Comments on: Headlines for Hacks, June 2011 http://ubcinsiders.ca/2011/06/headlines-for-hacks-june-2011/ Separating the wheat from the chaff. Wed, 13 Nov 2019 15:50:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: Arshy Mann http://ubcinsiders.ca/2011/06/headlines-for-hacks-june-2011/comment-page-1/#comment-10601 Arshy Mann Fri, 10 Jun 2011 05:36:37 +0000 http://ubcinsiders.ca/?p=8554#comment-10601 We do have an RSS feed. http://ubyssey.ca/feed/ -A We do have an RSS feed.

http://ubyssey.ca/feed/

-A

]]> By: Sarah K http://ubcinsiders.ca/2011/06/headlines-for-hacks-june-2011/comment-page-1/#comment-10600 Sarah K Thu, 09 Jun 2011 03:12:38 +0000 http://ubcinsiders.ca/?p=8554#comment-10600 I hope "increased web presence" translates in part to "finally getting an RSS feed" I hope “increased web presence” translates in part to “finally getting an RSS feed”

]]> By: Michael C http://ubcinsiders.ca/2011/06/headlines-for-hacks-june-2011/comment-page-1/#comment-10599 Michael C Thu, 09 Jun 2011 02:50:05 +0000 http://ubcinsiders.ca/?p=8554#comment-10599 "C'mon, government, give us a break. A TAX break, that is!" “C’mon, government, give us a break. A TAX break, that is!”

]]> By: Alex Lougheed http://ubcinsiders.ca/2011/06/headlines-for-hacks-june-2011/comment-page-1/#comment-10598 Alex Lougheed Wed, 08 Jun 2011 16:45:24 +0000 http://ubcinsiders.ca/?p=8554#comment-10598 Taking money from all Sauder students and giving it back based on merit instead of need isn't in line with the great change the University took towards taking Policy 72 seriously. That's a seriously regressive change that most people wouldn't stand for, when given the option between merit-based and need-based allocation. If this were a private donation, that donor could decide what they want, but this isn't private--this is funds from everyone to those who may not need it. Taking money from all Sauder students and giving it back based on merit instead of need isn’t in line with the great change the University took towards taking Policy 72 seriously. That’s a seriously regressive change that most people wouldn’t stand for, when given the option between merit-based and need-based allocation.

If this were a private donation, that donor could decide what they want, but this isn’t private–this is funds from everyone to those who may not need it.

]]>