What's the point of communicating privately, when you can whine and humiliate publicly?
This seems to be the motto du jour of the socially networked classes.
It is simultaneously vacuous and powerful.
Consider, please, the case of a young gentleman who was rather cross at his high school teacher. He didn't tell the teacher why he was cross. No, he told Twitter.
"I hate you, Mr. Torrence," he screeched. "You said the test was in (sic) Wednesday, so give it to us on (sic) Wednesday, not Tuesday. #YouNeedACalendar #ScrewYou."
Mr. Torrence doesn't, apparently, follow every word of this lyrical student. Instead, as the Daily Dot reports, one of the student's own friends exposed him to the teacher.
What was poor Mr. Torrence to do, on seeing his good name doused with such vitriol?
Well, he decided the best thing to do was to project the tweet to the whole class. This is certainly better than the teacher who projected his own laptop fodder the other day,.
He felt confident of being on the righteous side of the debate, as apparently the test had been scheduled for Tuesday all along and the student had simply been -- that rarity for a student -- wrong.
Naturally, a fellow student felt compelled to expose the tweeter to the wider world. Reddit was the medium of choice. (The name of the poster has now been deleted.)
Rabid educationalists will now debate whether Mr. Torrence was offering far too great a respect for the concept of "an eye for an eye." Or, more accurately, "a public eye for a public eye."
Did the teacher stoop to the student's (eye) level? Or does he merely have a wry sense of humor by making it his desktop background?
Will the student's parents get involved, demanding that the teacher be suspended and threatening to sue for emotional distress?
While you ponder these vital philosophical issues (I am proceeding with the notion that this tale is real), I have one far greater question: How did the student do on the test?