U pin ion The Michigan Daily michigandaily.com
4 - Tuesday, January 13, 2009
4 - Tuesday, January13, 2009 The Michigan Daily - michigandailycom
L74C MIC4ig n wily
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890.
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@umich.edu
GARY GRACA ROBERT SOAVE COURTNEY RATKOWIAK
EDITOR IN CHIEF EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR MANAGING EDITOR
Unsignededitorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorialboard.Allother signedarticles
and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.
FROM T HE DAILY
A slow way to vote s
State legislature should ensure every soldier's vote counts
NOTABLE T
"The White House reminds me of a museum.
How do you sleep in a museum?"
- President-elect Barack Obama's mother-in-law Marian Robinson on moving into the
White House, in an interview with People magazine and as reported yesterday by the Chicago Tribune.
CHRIS KOSLOWSKI I OUT TO PASTURE E-MAIL CHRIS AT CSKOSLOW@UMICH.EDU
SoI alread bo t y"Yes Sgh You coildiave salltn day=this st willbe
We Did" t-shirnmyOb raa at neytopoor4 worhmisls
dinner plates and $300 of you know
Obamatoin ,butstillneed a*'flbuy e ratnow
Oi shglasses.,(No, oudon'u n)1 a fo1r2 cens eahb er dse
0 0
Shakespear' ertsyn
L ast semester, many students learned firsthand that voting
in Michigan can be quite a hassle, complete with voter ID
problems, proper wardrobe requirements and general mis-
information. But as it turns out, voting is even harder for Michi-
gan's military personnel overseas. According to a study released
last week by the Pew Center on the States, one-third of all states
aren't giving these servicemen enough time to vote - and Michi-
gan is one of them. But Michigan's overseas military personnel
deserve to have their votes counted like everyone else. The state
legislature should get to work immediately to make sure that right
is upheld by implementing improvements like electronic voting,
write-in ballots and deadline changes.
In several states, the voting process for
military voters abroad can take as little as
eight days. In Michigan, it takes 57. Given
voting deadlines and inefficiencies in mail-
ing systems, this leaves military voters
very little time to complete and send their
ballots. For many, that is simply not enough
time, and makes the process far too incon-
venient.
It's bad enough when students and
civilians are discouraged from voting by
Michigan's overcomplicated election laws.
But to discourage serving men and women
from voting is downright embarrassing.
The Pew Center's report identifies elec-
tronic voting, write-in ballots and deadline
changes as ways to alleviate this problem.
These reforms have been successfully
employed in other states and would give
military personnel more time to complete
and submit their ballots.
Allowing electronic voting via e-mail or
fax would greatly reduce the time ballots
spend in mail systems. Although there are
some concerns about the safety and secu-
rity of electronic voting, Michigan's leg-
islature should take a serious look at this
option to see if electronic voting could
work with the proper safeguards in place.
This option could give military personnel
weeks, rather than days, to cast their bal-
lots.
Michigan can also give its military vot-
ers more time to vote and make the process
more convenient by minimizing the time
ballots spend in conventional mail and
military mail systems. The state should
consider changing the deadlines for absen-
tee ballots. Ballots are sent out to absentee
voters on Sept. 20, but Michigan could fol-
low the lead of other states and send them
out earlier.
Michigan should also expand use of the
Federal Write-in Absentee Ballot, which
allows individuals to write-in their can-
didate preferences and could serve as a
back-up for people who don't receive their
ballots on time.
Voters should be able to expect more
than slow mail systems and bureaucratic
hurdles from their government - espe-
cially when it comes to voting. There are
plenty of solutions to this problem, and the
state legislature has no excuse for failing
to address the issue.
The legislature needs to make proce-
dural changes to move Michigan into the
group of states that gives its troops sta-
tioned abroad enough time to cast their
votes.
recent AP article states lex-
cographers have become so
excited about the informal
expression "meh"
that the Collins
English Dictionary
decided to make
it an official word.
This prompted
many, including
myself, to wonder:
1. What is a lexi-
cographer? WILL
2. Should we beG
afraid if informal GRUNDLER
expressions excite
them?
I am, of course, joking. As any dic-
tionary will tell you, a lexicographer
is a person who makes maps. And
who wouldn't be excited about "meh"
as a real phrase? This word - mean-
ing indifference or boredom - has
been making a comeback ever since it
debuted, if you remember, in Shake-
speare's Hamlet:
Claudius: To be or not to be, that is
the question.
Gertrude: Meh.
Hamlet: (Stage left, behind potted
plant. Whimpers in rage and self-
hatred.)
"Meh" went unnoticed for centu-
ries - Shakespearean insults such as
"Thou vain, unwash'd bladder!" were
much cooler - but now it's gaining
popularity, especially here at the Uni-
versity. For example, when someone
asks you whether you're buying season
football tickets next year, a popular
response used to be "heck yes," but now
we say "meh" instead. "Meh" is also a
favorite reply when someone wants to
know if you plan on voting in the next
Michigan Student Assembly elections.
(Note: "What are those?" might be an
even more common response.)
Now, I know what you're thinking.
You're thinking, "Should I call a Diag
preacher a vain, unwash'd bladder?"
(No. Refrain from eloquence and call
him a dirty bladder, then bite your
thumb at him.) You're also thinking,
"Well yeah, it really comes as no sur-
prise that 'meh' is a word now - it's
basically 'eh' with an 'i'. But what
about other cool slang that we want to
see as real words, like 'irregardless'? P
Excellent point. As any decent edi-
tor will tell you, the bestjournalisis use
Wikipediato research these important
issues. But I wanted to go even further
- so I attempted to contact Collins
English Dictionary, which is based,
inexplicably, in Scotland. (But after a
quick Wikipedia search, I discovered
that they speak both Scottish and Eng-
lish over there, so it makes sense.)
Before doing so, I did some more
research and discovered that the Col-
lins English Dictionary editors, having
grownbored fromeditingdictionaries,
had encouraged readers to submitcon-
versational, non-dictionary words and
promised one submission would be
published as a new word. As a result,
many readers who were bored of read-
ing dictionaries sent in their sugges-
tions (eventhoughmostofthemhadn't
had a conversation in years). It came as
no surprise that "meh" was chosen,
though there were some interesting
candidates. For instance, the term
"frenemies" (French for "split per-
sonality") was a popular submission.
So was "huggles." but since no normal
person would ever utter the word in
public, it didn't win.
This information changed every-
thing. Suddenly, I knew I had to make
a suggestion myself, rather than bore
the Collins English Dictionary people
to death with journalistic questions.
However, picking a slang word that
the entire campus would like to see
made official is easier said than done.
Finally, after ages of consideration,
after thinking of popular books, mov-
ies and other entertainment, I had it.
What follows is a completely verba-
tim transcript of an e-mail exchange
between Anna MacDermid, a Col-
lins Dictionary support assistant and
myself.
Will: Hello!. I recently learned
that your 30th anniversary English
Why "meh"
makes it in but
. "huggle" doesn't.
Dictionary will include "meh" as a
word. I think this is very exciting
and I also wonder if you will include
"muggle," too, a derogatory noun - as
in, "Don't lie to me, you filthy muggle."
Thank you!
Anna: Hi William - Thank you for
your email - we appreciate feedback
from our dictionary fans. I will for-
ward your suggestion to our diction-
ary editors.
I will forward yoursuggestion. His-
tory in the making! Perhaps I wasted
my chance by requesting "muggle," but
it's such a good insult - whenever you
accuse someone of not being a wizard,
you know you've crossed a line.
Though compared to "vain,
unwash'd bladder," it's a bit meh.
Will Grundler can be reached
at sailguil@umich.edu.
LET TER TO THE EDITOR SE
Review of "Valkyrie" misses
film's historical accuracy
ND LETTERS TO: TOTHEDAILY@UMICH.EDU
Many critics disliked the movie. But perhaps
actually watching the film and a quick Wikipe-
dia search would have served Stahl better.
Rebecca Halpern
TO THE DAILY: LSA Senior
Though I often disagree with the Daily's
movie reviews, yesterday's critique of Valky- Obama's
rie by Noah Dean Stahl ('Valkyrie' a noble plot
that ends in failure, 1/12/2009) was an all-time Israel'sr
low. It appeared, in fact, as if Stahl didn't even
see the film before reviewing it. In the article,
Stahl asks why the movie barely mentions the TO THE DAIL'
Holocaust. The movie, however, was not about It's curious,
the Holocaust at all. The movie's backdrop is cize Israel's ri
World War. ing President-:
Aside from Tom Cruise's overacting, the Obama's fight.
movie fared pretty well in its historical accu- it was Barack
racy - a fact Stahl overlooked. Hitler's detrac- was sending r.
tors at the time did not oppose Hitler's regime two daughters
because of the atrocities committed at Dachau thing to stop ti
and other places, but because Hitler started a the same thini
war he was unable to finish. The opposition's that Stenvigv
rebellion was not out of compassion but was an rogue governn
attempt to salvage Germany's pride. If this fact dom rockets at
seems in some way "irresponsible" to Stahl, he
can blame the detractors the movie's characters Aaron Willis
were based on, not the writers. Alum
s remarks support
nilitary action
.Y:
that Kate Stenvig chose to criti-
ght to self-defense while prais-
elect Barack Obama (Continuing
for unity, 1/12/2009). Ironically,
Obama who said, "If somebody
ockets into my house where my
sleep at night, I would do every-
hat and would expect Israel to do
g." I suppose it is safe to assume
would be perfectly fine with a
ment in Ypsilanti launching ran-
t Ann Arbor by the thousands.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
Readers are encouraged to submit letters to the editor. Letters should be less than 300 words and must
include the writer's full name and University affiliation. Letters are edited for style, length, clarity and
accuracy. All submissions become property of the Daily. We do not print anonymous letters.
Send letters to tothedaily@umich.edu.
YANNICK WOOD I VIEWPOINT
Outlaws in the ML)3
I
JASON MAHAKIAN E-MAIL JASON AT MAHAKIAJ@UMICH.EDU
f Y"
99
Every day I spent as a freshman completing the LSA
language requirement was like an adventure straight out
of a Spaghetti Western.
I, along with hundreds of others, would herd through
the corral of the Modern Language Building basement.
The floors accumulated so much dust that it clumped
together (with several strands of hair) and rolled around
like tumbleweed. We were a motley crew of students -
some city slickers, some country folk, but all overachiev-
ers and desperados gunning for perfection with the
occasional senior whose graduation hinged upon a C- in
the class.
At any rate, we were concerned about our grades, and
most of us had no intention of pursuing a foreign lan-
guage, even as a minor. Being the outlaws that we were,
it should come as no surprise that some of us cheated.
After all, teachers used the same exams semester after
semester (believe me, I know). It was not uncommon for
an upperclassman to keep an old French exam on file to
lend to friends.
My real surprise is that very few were ever caught. Few
academic integrity violations are reported by depart-
ments at the University. This could be for several rea-
sons: professors might choose to handle cheating without
reporting it to the Dean, or they might not be catching
students. Truth be told, this problem of underreported
cheating occurs in almost every department.
But why did we cheat in the first place?
We cheated because we could. It was easy to get our
hands on tests from past students. Many introductory
classes are classes that most students have to take. When
professors use the same tests year after year, there are
many answer sheets floating around. If the answers are
online, it makes it even easier -- you don't even need to
know someone who previously took the course. Outlaws
never had it so easy.
We cheated because we did not respect the course.
If professors don't vary the subject material each year 4
and use examples and notes that are just taken from text-
book publishers, students have less incentive to actually
put in extra work for a fair grade. When professors design
uninteresting courses, we do not think the class is worth
our while.
Students have responsibilities, too, and I'm not trying
to shift all the blame to the professors. I understand it's
difficult and time-consuming to change syllabi each year,
and even if they are changed, there's no guarantee that
every student in the class will find the material worthy of
an honest effort.
But when professors update their material and show
they are truly passionate about their lessons, students
cannot help but buy into the professors' vision. It is then,
when teachers increase the effort they put into educating,
that students face a serious challenge in legitimizing their
cheating and are thus less likely to do it.
In cases when it's difficult to detect cheating, profes-
sors' passion for their material will still go a long way to
discourage this activity. A successful professor would
be as open as possible with students in explaining the
realities of cheating and encouraging students to take the 4
learning process seriously. They would not simply say that
"cheating is bad, don't do it or let me catch you doing it."
If proessors did that, our outlaw days might be over.
Yannick Wood is a Public Policy junior and
a member of the LSA Honor Council.
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS:
Nina Amilineni, Emad Ansari, Emily Barton, Elise Baun, Harun Buljina, Ben Caleca,
Satyajeet Deshmukh, Brian Flaherty, Matthew Green, Emmarie Huetteman, Emma Jeszke, Shannon Kellman,
Edward McPhee, Matthew Shutler, Jennifer Sussex, Radhika Upadhyaya, Rachel Van Gilder
I4
i