I am now officially cranky, at least for a little while . . .

PROVIDENCE, R.I. --Rhode Island's education commissioner ordered Portsmouth High School on Friday to publish a yearbook photo it earlier rejected because it showed a teenage medieval enthusiast holding a sword.

Why the sword photo thing makes me cranky . . .

• Put up a post.


• Take a nap.


• Spend the first 15 minutes after the name reading replies.

I am putting this response up in a separate post to make it easier to see.

I think the whole situation has been handled poorly. Bear with me, and I will list my reasoning.

1. As jcbigler pointed out, the decision itself raises my ire. This is not the kind of thing the commissioner of education should be dealing with at all, much less ruling on. It would have annoyed me if he ruled in favor of the school, too. It's that fact that he ruled. This is bad managment (micromanagement), and I am not sure the decision would hold up in court.

2. Under the Supreme Court decision Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, the principal serves as tghe "publisher" in these cases, and it's his decision. He doesn't even really have to give a reason. Schools are allowed to have standards. Now, clearly, this school does allow individual photos, but I haven't seen the yearbook to see just how extensive that might be.

3. I am really annoyed that the kid (and the media) dragged the SCA into it. It makes us look like complete idiots. (I do not think we are "complete" idiots) ;) I am one of those people who loathe the big swords anyway, but that's another issue. He was wearing props. Had he been in SCA-legal armor, that might have been different for me.

4. I am cranky because I always get cranky when education professionals make dumb mistakes in a public way -- especially one that is so publicized. I cringe whenever parents and schools fight publicly. In my opinion, the principal made two errors. First, he never should have mentioned the "no weapons" rule. He should have just said, "No. It's inappropriate," and stood by that. Two, offering to sell the kid an ad was an especially bad mistake. Now you are admitting that it's OK to run it, even with the weapons policy. If I were the kid, I might have taken up a collection and run it as a full-page ad.

5. I have just been annoyed by the whole discussion. Yes, I brought it up here, and yes, I have been participating elsewhere. But some of the arguments -- especially "OMG, the mascot has a *gun*." just make me weary.

Wow. That's a lot.

Catching up on stuff . . .

1. Finally saw "The Departed." Yes, yes yes to all of my friends who said, "Liam's gonna love this.

2. The movie night also included dinner with taureanbabe.

3. There are a number of readers who need me to do things for them. Today was a wash. I was a bit depressed. I wil get to all those things tomorrow.

4. One of my students did an English paper on teaching, and he observed his teachers for it. In his writeup, he refers to me as "eerily cheerful," and comments on how well I know my subject. "Eerily cheerful." I may rename my LJ.

5. The icicles on the ceiling of the Sumner Tunnel concerned me a little.

6. An SCA-related spoiler on the Departed ( Here )