IN RELATION to the lead editorial "Referendum Ridiculousness" published on Oct. 5, we think that the intent of the initiatives that Pavan Gupta and Rami Samo led should not be undermined. We also believe that the deep concern and positive conversations generated from over 1,000 University students who support the initiative clearly suggest a need for our U.Va. community to take action to implement change that would better combat hate-based incidents.
As we are all aware, several hate-based incidents have occurred within the University community over the past weeks. The incidents were deliberate acts of hate targeted against individuals based on race, gender, sexual orientation or religion and are serious acts of violence against our fellow students. First, these incidents strip individuals of their rights and disrupt the community of learning on which the vitality of our community depends. Second, they contradict standards of leadership and norms of best practice in personal and professional life that we all strive to achieve. We also feel that it is very unfortunate that these types of hate-based events happen every year, especially during the starting months of school. And while there have been previous efforts in this direction, the current events have created a need to move forward at a greater velocity and broader momentum. It is in that spirit that 80 percent of the students attending the Darden Graduate School of Business have endorsed the petition for including a 13th Standard of Conduct in order to bring to the forefront discriminatory harassment as a prohibited conduct for which disciplinary action should be taken.
We believe that the intent of the initiative that Gupta and Samo have led was to take immediate action to address the ongoing concerns of the University community in a way that leaves positive and lasting change.
As for the Managing Board's opinion that the referendum should have been allowed to remain if not for a technicality, once again we need to step back and focus on the intent of the initiatives. Efforts that call for the creation of a 13th Standard of Conduct and amendment of the University Judiciary Committee's (UJC) constitution that would limit the sanction for such acts to suspension or expulsion are significant changes for our community to implement. Gupta and Samo did recognize the magnitude of their intended change and constructed the wording for the amendment of the 13th Standard in a way that replicates that of the currently existing Discriminatory Harassment Policy of the University Record.
At the end of the day, however, their intent was to implement change that would be sustainable and beneficial for all members of the U.Va. community. Thus, if experienced members of our community deem that it is in our best interest that this referendum be redrafted, individuals leading change have the moral responsibility to thoughtfully and effectively act upon this request. And it is our strong belief that the supporters of this initiative who have bravely stepped up to seek change to better our community would agree to Gupta and Samo's decision.
On the other hand, whether you agree or disagree with particular wording should not be the focus of the discussion. Rather, we should focus on intent. We support the initiatives and the decisions that Gupta and Samo have led because their intent is directly in line with our community's deep caring about the rights and safety of our fellow students and with the best interest of our U.Va. community. And we sincerely believe that the intent of these students will allow our university to fulfill its commitment to sustain and protect a community of trust in which students can enjoy the freedom to develop their intellectual and personal potential ... how ridiculous is that?
Marice Cayo and Dae-In Cha are in the Darden Graduate School of Business Administration.