Talk:Jefferson Literary and Debating Society
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- "Unfortunately, it is also one of the most despised organizations on Grounds."
-Well, feel free to cite a source -- awww, or is someone just upset they didn't get in? :...-( —The preceding unsigned comment was added by EEMeltonIV (talk • contribs).
Not sure what's more pathetic -- some lame-o taking the trouble to add a clever quip to this entry, or me taking the time to bother to fix it. Ugh, I suspect I know the answer. --EEMeltonIV 05:25, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
-A Wikipedia entry will present all facts about an entry, not just serve as a puff piece. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.188.8.246 (talk • contribs).
-Why are all references to alcohol at the meetings being deleted? As I understand it, this is one of the largest selling points the Society uses to retain membership. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.188.8.246 (talk • contribs).
That is because you understand incorrectly. No alcohol is served at any Society meeting or function. Please get your facts straight. -RC —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.84.218.44 (talk • contribs).
[edit] Room 7 Resident
Regarding this entry
- The 4th year that is selected to live in Room 7 is in charge of providing all the alcohol the society consumes before and after each meeting. The Room 7 resident must do this in exchange for the honor of living on the Lawn rent free.
Besides being shoddily edited, this entry places an incorrect emphasis on alcohol (resident provides more than just booze). Furthermore, the resident's duties extend well beyond deciding to host a party -- indeed, hosting such a shindig is a relatively minor part of what the resident does. --EEMeltonIV 21:44, 13 January 2006 (UTC) (former rm. 7 resident)
-Yes you do. Its you. All that stuff that you have deleted has been true. Stop trying to censor this page for the betterment of your society. Ok the Room 7 resident might do more than provide alcohol. So instead of just deleting that entire entry, why don't you edit it instead and tell everybody what the Room 7 resident does. Because I would be very interested in that information. Because as of now, what that previous person listed is all I know what the Room 7 resident does. So edit it, improve it. Stop trying to be the censor who is only protecting his college club from their not so perfect past.
What else is that you also deleted the part of the article that some person listed on the Jeff losing control of Jeff Hall for a year because of their little compeitition fiasco. That is true. Look in the archives of the Cav Daily. Stop the censorship. If you want to edit the material to make it better. This article is not all about making a society look like the greatest society in the world, it is about, telling the truth. It is true the Room 7 resident provides alcohol to its members. It is true that the Jeff lost control of Jeff Hall for a year because it was found out that members of the Jeff use to have a compeitition to see who could sleep with the most female probies. Stop denying it and tell it. Wikipedia deserves that.
- "It is true that the Jeff lost control of Jeff Hall for a year because it was found out that members of the Jeff use to have a compeitition to see who could sleep with the most female probies."
- See, it's that kind of incorrect notion that makes the other tripe worth deleting. They were kicked out for alcohol violations. You point me toward the Cav Daily records -- I'll point you back toward the same archives, and also to the Board of Visitors records. Jeff Hall was kicked out for alcohol violations in the building.
- Re: your high horse about making wikipedia better by improving it and so on: I improve it/make it better be deleting the mis-informed nonsense that sometimes winds up here.EEMeltonIV 19:23, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
-I think the complaint is that revision would be preferred over deletion.
[edit] date problem
The page suggests Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter on August, 12, 1895. I believe Jefferson died in 1826. Perhaps the letter's original date is 1795 or some other year. I don't have access to the letter, so I won't alter the page on a guess, but perhaps whoever made the original statement can respond to the issue.
- Not only does it suggest -- it states. It was my eff up. Thanks for the heads up. --EEMeltonIV 21:57, 14 February 2006 (UTC)