Here’s your problem, right here

[rolanni]

The background to today’s adventure is that I have a day-job as a secretary in a private college. Dorm damage is something of a hot topic among the students of said college, since the cost of repairing any damage done to a dorm is shared equally among the residents of that dorm, whether or not they had anything to do with the breakage. This is, I gather, supposed to teach people to “police themselves.”

For the last couple weeks, as graduation — and the semester damage invoices loom — there has been an increasingly frantic discussion on the student list about damage, the people who do it, why people do it, and how people go about “policing themselves.” These are useful questions, and following this afternoon, I am in the position to provide some insights.

I work inside a library building. Normally, it’s a quiet place. There are occasional loud noises and the acoustics of the stairwell are really interesting, so that some conversations kind of waft up three flights and directly into my office, but, hey, it’s an old building and I like the stairwell, which is kind of Escher-esque. You can stand on the landing of the third floor and have a (loud) discussion with someone standing on the ground floor, aka The Street.

So, my office, around about 2:30. It’s quiet on my hall, with a slight buzz of voices rising from The Street, where many students are studying for exams.

Suddenly! A metallic bang rang out!

Followed by more bangs, and laughter, and even more bangs. This goes on for a couple minutes before I decide to see what the devil’s going on and walk down two flights of stairs to the point where I can overlook the vending machines.

As I’m walking down the stairs — two flights, now, and I’m walking briskly, but not running — I see students coming out of the library, looking over the rail to the vending area, obviously curious about the noise, and move on. There is from time to time still some laughter at the banging, which is continuing at a goodly pace.

I arrive at last at the proper landing, and look down into the vending area, where one young man is whaling the hell out of vending machine, while another young man is calmly purchasing a drink from the machine beside it.

Since I’m obviously the only adult in range, I lean over the rail and ask a leading question: “What the hotel are you doin’?”

The boy — I’m supposed to refer to students as “students” “men” “women,” but in this case I’m making an exception for truth in reporting — the boy who’s whaling on the machine looks up at me.

“What?”

Since I now have his attention, I decide to cut to the chase.

“Leave,” I tell him.

He blinks and pulls the sound plugs out of his ears.

“Are you serious?”

“Yes, I’m serious. Leave.”

“No — wait, just listen. I swiped my card twice and the machine deducted the money and my Doritos are still stuck in there!”

“Leave,” I said.

“You’re really serious.” Said with a look of utter disbelief that I could find his explanation anything but reasonable and his actions objectionable in any way.

“Yes, I am really serious. Leave.”

At which point the guy who had been buying the drink, and who had remained by that machine, muttered, “She said leave, man,” and so the boy did that.

I went back up to my office and fumed.

But I promised an insight, and here it is: The way to police yourselves is not to laugh when some fool is breaking something. The way to police yourselves is not to walk away, because it’s somebody else’s problem. The way to police yourselves is to do something, to speak up. If you’re little and they’re big, or you’re sober and they’re drunk, take a friend or three to help your present your case. Call Security for ghod’s sake! But don’t do nothing.

That’s it. No, that’s not it. One more thing — If that vending machine is broken, every person sitting in The Street, laughing, or pretending not to notice, has earned a piece of the repair bill.

Originally published at Sharon Lee, Writer. You can comment here or there.

Comments

[zanzjan.livejournal.com]

I work at a very large state University and, man, I *wish* we could charge students for the damage they do.

Vending machines, glass doors, and computers in labs seem to take the brunt of the abuse (that I see, anyway; I have nothing to do with the dorms) but I still haven't forgiven them for getting extra-rowdy two years ago and burning down a bunch of trees.

[jelazakazone.livejournal.com]

The thing that gets me is that these are supposedly really smart kids, right? Why didn't the guy getting the drink say to the other guy, whoa there, why don't we go see if the librarian can get your money or get the chips out of the machine?

Oh, that's right. The pre-frontal cortex is still developing.

[(Anonymous)]

In our elementary school computer lab someone repeatedly ripped the CDROM players out of the hard drives. Now we have video cameras watching - but we still don't know what little s*&# did it. Wish we knew - he, she, they would get the bill.

Here here!

[(Anonymous)]

First off, a small gush! I LOVE your books. I have every one of the Liad series. Love them all. I just got Fledgling. I got sucked into Dragon and Mouse, but found that it's not yet available. (Slight anguish, but Fledgling filled in nicely.)

I work at a company and in an industry that is mostly men. You wouldn't believe the bone-headed things that they think are acceptable. I've often been The Voice of Reason and Light. Good to know that there are others out there.

Thank you for your great books.

Inge

Re: Here here!

[(Anonymous)]

Inge, don't forget about Saltation, which follows Fledgling. It is a great book. Beverly

Re: Here here!

[(Anonymous)]

I'll definitely get it next! i

[redpimpernel.livejournal.com]

It's surprising how many people out there have never been taught to simply Do the Right Thing, simply because it's the Right Thing to do. I have told litterers to pick up their trash, that the world is not their waste basket, and that it is not acceptable behavior. I've told kids to stop teasing the animals at the zoo, which include the free roaming peacocks and geese. I even chastised a kid on the zoo train passing by that was "shooting" passerby's with his finger. (Silently, with a shaken finger, and shaking head and direct eye-contact, and he stopped). His mother was sitting next to him. My roommate is always shushing me, scared someone will retaliate. But, we have a responsibility to our society to stand up and say, when things are unacceptable.

It's all about morality, ethics, and acceptable social behavior. Often sticky subjects, but ignoring them doesn't make things better.

[estrelladesax.livejournal.com]

Good job!

[enleve.livejournal.com]

At the university near where I live, I have never seen a vandalized or broken vending machine. People are generally quiet and respectful of property when using them.

On the other hand, on each machine there is a paper sign with a phone number to call if there is a problem with the machine. So when there is a problem, people are empowered to take constructive action. There is a process for getting a refund or getting a product that is stuck inside that doesn't involve kicking the machine and hoping that it will work.

Obviously, the boy mentioned above should not take out his frustration by damaging the machine and making noise that disturbs the library patrons. He is responsible for his own behaviour, and wasn't doing the right thing.

However, sometimes you can design a system so that people are less frustrated in the first place, and have what they need to resolve problems when they come up. This would lead to a better experience for everyone. I think that this sort of design or re-design to make it work better should be a goal for how to deal with recurring problems in systems where people interact with each other or with technology. Sometimes changing something simple can have big effects.

[rolanni.livejournal.com]

However, sometimes you can design a system so that people are less frustrated in the first place, and have what they need to resolve problems when they come up.

The trouble with a linear storyline is that one must of necessity leave things that do not impinge on the progression of the story out.

Of course there's a sign with a phone number to call in case there's a malfunction, right there on the face of the machine.

However, I had no interest in educating the boy, who was clearly already angry or having 'way too much fun; my goal was to get him away from the machine and out into the day where he could cool off and perhaps find a friend who would have pity on him and buy him a bag of corn chips.

[enleve.livejournal.com]

And you achieved that goal admirably!

I'm glad the sign exists. Vending machines are faceless unaccountable things that are designed not to be fixable by the people using them. Having the information available right where people are using the machine on how to call in a specialist to fix it is a good thing. It is good for self-policing in addition to being helpful for resolving problems with the machine.

Some people might feel more comfortable taking an educational approach to self-policing. They can say "Stop doing that! If you have a problem with the machine, call the phone number," and point to the sign. The existence of the sign can provide a sort of back up, bolster what they are saying, even if there's no other person there to back them up. It is also slightly less confrontational than insisting that the other person leave, so for some people it might be easier to work up the chutzpah to say it. (Obviously not a problem for you. :-) )

Still, it's sad that with an alternate, more effective, less disruptive way of resolving the problem right there in front of his face, the boy elected to throw a physical tantrum.

I haven't seen that sort of thing happen at the nearby university. I wonder why. A different culture? A different demographic of students? Just lucky?

Things that tend to get damaged around here are ones that students might see while walking home drunk late at night, things that they think are funny to do things to when they are drunk and no one is watching. Making a scene in public, in a library no less, is just Not Done. And I am very grateful for that. How irksome that the situation that prompted you to intervene existed at all.

A few odd years ago I lived in a dorm at Big State University

[(Anonymous)]

One of the most entertaining things I did while there was to let myself be talked into serving on the Peer Review Board. It was what it sounds like, not quite night court (you don't really care how I know what night courts are like), but sometimes close. At times it was all we could do to get the guilty parties out of the room (Why don't you go watch TV while we discuss this?) before we burst out laughing over their behavior, and inability to grasp that what they had done was not "acceptable". The realization that in the real world they had to pay for what they broke, regardless of whether or not they had done it "on purpose", or could even remember doing it (Any guesses what usually impaired the memory?), was always a shock. So was the expense, at Big State University the trades are paid union wages, and being unionized, they come in pairs. Sorry, no, you can't fix that yourself unless you join the right union.

And while we are on the subject of the U, I note that Lee & Miller books seem to be moving in and out of The University Bookstore at a respectable clip lately. Nice to see that.

Erik,

Well...

[ysabetwordsmith.livejournal.com]

You know what that policy teaches people? That no matter what they break, somebody else will have to help pay for it. They won't have to bear the full weight of their own mistakes.

Now look at Wall Street. I wonder if their dorms had that rule.

Re: Well...

[(Anonymous)]

If we found a resident responsible for damage to University property, the union scale cost of repairs came out of their pocket (not to say that parents weren't filling the pocket). Failure to pay up meant that you could not live in the dorms in future, and/or no diploma. Think you'll just transfer somewhere else? No transcripts released until the bill is paid either. In fact, the most effective tool we had (we couldn't fine people for bad behavior alone, just any damages) was the subtle threat that future landlords and/or employers might be told of transgressions. The official policy was that no information, good or bad, was given out. (If the accounting office sent things to collections, well. . .) Surprisingly, no one that I recall inquired as to exactly what the official policy was.

[(Anonymous)]

I see two things going on here. And my years as a teacher show that they are on the increase...sigh. One is "three year old morality" which translates into "it's not wrong unless you are caught" hence the laughter. Two is instant gratification which this system of things promotes on an increasingly regular basis. I'm sure there was a number to call in case of problems but hey!I paid for those Doritos and I want them NOW. Reminds me of the study with the M&Ms. A little kid was sat down at a table with a handful of M&Ms in front of them. They were told that if they could wait for a few minutes they would get a whole package of M&Ms instead of the few on the table. The researcher left the room, returning a few minutes later. Result? They ran the test with increasingly older kids and it wasn't until, I believe, the age of 12 that the kid could wait to get the bigger portion. Guess that kid at the vending machine is 8. or 6. or probably 3. Jenny from CO

[mbarker.livejournal.com]

Um... you might be thinking of Walter Mischel's marshmellow experiment in the 1960s? That was a group of 4-year-olds given the choice between eating one now or two in 20 minutes. Depending on whether or not they could wait, they were classified into two groups. They then followed up into adolescence. Kids who could wait were demonstrably better adjusted, more dependable, and had higher SAT scores.

A little poking around with Google shows that indeed, people have been replicating the marshmellow experiment with M&Ms. But it doesn't sound as if they are doing a good job...

M&Ms

[(Anonymous)]

Actually, as I recall it was an attempt to build on the marshmallow study but done on a local level at C.U. in Boulder, Co back in the 70's. I was a student at Greeley and there was chat back and forth between universities. It was pretty casual; somebody's term paper, I think. The focus was to see when the ability to delay gratification appeared but the follow-up is most interesting. Jenny from CO

Re: M&Ms

[mbarker.livejournal.com]

Oh, I suspect there are lots of variations. Is there a "development" of delayed gratification (do we learn to put it off)? Are there thresholds of difference -- one marshmallow (or M&M) now versus how many and how long? How much now and how much later? Does it make a difference if we have just eaten or not (satiation)? Room for tons of follow-up studies.

I wonder if anyone has tried this recently in a really controlled experiment? Be interesting to compare with the older studies and see whether kids are really getting less able to postpone or not. I know what everyone says, but I prefer measurements :-)