More idiots in the U.S.

[Missing_Minds]

*sigh*

http://www.metro.co.uk/weird/article.html?Word_%91meep%92_banned_from_US_school&in_article_id=769726&in_page_id=2


and a lawyers retort.

http://theodoramichaels.com/articles/meep.php

P.S. Meep!

[Bekki]

Meep!:p

:D:D:D

[Strakeln]

That school's IT dept will be having a headache of epic proportions now. Farkers will be emailing meep-bombs by the tens of thousands.

Sheesh. And Meep.

[Monkey_Archer]

:eek:

[adamkatt]

+1 for funny factor!

Meep

[Almerel]

Wow just wow lol

[ChaelaAnne]

ARG!!! STILL. OUT. OF. REP.

This is hysterically funny stuff. I love the fact that they forwarded it to the police. Good luck with that, suckers.

[Lleren]

meep

[karnokvolrath]

Call the oyster cult cuz people are fearing the meeper

[Memnir]

Somebody call Jack Thompson - this school district is gonna need his caliber of legal representation. :D

[RictrasShard]

Somebody call Jack Thompson - this school district is gonna need his caliber of legal representation. :D

I'll send him a distress signal!

meep meep meep meeeep meeeep meeeep meep meep meep

I was going to send them a message with "Hi" for the title subject and the text consisting of "Nice to meep you", but they totally scared me off with their police action threats. Well, that, and the fact I was too lazy to bother with the email.

[snow12992]

Meep! Meep!

[Cedwin]

http://www.toughpigs.com/uploaded_images/beaker-fire-717642.jpg

Flaming on the forums. :D

MEEP!

[karnokvolrath]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KANI2dpXLw&NR=1&feature=fvwp

[Aspenor]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KANI2dpXLw&NR=1&feature=fvwp

epic...win

[Therigar]

Assuming that news reports are accurate and the students were planning to be disruptive -- continuing a pattern of disruptive behavior from an earlier event -- the decision of the school's administration is appropriate. It does cause us to scratch our heads in wonder but is no different in principle or application than Turbine rules about personal attacks or restrictions on word choice (the presence of word filters).

In an institution where student behavior and compliance with school programs is judged to be necessary to providing meaningful education deliberate anarchic behavior whose sole function is to be disruptive and contemptuous of school rules is unacceptable. Banning disruptive behavior, regardless of its form, is a reasonable response.

[Therigar]

delete duplicate response

[Missing_Minds]

Assuming that news reports are accurate and the students were planning to be disruptive -- continuing a pattern of disruptive behavior from an earlier event -- the decision of the school's administration is appropriate. It does cause us to scratch our heads in wonder but is no different in principle or application than Turbine rules about personal attacks or restrictions on word choice (the presence of word filters).

In an institution where student behavior and compliance with school programs is judged to be necessary to providing meaningful education deliberate anarchic behavior whose soul function is to be disruptive and contemptuous of school rules is unacceptable. Banning disruptive behavior, regardless of its form, is a reasonable response.

Punishment for disruptive behavior is one thing. I do not believe any of us will ridicule the principle on that judgment.

However, turning a word that has a history of just being used for fun to have the same level of harshness as ****, ****, or *******... yeah. That is the issue at hand. The administrators took it too far at that stage.

[Bloodhaven]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kani2dpxlw&nr=1&feature=fvwp


+1

[karnokvolrath]

muawhaha, I give you eddie torres......also an epic user of the "meep meep"

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3556/3762919317_fbace35302.jpg

[Therigar]

Punishment for disruptive behavior is one thing. I do not believe any of us will ridicule the principle on that judgment.

However, turning a word that has a history of just being used for fun to have the same level of harshness as ****, ****, or *******... yeah. That is the issue at hand. The administrators took it too far at that stage.

Well, that seems to be the opinion of most people. But, how would you suggest that the administrators deal with the disruptive behavior and effectively ensure it is not repeated?

The simplist and most direct method is to address the specific word that was used. It is really irrelevant what that word is. The fact that we would distinguish between a "fun" word and a vulgarity means that we have missed the point. It was the use of the "fun" word that was disruptive. So banning the word becomes an effective tool in eliminating the disruption.

Had the word been a vulgarity we would all ridicule the school for banning it -- right? Of course not. We'd probably ridicule the school if it did not ban the word. So what is different?

Now, on a personal level, do I think that the school made the most rational choice? I don't know all of the facts. IMO there is a lot more going on than just word choices if an entire school plans to disrupt a school activity -- which is what media reports lead us to believe. There are surely serious underlying problems involving teachers, students, administrators and parents -- the entire school appears to be dysfunctional.

So my personal view is that banning a word won't change anything. That doesn't negate the value of the ban in sending a message that the school administration is intent on establishing control over an anarchic student body. But it does indicate that there is likely more to the story than just 'meep'.

[RictrasShard]

Assuming that news reports are accurate and the students were planning to be disruptive -- continuing a pattern of disruptive behavior from an earlier event -- the decision of the school's administration is appropriate. It does cause us to scratch our heads in wonder but is no different in principle or application than Turbine rules about personal attacks or restrictions on word choice (the presence of word filters).

In an institution where student behavior and compliance with school programs is judged to be necessary to providing meaningful education deliberate anarchic behavior whose soul function is to be disruptive and contemptuous of school rules is unacceptable. Banning disruptive behavior, regardless of its form, is a reasonable response.

I think there is more to the story than just that. Teenagers usually don't organize things like this in large numbers just for the heck of it. From my high school memories, it is my guess that the students felt something unfair was happening, and they thought this would be a fun way to protest. It is my theory the principal isn't giving us the full story.

[eonfreon]

Well, that seems to be the opinion of most people. But, how would you suggest that the administrators deal with the disruptive behavior and effectively ensure it is not repeated?

The simplist and most direct method is to address the specific word that was used. It is really irrelevant what that word is. The fact that we would distinguish between a "fun" word and a vulgarity means that we have missed the point. It was the use of the "fun" word that was disruptive. So banning the word becomes an effective tool in eliminating the disruption.

Had the word been a vulgarity we would all ridicule the school for banning it -- right? Of course not. We'd probably ridicule the school if it did not ban the word. So what is different?

Now, on a personal level, do I think that the school made the most rational choice? I don't know all of the facts. IMO there is a lot more going on than just word choices if an entire school plans to disrupt a school activity -- which is what media reports lead us to believe. There are surely serious underlying problems involving teachers, students, administrators and parents -- the entire school appears to be dysfunctional.

So my personal view is that banning a word won't change anything. That doesn't negate the value of the ban in sending a message that the school administration is intent on establishing control over an anarchic student body. But it does indicate that there is likely more to the story than just 'meep'.

Yes, it is about being disruptive in class, not about use of a word.
The correct action is to punish those who disrupt class for what they are doing; disrupting class.

To "ban" the word only opens it up to even more disruption. Now the kids will test out the school's commitment to "stamp out meep".

Appropriate action would have been to punish the disruptive students for being disruptive, not over-react and ban a word from being used.
What happens if students say "peep" now? Or choose any million of nonsensical words?
Start banning those words too? Since it's not really a word, isn't the principal basically banning a sound?

There are appropriate ways to deal with disruptive students. Banning a word is not only inappropriate, but downright stupid.

[Missing_Minds]

The, every society seems to have a list of "vulgar" words. I have never seen one that lists "sounds" as being vulgar. "Meep" is not on any of these that I know of... until now.

The correct action would have been standard disruptive behaivor discipline. There was no need to add another "rule" to the list at all. (If you have ever tried to create a set of rules, you will realize that short and to the point is better than long and drawn out, esp when dealing with kids. However, the spirit of the law has long been lost... that is a topic for a different debate).

The word used has been part of at least U.S. vocabulary (and this I'm going off pure speculation based on what I know) since the Muppets Tonight show when Beaker came into existence. My parents know the Muppets.. my parent's parents know the Muppets... Now some guy with authority over children comes in and declares in a fit of frustration that "meep" is a naughty word...
So now the guy goes down in internet viral history of being a doushe bag that has forever tainted something that was wholesome.
As you can see.. it has begun.
http://www.google.com/products?q=meep+shirt&aq=f


Meep.

[Snorificus]

What about if students use all the words that rhyme with meep...do they still get suspended?

Beep, Jeep, keep, leap, seep, peep, creep, deep, heap, reap, weep, etc...

Stupid un-enforceable rules...

[karnokvolrath]

Any update on this story? I am curious :)

[Tilliak]

I first saw this on Daily Rotten a couple weeks ago. I immediately went to Danvers High School's website, looked up the address of the principle, and sent him a message saying "meep." I got a reply back that my message was blocked because of the use of inappropriate language.

I find it funny that they are now forwarding messages to the police department. I bet the principal is really loved down there.