I guess the putative association would be via the glyph "SFU" in the folk-name "SFU Harbour Centre."
But seriously: I think the SFU/MECS arrangement makes a lot of sense. But that doesn't mean there aren't cases where the arrangement warrants re-examination. It seems to me this may be one of them. jdf
De: "David Andolfatto" <dandolfa@sfu.ca>
À: "Anke Kessler" <akessler@sfu.ca>
Cc: "John O'Neil" <joneil@sfu.ca>, academic-discussion@sfu.ca
Envoyé: Vendredi 1 Mars 2013 19:49:38
Objet: Re: Questions regarding the Vaccine Resistance Network Event @SFU on March 12
I am not sure how the simple act of hosting such an event should lead anyone "to associate" (whatever that means) themselves with our academic/scientific community. If it makes anyone feel better, I suppose the university could provide (what everyone should already understand) an explicit disclaimer to the effect that the statements and views of conference participants do not necessarily reflect those of anyone in our community or SFU as an institution. (It would be sad, indeed, if this had to be made explicit, but we live in sad times, I guess.)
I'm glad to hear my colleague affirm that free speech is important. But if free speech is not welcome at a university, where else in the broader community should people be able to "freely" send out their message to the public?
David Andolfatto
Department of Economics
Simon Fraser University
=================
I would like to know what SFU event planners were thinking when invite a group like this, and - by hosting the event on a university campus - allow the organizers to associate themselves with our academic/scientific community.
To be sure, free speech is important, and groups like these should be able to freely send their message out to the public. But do we really have to give a platform like SFU for their agenda?
Anke Kessler
Department of Economics
Simon Fraser University