> So in the end, he still blamed those teenagers. Has he learned nothing?
What should he have learned?
What should he have learned?
It looks like a fact that at least some of the teenagers in that group complained, and NYT handled their complaints professionally then. However, when some other media exposed it, the author treated it lightly and inappropriately.
Down vote me as you like, but I don't like the author blame it on the teenagers at all.
How ? What exactly should have been changed in his behavior ?
If you run through a field of land mines, you can't get mad when your legs get blown off.
Ah yes, the teacher who only listens to their students' feelings. The greatest wisdom of all comes from letting a bunch of kids steamroll you.
> If you run through a field of land mines, you can't get mad when your legs get blown off.
This is the issue. What teenagers think about someone should not be a field of landmines. Teenagers are constantly whiplashed by emotion, easily offended, self-important, and constantly trying to impress and one-up each other.
The last thing we need to do with teenagers is shut up and let them speak. Yet now we've given a handful of them the power to fire someone based on their feelings. What message does this send?
Sounds more like HN users.