Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Help us get GWireless in City Hall!

I wish the dictionary had a definition for “Individual High Speed Internet”. If it did, I am sure that City Hall's wireless would not fit the description. Even if that's what GWU promises on it's website.

The truth is that even if GWireless is problematic across campus, there is a huge difference between problematic wireless and having no wireless at all.

Since the wireless signal only reaches as far as the lowest floors in the building, the ones located in the upper floors are forced to used the much hated ResNet cables.

People are tired of tripping with the cables. Sick of inviting people over to work on class projects, but not having Internet for their guests.

If you are sick of GWireless too, or just empathize with this issue, please join our facebook group and sign the petition there!

We will email President Knapp after we reach the 150 member benchmark, and hopefully reach our goal soon thereafter.

$12,250 a year make real “Individual High Speed Internet” more than affordable. Let's make it real!

Join the group now!


Colby Anderson said...

Last semester I was one of the defenders of this website.

But now I'm having a little trouble with it. I am guessing there was an assignment to take on online activism for a project. While I'm sure the intentions were good, it seems that this projects has turned into a three step project.

1. Find something that grinds your gears
2. Create a facebook group
3. Gripe about it on this blog, but don't form a cogent argument. Instead, talk about how the cost of tuition should cover your problem.

I don't mean to call this specific post out, but rather the assignment as a whole.

Zahin Hasan said...

Finally, someone came out and said it. Thank you, Colby.

Anonymous said...

Colby, if you're aware that we're doing this for an assignment (obviously as a grade attached), why are you going out of your way to undermine our efforts to get a good grade? From one student to another, that's a dick move.

Colby Anderson said...

If my comment does cause anyone to get a grade different from one they would have gotten without the comment, I do apologize. In would think that actually drawing a comment would improve your grade.

It's not the actual work I have a problem with, it's the learning effectiveness of the assignment. Did any of the students not know how to create a facebook group? Did any one of the students not know how to write a blog? Where is the consideration of the audience? Knowing that too many campaigns launched at the same time create noise that cancel each other out, why would the professor assign each person to create his or her own campaign.

And furthermore, where the is analysis of the stakeholders in each campaign? To me, and perhaps I am not privy to the inside workings, it seems that the assignment isn't to create a sound electronic media influence campaign to bring about real change. This isn't something for which the students should be punished, it is something that the educator needs to think about.

And to the students, you know if this is one of those classes that really shifts your paradigm like the best SMPA classes do. Has this class met that bar?

Again, it really wasn't my intention to undermine anyone's grade, but more a challenge to think about the assignment.

Anonymous said...

LOL at the anonymous comment. Yeahhhh Colby what a dick haha but seriously though I do enjoy reading the blog (until I'm asked to join a group). The professor needs to give y'all As because you keep me entertained!

AdamGreen said...


First, thanks for your consistent reading of GWBlogSpot -- and your thoughtful critique.

It may surprise you to know that I agree with much of what you wrote.

A key part of this class is "theory of change" -- the idea that online tactics must be in pursuit of a larger strategy meant to achieve a goal. Regarding our online activism projects, the syllabus specifically asks, "Did you envision a path to victory, where online activism was part of that path?" If you cannot tell from the blogs posts what that path to actually moving the ball forward is, that's a legitimate critique.

Also from the syllabus, "Did you shift the environment around your issue -- or was the activism a tree falling in the middle of the forest with those who most needed to hear your message not hearing it?" Last year, a Facebook group got 1000 people involved in a J Street issue that led to meetings with top administrators who proposed solutions in direct reaction to the group. Along the way, GWBlogSpot gave updates on this progress. That's the way it should be. The burden is on those leading the online activism campaigns to show you how what they are doing is relevant -- and if you can't discern that, that's a legitimate critique.

More from the syllabus that I think you'll agree with, "I don't want glitter. I don't care if you got 500 people in a Facebook group if nothing was done to use that toward victory. All online tactics are not created equal, so if you show me that 100 people ReTweeted a message, that's cool -- but what did it achieve? That's the question I want to see answered."

Seems like we have the same questions -- and will be looking for the same answers.

Leire said...

Hey everyone,

I just wrote another post trying to adress some of the problems you talked about here.

But I still wanted to address one issue. Colby mentioned on his first comment that we "talk about how the cost of tuition should cover" our problems.

Just to make it clear, when I said that $12,250 a year make wireless affordable, I wasn't thinking about tuition, but about the price paid by residents in City Hall.

I agree with you when you suggest that the cost of tuition can't solve all of our problems. That's a hackneyed argument.

But again, I was referring to the actual price for a year in City Hall. Why is it one of the most expensive dorms when we don't even have GWireless in every room?

Why do we pay the same that residents in South Hall? They have single rooms with a normal GWireless service, and we have doubles with cables all over. That was my point there.