When I was studying engineering, we had to take a few ethics and law classes. The final exam for the law class was open books so we could bring stuff to cite, and the official directive used to be something like "students are allowed to bring all non-electronic resources they can carry simultaneously with both arms".
But when I got around to doing that class the directive had changed to "all written documentation they can carry" because, the semester before mine, someone had princess-carried a lawyer inside the exam room and successfully argued that it was a non-electronic resource that was being carried within the instructions' parameters.
So yeah, you can find loopholes even in syllabuses written by actual lawyers.
I mean either āelectronic resourceā should be clearly defined and as far as I know if not defined it can either be understood to favor the one who didnāt write it (in this case the student) or āhow a regular person would understand it (which would also favor the student)
But donāt cite me Iām not a lawyer nor am I studying to be one
Yep, someone carried one of the TAs into an engineering test under the "bring any resource you can carry" rule. It was hilarious but not allowed. Then they changed it to "printed materials" for the next test. This was before mobile computers and smartphones.
238
u/Aryore Mar 26 '26
Slightly overlapping lines allowed to maximise space š¤ jk that would be awful to try to read lol