Aw man! U. of Vermont comes close, but no cigar on its protected and unprotected speech graphic. Kudos for recognizing that “hateful speech” and “offensive speech” are protected under the 1st Amendment. But encouraging students to “report” that speech anyway is a bad idea and still chills speech. Think it through: 1. Nobody agrees what speech is hateful or offensive, and some people are more sensitive than others, which is the classic problem. Here’s the “common ground value” UVM cites: “we unite against all forms of injustice, including, but not limited to, racism. We reject bigotry, oppression, degradation, and harassment.” To what degree, and on what topics? With no guidance, there’s only one answer - a viewpoint (un)popularity contest. And guidance that satisfies everyone is impossible. 2. Imagine a Ukrainian student says something offensive about Russians in light of the ongoing war. Is a Vermont admin really going to pull them in, sit them down, and tell them they need to cool off? How about a student wearing a “Punch a Nazi” shirt? That’s either not going to happen, in which case UVM's doing viewpoint discrimination in disguise, or it is going to happen, and UVM will be forced into increasingly foolish situations that make everyone look dumb. ("Look, I know Russia bombed your city to the ground and killed your family, but that's no reason to say mean stuff about Russians!") 3. Students will feel duped and betrayed when UVM’s bias response folks turn out not to be able to “solve” what they feel, rightly or wrongly, is a problem, especially when UVM says some speech is against its values. If you report something to the authorities, you expect something to be done about it. And if you have a “value,” people expect you to stick with it. On this one, UVM can’t actually do either. Far better not to send students these mixed messages.