Student "edition" found at {csi dot journalspace dot com}.

Maybe I shouldn't have started this blog now, not with everything that's been going on.

So the badminton club will now be having their trainings at an outside set of courts (converted from a warehouse, of course) that is owned by the director of the office of sports development.

He can repeat ad naseaum (and he has) about how he has "given up his share" of the establishment - whatever that means - to ensure that the students have a lower court rental fee to pay than normal.

But unlike at the school, they still have to pay, despite all the excuses he gives about three times as many courts, a higher vertical clearance and allowing them to concentrate by not having any of their friends drop by anytime.

And for some, that also means additional commuting expenses going to and from the location from school, or at least near the school, where a lot of them are used to coming from.

This is not the first time something like this has happened, before being about getting sports equipment for a nominally low price relative to the current market price, but that has to go through him first (unconventional for a school's purchasing system) instead of from a normal supplier.

Makes some of us think it's really cheaper than he lets on, and that he skims a portion off the top for himself, which he thinks he deserves since he's also saving the school "a lot".

Not only that, he's also done the same thing for some faculty and staff, saying he could get them shoes, badminton and tennis rackets and such at a great discount, and more than once, while the person being given the sales pitch says they are still going to think about it, he already brought the product to school, and they were forced to buy it.

I thought this kind of coercion only happened in public schools.

Session 2133 wishes this were a complainable matter to the administration. Class dismissed.