Modem fee an unwelcome charge
I only recently heard of the decision to start charging students and faculty for Internet dial-up access, and I have more than a few concerns:
First, I heard about the change only two weeks ago by reading an article in The St. Petersburg Times and one recent editorial in The Oracle. There was one previous article published in The Oracle in March and though I read the publication frequently, I evidently missed it on that particular day.
However, I know many students who never even pick up The Oracle and I would therefore like to know why the students and faculty (at least the ones using the service) were not sent an e-mail or some other form of notification about this change in a more timely manner.
After going back and reading the archived March article online, it claimed that there would be a “large communication campaign to notify students.” This obviously has not happened, (unless you count the publicity that The Times has generated), even though the service is slated to change this month.
Second, I think it is ridiculous for a “research” university to charge its students (and especially its own faculty) for dial-up resources. This should be a free service offered to all students and faculty, just as it is at the other state “research” universities in Florida.
I am a graduate student who is trying to watch every dollar I spend, but I need the Internet for research purposes and to communicate with other students and professors. It is not always practical for me to drive to campus just to use an”open-use” lab that may or may not be full at the time.
Third, the Internet dial-up access at USF is, in a word, “slow.” The only “good” part about it, other than the cost, is that one accesses USF’s Library services at home without reconfiguring their home computer. I would like to know if the service provided at $6 a month will be faster and more reliable than the current outdated service. Nothing has been mentioned regarding improving the connection speed or download bandwidth of this service.
Fourth, according to the published articles, the cost of operating the current modem pool is approximately $187,000, and the access fees charged to students and faculty will supposedly recoup this expenditure.
However, if the approximately 7,700 students and faculty who currently use the service continue to do so at $6 per month, this will raise approximately $554,000 in annual revenue. Where will the extra $367,000 go? Even if many students drop the service because they do not want to pay for it, it is likely that there will be additional funds earned, which makes me think that this whole thing is a money-making venture rather than simply a means to recover money lost through budget cuts and a poor economy.
Finally, as tight as my budget is, I would rather pay a different ISP more money per month and get fast, reliable, high-quality service than give another dollar to USF, which already gets my tuition, parking fees, lab fees, A&S fees, health fees, etc.
At least Time Warner and AOL admit they’re in it for the profit.
Amber Turcott is a graduate student in Music Education.
Hatred not Promise Keepers’ message
This is in response to Thursday’s Oracle article entitled “A Promise Kept: Men Only at Dome.”
Linda Miklowitz has some pretty harsh views about the rally this past weekend. I admire her for her ability to speak so freely about her views. However, I do not agree with many things she said. Here’s why.
First, if Ms. Miklowitz were to actually hear some of the things that go on in Promise Keepers, she would see that the idea of the men learning to be “dominant” is absurd. At the rally, men learn to be leaders. This does not mean that the men are dominant over their wives. In fact, they are taught to be servants of their wives and place their wives above themselves.
Second, I believe that the fact that the founder was involved with a militant anti-abortion group is irrelevant. While I do not agree with militant groups such as that, what the men are taught at Promise Keepers is in no way related to anti-abortion ideas.
Third, I think that Ms. Miklowitz’s statement that the rally spreads hate in the name of God is ridiculous. Again, if she would take the time to actually listen in on what goes on there, she would know that the rally teaches men to spread love to their families, wives, strangers, and even the picketers.
Finally, in response to the statement that “Promise Keepers give religion a bad name,” as an attendee of the rally, I would say I agree. It’s not about religion. It’s about a relationship with God.
So, when I attended the rally this weekend, I will greeted the NOW protesters with open arms. We have the almighty creator of the earth on our side, so how could mere people possibly harm us? We will love them just the same.
BJ Quinton is a senior at USF.
Protesters need to educate themselves
As a retired United States Marine and a proud American, I am repulsed by anyone who would protest this nation’s war on terrorism. The savages who attacked America and killed (very purposely) close to 3,000 non-combatants will have no qualms about killing another 3,000 people or 3 million people. To protest on Memorial Day is to spit on the graves and into the faces of millions of brave Americans who served and died for their right to protest.
These war protesters represent people who are not very educated in the real world. They live in a dream world where we all sit around, hold hands and sing “We Are The World” and “Give Peace A Chance.” They need to understand that these terrorists, and what they represent, want to end our way of life. They are not interested in peace. They do not sit around and sing songs. They train to kill. They plot to kill. They kill.
They want their way of life to replace our way of life. These war protesters are only helping the terrorist achieve their goals. They are not helping the cause of peace because peace will come only after the terrorist have been defeated in battle. Force is the only thing that terrorist understand. Either we show that we are stronger than they are or they will come at us full bore with the intent to destroy us.
We all would love to live in a peaceful world, but until the world is rid of people who fly airplanes into buildings or strap bombs around their waist, there can be no peace. Nothing any government or government policy does gives anyone the right to kill for pleasure by conducting terrorist activities.
Yes, during our responses to terrorist acts, there have been innocent civilian casualties. These people were not targeted nor were they intended to be killed. They were just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
During all wars innocent people die. War is a nasty business. Terrorists, on the other hand, seek to inflict as many civilian casualties as possible. They are cowards by nature.
War protesters, I encourage you to become more educated about the real world. You need to get out of your dream world and join the rest of us in our quest to readily pursue peace by letting the terrorist know that we, as a nation, are together in our quest to rid the world of them. That is the only way to peace.
Gary Stanley is a junior majoring in secondary education.