logomancer | (no subject)

Someone showed up today for fire safety inspection. He was looking around the room, and saw an extension cord I plugged one small DC transformer (6V @ 100 mA) into to get to a power strip it was barely unable to reach. He saw it, told robertliguori to remove it, and said they'd be back in 30 days to see it wasn't reinstalled. He then handed me a note. Things would've been fine, except for the bold print on the second paragraph:

As a result of the [fire code] violation, you have been referred to the university judicial system and corrective action is required.

So. Yeah. I'm boned, I think. Two JRs in two weeks (let alone one semester, year, or university career, not sure how many they let you have before they decide you're a Diseased Criminal Pervert and kick you out) will not be incentive for the Judicial Affairs Office to consider me a model citizen, or even a citizen, period. It didn't say what kind of sanction would be taken, but given my past record of "criminal behavior", I imagine they're more apt to throw the book at me. Bloody authoritarians.

And it's a stupid rule, anyway. No extension cords whatsoever? They provide a maximum of 10 outlets throughout the room. But of course you need more than two outlets at various locations sometimes (ie, the computers and the TV station). Power strips are available, but then you have transformer blocks, and they take up at least three outlets on one of those, thus cutting your effective use of that strip in half. I can understand the rationale behind the policy -- to keep people from overloading the extension cord, since that is a genuine fire hazard -- but one that was barely loaded? It doesn't make sense. All because some bureaucrat in RDP thought this would reduce dorm fires. As if the fire department comes much down here anyway for anything else except the pulls that seem to be a weekly routine in Pritchard, AJ, and Lee.

Maybe I can find a bigger strip over break. In the meanwhile, I need to get in touch with this person to see what kind of sanction they are looking to impose WRT this.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Take picturesof the said extention cord & power block and write down it's ratings. Show the JR board that you were not causing a possible fire hazard and they should just throw out the charge.

I would recommend buying a power strip with a 15-foot cord. They're more expensive than normal ones, but they save you all that fire code hassle. We got a nasty email about that last year, so I figured, better safe than sorry.

I think it's not just overloaded extension cords they're worried about--it's extension cords period. They're not constructed as well as power strip cords, and are more likely to fray/overheat/etc. At least that's the impression I've gotten.

When you talk to the judicial people, just explain that you didn't understand the threat inherent in extension cords, you have now bought better power strips, yadda yadda yadda, and you should be fine. (and hopefully not fined.)

Uhh.. You might well be boned. I don't know what the current rules are, but you're on probation from a J.R. already. Back when I was a student, getting another J.R., even a residential violation, while on probation automatically triggered a suspension if the charge was upheld, regardless of how severe it was.

Hmm...I don't know whether or not I'm on probation. I don't think so. Supposedly, that's a separate sanction. Even if it isn't, I'm going to fight this unless they're not going to impose sanctions.

Just remember when you go in to fight it that the reason they are being strict is because of several people who have died at other universities in recent months due to fires. It's kind of hard to argue against that when they bring it up, because it might not just be you that gets hurt if something does happen. They have to be responsible for the entire student body. Dorm fires are a MAJOR issue right now. If you think it's bad for you, think about how a set of deaths and several million dollars worth of lawsuits are to the university. Talk about BAD.

You're in Payne Hall, which was built with sprinklers (as opposed to retrofit) but it's hard to get away with the argument "but if something did happen the sprinklers would get it (and flood the entire dorm)". The one thing I would argue is that the punishment doesn't match the infraction, because you were not informed of the hazard and given a chance to fix it. That is assuming, of course, that you weren't informed by some legal document or policy letter and that you didn't refuse to fix it when you were asked to.