inaction. For example, the student body has shown itself capable of having not a single person enroll in the class of the electrical engineering professor who sexually harassed a graduate student.

It may sound ridiculous, but Princeton students need to strike. Refuse to participate in a broken system. Refuse to take your final exams. At least one professor might be happy for the rescheduling. Unfortunately, the University is well-versed in tactics of delaying student-driven reform. The timing of the University’s action strategically grounded the students with Dean’s Date papers, final examinations,

and independent work to deal with. Organizing in a time like this is understandably difficult. On top of this, the nature of our Orange Bubble lets students ignore political realities both on campus and the outside world.

I’m as worried as the next student about my Dean’s Date papers. A student strike may realistically be a pipe dream, but one for an undoubtedly important cause.

Regardless, this situation highlights the ridiculousness of what it takes to effect change at this university under President Eisgruber and the rest of this administration.

One thing is certain, you can’t trust the process or the administration. Perhaps Triangle said it best, “Nothing ever happens in Princeton.”

Ryan Chavez is a junior in history from Arcadia, Calif. He can be reached at rdchavez@princeton.edu.

The most important referendum passed Ryan Born

S

columnist

o your administration decided to shoot down your school referenda.

Now, I’m sure much analysis and frustration will follow the referendum rejections; we’ve already seen some of it. But there is one silver lining to the whole debacle. After all, there are four referenda, and the fourth made it through the gauntlet. In my opinion, the fourth referendum is the most important: This is the referendum that re-

quired the Honor Committee to tell you if you are under investigation or not.

Ultimately, this is a really good change; other Princeton students ought not be able to lord it over their peers with power in situations that affect their peers at a fundamental level. In the real world, the police are required to tell you if you are under arrest. Why shouldn’t we have the same policy here?

So, let’s keep our chins up: We get to know if we are under investigation now. This is a change that we ought to be proud of, and when you consider the

other referenda, you realize how good of a deal that is.

I want to focus on referendum one, which is the referendum that I’m sure sank referenda two and three with it: a significantly lesser penalty for an Honor Code violation.

I don’t understand it. You have been convicted for cheating at an institution that is essentially predicated on the idea that it is merit-based (you got in selectively, didn’t you?). And you get probation? If people cheat, they don’t deserve to go here. They undermine our entire education and the prestige of the Universi-

ty. People have to think that Princetonians are smart and deserve their degrees.

If we were a den of cheats, we would be neither smart nor deserving. I hope to God that we are not a den of cheats, and that this referendum was suggested only on the idea that if you were wrongfully convicted, you would have some degree of amnesty. But given that you were already raising the standard of evidence for a punishment in referenda two and three, you would be less concerned with wrongful convictions anyway. Raising the standard of evidence plus lowering

Junior Reading Period tashi treadway ’19 ..................................................

T HE DA ILY

News. Opinions. Sports. Every day. join@dailyprincetonian.com

penalties seems to encourage cheating more than anything else. Honestly, the administration saved students from themselves.

Regardless of whether you buy these arguments, if you voted yes on all four, you still get to know right away whether you are in the cross hairs or not. In my opinion, that was the most important referendum anyway, and it’s the one that made it. Hey, no one said reform was easy.

Ryan Born is a junior in philosophy from Washington, Mich. He can be reached at rcborn@princeton.edu.

Monday January 15, 2018

Opinion

page 7

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Give us an Honor Committee timeline Jon Ort

contributing columnist

I

n our conversations about the University’s suspension of Honor Code referenda, we have overlooked one crucial fact: The administration has offered no timetable for its internal deliberations. Although we cannot change the decision to stay the referenda, we should press administrators to establish an operable time frame to which they can be held accountable. As citizens, we would expect nothing less

from our government. We should hold our University to the same standard.

The University has indefinitely postponed a serious reckoning with the referenda. In an article published in The Tab, Dean of the College Jill Dolan promised that a faculty-student committee would consider the referenda during the spring semester. With no established deadlines, however, I fear that the cogs of bureaucracy will swallow the much-anticipated reform.

The University has struggled to effect reform

in the past. In 2016, the student body passed a referendum authorizing the Undergraduate Student Government to collect demographic information about the eating clubs. Over the next year, USG repeatedly failed to undertake the necessary steps to implement the measure. As a result, the referendum’s momentum dissipated. Although the administration may be more reliable than the student government, we should remember USG’s failure as a cautionary tale.

I was no zealot for Hon-

or Code reform. The hastiness of the referenda and the disparity in punishments that would result from them concerned me.

I did not vote for all of the reforms. For better or worse, however, the referenda passed. Similar political impulses have shaped our country over the past year. The University, like the U.S. government, must respect voters’ democratic decisions, regardless of its own position on the measures in question.

To create a more equitable solution, the University could have delayed

Like sports? Write for the sports section!

Follow us on Twitter! #BeAwesome

@Princetonian

putting the referenda into effect by a semester. Doing so would have given the faculty time to review and possibly standardize procedures between the Honor Committee and Committee on Discipline.

Instead, the administration has offered no timetable, writing only that the referenda “cannot take effect at this time.” Such oblique language makes me doubt that anything will be done.

Jon Ort is a first-year from Highlands Ranch, Colo. He can be reached at jaort@ princeton.edu.

Sports

Monday January 15, 2018

page 8

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } MEN’S AND WOMEN’S BASKETBALL

Men’s and women’s basketball sweep weekend doubleheader against Columbia and Cornell

By Owen Tedford senior sports writer

T

his past weekend was a great one for Princeton men’s (9–8, 2–1 Ivy League) and women’s (13–3, 0–3) basketball. Both teams went undefeated in their opening Ivy League weekend at home in Jadwin Gymnasium against Columbia on Friday and Cornell on Saturday. The women’s team won 69–47 over Columbia (6–11, 0–2) and 75–54 over Cornell (4–11, 0–2), while the men won 72–56 and 91–54 over the Lions (3–12, 0–2) and the Big Red (6–9, 0–2), respectively.

This weekend the women’s team was sparked by a balanced offense and strong defense. On both nights, Princeton had four players in double figures.

Against Cornell, sophomore guard/forward Bella Alarie led the way with 18 points, followed by junior guard Gabrielle Rush and freshman guard Abby Meyers with 11 points each off the bench. And finally, freshman guard Carlie Littlefield added 10 points on an off shooting night for her. On Saturday, the four players in double figures

were senior forward Leslie Robinson with 16, Alarie with 14, Rush with 11, and Meyers with 10. The Tigers played great defense this weekend as well holding opponents to 10 or fewer points in four of the eight quarters. Most notable moments of this were when Princeton held Columbia scoreless for the first 4:23 of the game and first 3:23 of the second half. A strong defensive start to the second half was what sparked the win against Cornell as well, when the Tigers held the Big Red scoreless for the first five minutes of the half.

The men’s team this weekend was led well by junior guard Devin Cannady and some sharp three-point shooting. Cannady had a game high of 17 points against the Lions on Friday night and a game high of 20 points against Cornell on Saturday. As for the accurate shooting from beyond the arc, this is nothing new, having been an important part of Princeton’s success last year as well. Against Columbia, Princeton made 15 of 31 threes, shooting nearly 50 percent from behind the line. On Saturday, the Tigers made 10 of

COURTESY OF GOPRINCETONTIGERS.COM

The Tigers defeated Cornell by an impressive margin to extend their Ivy League home winning streak to 21.

27 threes, shooting about 40 percent from downtown. Offensive prowess was certainly on display in Jadwin for the men this past weekend as they shot over 40 percent from the field for the ninth and 10th straight times. This was perhaps aided by the de-

fensive success Princeton experienced, which was able to hold back-to-back opponents under 40 percent shooting for the first time this season.

The basketball teams will take their finals break now and will next return to Ivy League play Feb. 2

and 3. Both teams will take on Yale and Brown, with the men playing at home and the women going on the road to New Haven and Providence. Before that weekend, the men will play their last non-conference game against Rowan on Jan. 28 at home.

COURTESY OF PRINCETON ATHELTICS

Princeton women’s basketball starts second half with 17-0 to push back Cornell and extend winning streak to seven games.

Tweet of the Day “Princeton has six named to All-Region team #TigerUp” Princeton FH (@ TigerFH), field hockey

Stat of the Day

139 meetings The Tigers and Bulldogs will clash for the 139th time this Saturday as they fight to keep their season hopes alive.

Follow us Check us out on Twitter @princesports for live news and reports, and on Instagram @princetoniansports for photos!