okay

So I have my meeting about the disciplinary stuff tomorrow (well technically today). I'll withhold judgement until then, but the prospects aren't good.

When I scheduled the meeting he told me it was about the reflection paper that failed to meet the requirements (is it odd that a lot of stuff here "fails" to do something?) of the sanction. He didn't mention the 10 business days nonsense, but it's likely that it will come up.

So here are the likely scenarios:

1. Something technical about the paper, such as not being 3 complete pages. If they are really that nit-picky about it, I'll apologize and offer to redo it, but I still think additional failure to comply charges are unnecessary. This would just be really dumb. Yes, the prompt said 3 pages minimum, but this is the same argument as the soccer ball incident. Failure to comply, even though I didn't really do anything wrong.

2. They did not think my paper contained enough remorse. Okay this is the one I'm dreading, because I'll probably end up arguing, which will probably do no good. I certainly don't think this would be a legitimate reason to add charges because in the prompt it asked for my opinions. If they wanted an apology letter, they should have asked for one. I addressed each part of the prompt, so they should have just let the matter drop. I agreed that complying with the instructions of UF Staff was important for safety reasons, and I said that had I seriously thought about it at the time, I would have stopped passing the ball. The only thing I disagreed about was the "failure to comply" charge. Note that I did not justify my actions, I just thought the consequences were too harsh. It is not right to ask for a person's thoughts then to punish him/her because you disagree. I could have been a tool and written 3 pages of bullshit to appease them, but instead I took the time to honestly and innocently express my thoughts, believing that the prompt allowed for differing points of view.

Also, I doubt they would have brought up the whole "10 business days" deal had I written an "acceptable" reflection paper. Unless that is just a mistake where they have no record that I attended a meeting it seems as if this is just another dirty way to get at me for disagreeing with the verdict.

Before I get too far into how many types of wrong the second situation would be, I'll go to that meeting. I'm going to be VERY disappointed and upset if I come out with still the 3 failure to comply charges though. If that happens then the administration is either too caught up in it's own policies to be able to deviate from them at all, or they just don't give a damn about circumstances, which would be in accordance with my views complaints all along.

I just hope things won't get negative during this meeting, because I'm definitely not going to just sit there and take shit from them. Especially not if they value policy over reason. In that case then no matter how much I argue they will just spout the pertinent policy and refuse to budge. And in that case they won't be likely to remove those two failure to comply charges.

Hopefully this Brian Trutschel will have a LITTLE more decision making power/ability/will than the previous staff members I've encountered.