Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue


Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

October 19, 1998 - Image 4

Resource type:
The Michigan Daily, 1998-10-19

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

4A - The Michigan Daily - Monday, October 19, 1998

c be 91Irbigutn tiIg

420 Maynard Street
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Edited and managed by
students at the
University of Michigan

Editor in Chief
Editorial Page Editor

'When you compare where we were for eight months
with where we are today ... these are huge
victories for the American people.'
- President Clinton commenting on the bipartisan
budget recently passed by Congress

Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of the majority of the Daily's editorial board.
All other articles, letters and cartoons do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily
Honorable behavior
Honor Code helps students monitor themselves


. .

A11 University students know that
cheating is wrong and if they are
caught doing so they might face serious
consequences. But cheating is becoming
harder to define and therefore harder to
catch. Copying another student's home-
work - even with that peer's permission
-is clearly considered cheating; but
other scenarios are not so cut and dry.
Is signing in attendance for a friend
who is skipping a discussion section
cheating? What about programming
information into a graphing calculator
before an exam? Where should the line be
drawn after collaboration of group work?
The Honor Council is planning to give
its Engineering Honor Code - guidelines
under which Engineering students are
responsible for watching behavior - a
face-lift for the first time in nearly 80 years.
The Honor Code stresses personal integrity,
trust and cooperation among students and
faculty. The Honor Council investigates
every claim by students or instructors
regarding any form of cheating or dishon-
esty. Most Engineering students follow the
Code very seriously. The new revisions will
not change the ideology behind the Code,
only specifics that must change with chang-
ing times.
The College of Engineering is a more
open environment, unlike the College of
Literature, Science, and the Arts,
Engineering instructors are not required to
proctor examinations. The code attempts to
control for this lack of authority by instill-
ing a sense of honesty in Engineering stu-
dents. Partially due to the seriousness of the
Honor Code, the standards of the College of
Engineering are impressive and should be

While small schools, even within a large
university, tend to have a sense of commu-
nity and trust, the reality is that cheating
happens in the Engineering program and
even in much larger schools like LSA. LSA
does not have uniform policies regarding
cheating in its different departments. Most
instructors monitor exams, and use tech-
niques such as alternating seating and
administering different exams to each stu-
dent in order reduce the opportunity to
cheat on tests. Cheating is not even includ-
ed in the violations under the University's
notorious Code of Student Conduct. Many
instructors deal with situations themselves
rather than report the violation to their
department. Professors are probably saving
time by doing so; University disciplinary
processes take up a significant amount of
time. But LSA should take a cue from the
College of Engineering and beef up its stan-
dards by making them uniform.
The temptation to cheat may be on the
rise, partially due to easier access to refer-
ences. The University, along with other
institutions nationwide, is learning to cope
with a new threat to academic integrity: stu-
dents plagiarizing material from the World
Wide Web. Cutting and pasting text from
the Web without permission is an increasing
problem. Students should remember that
their grades could be negatively affected by
allowing their fellow students to cheat.
A standard that addresses all types of
cheating, including the use of unattrib-
uted information from the Internet, must
be created and enforced in LSA and all
University academic divisions. It should
be impressed upon students that ultimate-
ly, despite regulations, it is up to them and
their peers to monitor themselves.

Bill Gates, our
supreme being
ashington, D.C.. will become
the front line of one of the most
historic battles of our time today as Bill
Gates guards his vast Microsoft
Empire from the advancing forces of
federal government anti-trust regula-9
tors. The shots fired in the struggle will
throughout the
computer world
for years to >
come, possibly
changing the
way millions of
people use soft-
ware to access
the information
Many of the
nation's most SCOTT
renowned com- HUNTER
puter geeks will 0I. 1 IROU1'
soon begin to 1'I_________
testify about the business tactics of Bill
Gates. At issue today is whether Czar
Gates, using all the muscle of his $14-
billion Microsoft Corporation, illegally
promoted his company's product,
Internet Explorer, to monopolize theW
Web browser market.
The government's list of allegations
paints a picture of the divine creator
of Microsoft as a power-drunk com-
puter geek spiraling out of control,
bullying all the puny $5-billion com-
panies like a big, bad cyberthug
(because hey, he's got to find a way to
feed his family, too).
N To annihilate competitors such as
Netscape Communications Corp.,
Microsoft is illegally binding itsq
Internet Explorer to Windows 98, a soft-
ware platform that comes installed on
about 90 percent of all newpersonal
computers. Bill takes a quarter of the
market with this shady move.
bill met illegally with Netscape a
couple years back in an unsuccessful
attempt to coerce the company to keep
out of the Windows market.
Bill coerced Internet service@
providers into signing contracts to dis-
tribute Internet Explorer instead of
Netscape or else!
If all of this is true, you have to ask
yourself: Why was he so successful?
Why did so many rich, uptight CEOs
just give into him, knowing fully well
that he was breaking the law and violat-
ing the spirit of competitive markets?
Like Napoleon and Charlemagne,
Bill Gates's name strikes fear into the
hearts of all who come before him. His*
celebrity as the ultimate financial
supreme being fills common folk with
both veneration and dread.
Computer geeks worship Him.
Businesspeople worship Him.
Commoners all enshrine Him in their


Lawful discrimination
Supreme Court should review unfair decision
Supreme Court order this past Tuesday unfair distinction. It was the only reason-
allowed the city of Cincinnati to add able judgment.

an amendment to its constitution banning
the protection of homosexuals from dis-
crimination. The new measure states that no
policies can be initiated that grant gays and
lesbians the right to take legal action
against discrimination regarding employ-
ment, housing or the like. It also denies any
person the right to minority status or prefer-
ential treatment based on his or her sexual
Opponents of the .amendment and sup-
porters of gay rights were outraged at the
court's action, and understandably so. But
even more infuriating was the fact that this
order came just two years after the Supreme
Court struck down a similar amendment to
the Colorado state constitution. In 1996, the
Court called Colorado's movement uncon-
stitutional, noting that it promoted inequal-
ity. That movement was nearly identical to
Cincinnati's, save for the fact that it was on
a state rather than a municipal level.
Regardless, the two amendments resulted in
entirely opposing decisions.
The Court's reasons for striking down
Colorado's 1996 amendment were clear. To
^deny a specific minority the same rights
and privileges granted to other minority
groups in the United States is to label them
unequal in the eyes of the law. There is no
doubt that homosexuals have been and will
be discriminated against as much as
women, African Americans and all other
recognized minorities. They will be unfair-
ly denied jobs and homes based solely on
their sexual orientation. The Supreme Court
realized that this would be the case, and


Court's passive acceptance of

Cincinnati's recent amendment contradicts
the aforementioned reasonable judgement.
Gays and lesbians in the city of Cincinnati
have, in effect, had their civil rights retract-
ed. Anti-discrimination policies are in
place to ensure that all people are treated
equally in decisions regarding their way of
life - most often their housing or employ-
ment. To enact a law that denies homosex-
uals even the possibility of forming one
such policy is to accept the fact that they
can be treated unequally without conse-
The Supreme Court's action is difficult
to comprehend as an isolated incident. It
is even more difficult, however, in light of
the opposite r.uling that was made so
recently in Colorado. The only plausible
explanation would be to cite the one
notable difference in the two amend-
ments: one was on a state level and the
other, municipal.
Between the two orders, the court has,
in essence, decided that a city may deny a
certain group of citizens their rights, but
a state may not. The logic here is equivo-
cal. A more likely explanation is that
there simply has been a lapse in the move-
ment to protect a deserving minority
group in the United States. Homosexuals
will now undoubtedly be the victims of
increased discrimination in Cincinnati,
considering the lack of consequence.
Surely, however, the movement to grant
them the rights they deserve is far from
over. It has merely been prolonged by an

votes are not
worth it
I am writing in light of
the Oct. 15 letter ("Third-
party candidates deserve
votes") by Edward Chusid
I can understand Chusid's
frustrations in reference to
partisan politics, but by no
means is the solution to vote
for third-party candidates
blindly. Shall we do this to
spite the Democrats and
Republicans, will this give us
(the public) the last laugh? I
don't think so. This is not the
solution. In the end, the pub-
lic will be hurt.
I think that Chusid over-
emphasizes the role the
Clinton scandal is having in
how effective or good our
representatives are. ust
because a Republican repre-
sentative is standing with fel-
low party members on this
particular issue doesn't make
him or her ineffective in
other scopes of legislation.
As for taking a lead, I see
no relationship between the
Clinton scandal and a party
not demonstrating its leader-
ship abilities.
I agree with Chusid in urg-
ing students to use the vote
that they have. But do not use
it blindly. Vote for a candidate
because you believe that he or
she has the best ideas and/or
values. It is everyone's right
not just to vote but to make an
educated vote.
For example, don't vote
for Gov. Engler just because
he is a Republican or because
Democratic candidate
Geoffrey Fieger can be seen
as a lunatic, but because you
believe Engler has what it
takes to do well.
When it comes down to it,
we need to vote for the best
person out there,whether
they be Democrat,
Republican or any other
party. Don't use the excuse of
political parties to make an
uneducated vote.
Latin prof.
The Oct. 12 Daily article,
"Memorial honors former
Latin prof," skillfully con-
veyed what made him so
important in the lives of
many of his students, col-
leagues and friends: his abili-
ty to exist in several places at
once, which was indeed leg-
Equally worth comment-
ing on, however, is the way
Prof. Knudsvig helped stu-
dents spot Latin in the here

my eyes to the fun factor
inherent in the analysis of
word formation: English
word formation. This in turn
was the source of my current
research interests, and I thank
him for helping me find my
Is Latin still alive? It is
for those lucky enough to
come to it in a learnable spir-
it. And we are all fortunate
that it is alive, given Latin's
dominant contribution to the
English word hoard; it is hard
to imagine real linguistic
competence arising in some-
one who hasn't done so.
Not that the University
would presume to insist on
real linguistic competence
being achieved by its students
- at least by its undergradu-
After all, what fraternity,
sorority or student peer group
would care to boast of that
kind of academic excellence
today, when fighting in the
street is so much more plan-
gent a way of establishing
your credentials in the
University community?
(Latin plangens, plangent-,
present participle of plangere,
to strike, lament.)
should first
look inward
I write this in response to
an Oct. 15 article in the Daily
("Kansas church to picket
Shepard funeral"). The views
expressed therein both sad-
den and frustrate me, as they
are views held by far too
many "Christians." It upsets
me that certain people will
name themselves Christians
while ignoring the very
essence of Christ's teachings.
For these people, I have
but one thing to say: Read
your Bible.
I am a Christian. I do not
presume to know the mind of
God, but I can read, and I can
understand what my Bible tells
me. First and foremost, the
Christian religion is about
love; love for all people, no
matter who they may be. Jesus
stated this when he said, "Love
your neighbor as yourself"' A
simple enough statement, but
one that many Christians still
fail to grasp. This does not
mean "Love your neighbor if
he is nice to you, has the same
religion as you or agrees with
your opinions." Plain and sim-
ple, your job is to love every-
one regardless.
My Bible-may tell me that
homosexuality is a sin, but it
also tells me that dishonesty,
hate and murder are sins as
well. All sin is contrary to
God's instruction and it is not
the job of any Christian to
rank that sin nor to punish it.

way, some of us forgot what
that example is. So before
you Christians (and you
know who you are) start
examining the actions of oth-
ers, take a long look at your
own lives and ask yourself,
"Am I living like Jesus?" You
probably aren't, and you're
giving the rest of us a bad
Crime at
Kresge is
I was horrified to read of
the recent theft of research
samples at the Kresge build-
ing reported in the Friday
Oct. 16 "Crime Notes."
Tucked in with the ever-
laughable crimes was one of
a very serious nature. Though
the Daily obviously has left-
wing ideals and probably
opposes the uses of animals
in research, this is definitely
a piece of news that warrant-
ed further coverage.
Kresge is not the sort of
building that one would casu-
ally waltz through and think,
"Oh gee, a freezer.dWith
mouse brains inside?
Wouldn't it be fun to steal
them?" Anyone who has any
business being inside Kresge
in the first place would most
likely respect the research,
not sabotage it. Whoever
committed this crime knew
exactly how and where to
lash out at their enemies, and
they went straight for the
No perpetrator was appre-
hended, but animal rights
activists are probably to
blame since they are the only
ones who could possibly see
this act as being worthwhile.
Too often they put animal life
above human life and fail to
see the.big picture or even a
clear one. Animal life is still
very precious, but these mice
both lived for nothing and
died in vain. Who knows how
much time that scientist
invested in his or her experi-
ment? Humans who suffer
from the virus being studied
now have that much longer to
wait for a cure or treatment.
This was a sickening, pre-
meditated act that has far
greater costs than most peo-
ple realize. Animals used in
long-term research have
unbelievable net worth and
incalculable value to the field
of medicine. Though initially
inexpensive, in the long run,
the mice and rats can be
worth hundreds of dollars or
more. The precious research
money that funded this stolen
research was wasted.
Indeed, people who
strongly believe in the
progress of medical science

After all, we're talking about a man
so rich and powerful, he could have
each of us exterminated with two clicks*
of his left mouse button.
Though many people choose to paint
a horrible picture ofrBill Gates the
Greedy Geek, he is really not much
different than you or me. Just imagine
for a second that you have $50 billion
in your checking account$at First
Federal (yet another monopoly). You
earn more interest in 30 seconds than
most small countries earn in a year. Do
the rules of lowly common people
mean anything to you? You think to
yourself: "What's the worst they can
do? Fine me!" You sit back in your
Beamer and laugh maniacally on your
way to the country club.
Anyone can be consumed by power.
Personally, if I had $50 billion dollars
and a near-complete monopoly on the
most lucrative industry in the world, I
would make it a point to systematically
flout every rule, and watch the wretched
masses writhe with frustration, knowing*
that they could do nothing to stop me.
But that is precisely the problem.
The Federal Trade Commission
waited far too long to set up a thor-
ough investigation of Microsoft's busi-
ness practices. Early this decade,
responding to complaints of a monop-
oly from Microsoft's rivals, the gov-
ernment held a cursory investigation
of Bill's activities, but let him escape
unscathed when he changed the details
of a contract or two.
In the ensuing years, Bill earned
interest. His kingdom grew, wielding
more and more influence over the soft-
ware market. And companies became
less able to resist his influence.
The Federal Trade Commission, with
its anti-trust regulations, exists to pre-
vent such monopolies from coming to
power. Had it put the smack down a
while ago, it could have prevented
Microsoft from amassing enough power
to brazenly slap around all the competi-
tion. And today's trial might not even be
in motion.
Microsoft and Bill Gates have given
the world many great products, many
ways to waste an afternoon on mind-
d~ulling cr atiity and ma lec lptronic


Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan