Secondly, how exactly would you suggest GUSA more effectively leverage people power? The proper channels were used, then private pressure was applied, and then a public campaign was waged (referendum, open letter, etc). Recall that the Georgetown Voice editorial board, which I suspect shares much of your worldview, praised this method.

Thirdly, you appear to fundamentally misunderstand GCP. How can you make claims about its power structure when it has yet to meet?

Has Tatiana not actually noticed any part of this story until now? Because it certainly seems like she has missed all of it.

Without C+V (and, yes, their predecessors), this would not have happened.

Per the second point, I think it’s less a matter of playing a long game and more of having a stunted theory of change. Anyone who has worked on a labor organizing campaign, for example, understands that it’s about leveraging your people power and not trying to buddy up to these clowns. The administrators DO NOT CARE about you, so you might as well stop trying to appease them.

Also the number that you refer to is about to dwindle significantly and the number of incidents there already is below the population portion (10% of incidents). Look at the chess board and realize there’s a long game to be played.

Don’t forget that this effort started years ago, with the idea to do a thorough review of the Code of Conduct starting in the second Angert/Kluger term and with most of the grunt work done last year with Meaney/Laverriere. That said, credit to the current team in helping get to the finish.