The Facts: The University recently relaxed their policy regarding signage at football games. Until recently, there was a policy prohibiting signs at Carter-Finley Stadium. Signs that meet a certain criteria are now allowed.

Our opinion: While it is to be expected that any institution of higher learning should be as a rule conservative in their endorsements and conduct, ironically, at times this goes too far. Such is the case when it comes to sign use at Carter-Finley Stadium.

At times at our University, we are faced with policies that force us to question the administration’s default-conservative nature. To its credit, the University did recently relax their policy regarding signage at football games. Until recently, there was a policy prohibiting signs at Carter-Finley Stadium, and all the signs you did see were snuck in elaborately. The policy has been changed to allow signs that: are not offensive to individuals or teams, are in good taste, do not block spectators’ view, are not a hazard and are not affixed anywhere in the stadium. Going to complete oppression to slight acceptance is a good step forward; however, it is simply not enough.

The restrictions should be lessened ten-fold. Policy only allows for University-approved propaganda, and if we ever got on ESPN, the occasional clever acronym. The idea that anything that diminishes the other team can be forbidden is a laughable policy. If we perpetuate rivalries with other schools we should be allowed to engage in them. This is not a question of sportsmanship; it is a question of atmosphere.

When we march to Carter-Finley Stadium on Saturdays we’re not going to church, we’re going to a football game and with that comes a certain acceptability of action. We should not try to quell the intensity of our fans through putting restrictions on their voices.

Of course, if restrictions are lifted, there will be the occasional outlier who goes to far; however, the chance of this should not evoke a universal policy. The fans who would go too far in their signs are the same fans who yell obscenities in front of children; however, we do not enforce three hours of silence at games. We socially police these people, we let the acceptability of their act be governed by their fellow fans.

The free expression tunnel is a prime case of social policing working. If an opinion is made that is particularly offensive or hateful it is taken care of by our fellow students; these rare cases do not prompt us to call for an end of free expression, just an end to ignorance.

It is the fans who make the team, and it is up to them to decided what is warranted and what is not. Rather than policy being made through a top-down approach, let policy be made from a bottom up approach. Let a social policy take hold. Let the fans police themselves.