The Virginia field hockey team will host No. 5 Duke during its regular season finale Saturday night on a Senior Night game the Cavaliers hope will provide as much practical significance as it does symbolic.

The team will honor its three seniors, midfielder Alexandra Jahnle, defender Rachel Jennings and goalkeeper Adrienne Ostroff. The three seniors have helped lead Virginia to its most successful three-year stretch in the program’s 39-year history, reaching the NCAA quarterfinals each year and advancing to the semifinals the last two years. Virginia will also seek some much-needed momentum heading into a do-or-die conference tournament as it looks to prove that it can compete with the ACC elite.

Virginia (7-11, 0-4) has not only failed to meet lofty preseason expectations in 2011 but has also failed to register a conference victory in four tries. Now the only thing standing between the Cavaliers and a premature end to their 2011 campaign — and a five-year run of NCAA tournament appearances — is the distant possibility of claiming the first ACC championship in team history and an automatic bid to the NCAA Tournament. Although the Cavaliers’ prospects of salvaging a season which began with so much promise seem bleak, they know a win against the Blue Devils would go a long way towards boosting team morale and giving the seniors the send-off they deserve.

“We’re still within a shout,” associate head coach Michael Boal said. “We’ve never given up, and we never will give up until it’s over. It’s a great sentiment to [the seniors] to have this day in honor of them. They deserve it, and hopefully as a team we can really give them the performance and the result that they deserve for their final home game.”

Duke (11-5, 2-2) comes to Charlottesville firing on all cylinders. The Blue Devils have won four out of their last five games, including an overtime thriller against previously undefeated No. 1 Old Dominion, 2-1.

The Blue Devils topped the Monarchs despite being outshot, 17-10, largely because of a dominant performance by redshirt senior goalkeeper Samantha Nelson, who was later named ACC Player of the Week. The win catapulted Duke to third place in the ACC — its highest conference standing since 2008 — despite a conference-worst average of 2.62 goals per game, and relied heavily on stellar defense and solid play between the pipes by Nelson, who leads the ACC with five shutouts, to secure the win.

Where the Blue Devils have been consistently impressive, allowing just 1.19 goals per game, the Cavaliers have been anything but by allowing 3.11 goals per game — more than a goal worse than any other team in the ACC. Virginia’s struggles to keep the ball out of its own net have become less of a hindrance and more of a full-blown crisis in recent weeks. The team has dropped four out of the five last games including conference losses to North Carolina, 7-2, and Wake Forest last Saturday, 5-0, while allowing almost four goals per game.

“We really just want to play like we know how,” Jennings said. “We’ve been struggling and not playing the way we’ve been playing in practice. We get to games and we don’t play the same. I think if we just come out and give it everything we have, and leave it all on the field, we’ll be set.”

Along with playing her final game in Charlottesville, Jennings also will be squaring off against one of her triplets, senior midfielder Tara Jennings, who is Duke’s third leading scorer with six goals.
“I’m definitely really excited [for Senior Night] and for playing my sister as well, but it’s a little bittersweet,” Jennings said. “It’s sad to be playing my last home game.”

The Cavaliers’ history with the Blue Devils runs much deeper than the Jennings sisters’ rivalry. Exactly one year ago Sunday, it was the Cavaliers who spoiled the Blue Devils’ Senior Night during a trip to Durham. Then-freshman forward Elly Buckley put the game-winning goal past Nelson to take the regular season finale, 2-1, and set up a Duke-Virginia showdown in the first round of the ACC Tournament. That win keyed a repeat performance, as the Cavaliers again downed Duke, 2-1, and ended the Blue Devils’ season.

The two team’s fortunes are reversed in 2011, as it is the Cavaliers who sit in the ACC cellar and hope to rally around their seniors to secure a statement win and set the tone for a possible postseason matchup.

“I think a win over Duke would give us a huge confidence boost,” Jennings said. “I think if we just come out and give it everything we have, and leave it all on the field, we’ll be set and be able to have a good performance in the ACC Tournament.”

Saturday’s game is slated for 1 p.m.

The State Council of Higher Education for Virginia suggested in an annual report this week that the government should spend $117.7 million this fiscal year on higher education institutions in Virginia.

The report proposes a $51.2 million increase in funding toward “base adequacy,” which aims to “support base operating needs, enrollment growth, additional faculty and staff, library and other instructional and research materials, and efforts to facilities.” It also proposes a $6.4 million increase in faculty salaries and a $3.6 million increase in graduate financial aid.

“The proposals made by SCHEV would be advantageous to higher education in general and therefore to the University as well,” Colette Sheehy, vice president for management and budget, said in an email.

University students will also benefit from these proposed increases in funding.

“Any funding we receive from the state will benefit students as we are able to hire additional faculty, purchase equipment, support our AccessUVa program and mitigate tuition increases,” Sheehy said.

Kirsten Nelson, director of Communications and Government Relations for SCHEV, said the council took into account the size of institutions, financial aid and state tuition, among other factors in reaching its conclusions.

The increase in funding necessitates a 3 percent to 5 percent increase of student tuition for each fiscal year, the report says.

Now that the recommendations have been made, the General Assembly and Gov. Bob McDonnell have to decide which suggestions to follow. Sheehy believes McDonnell will consider SCHEV’s suggestions.

“The Governor is very committed to increased funding for higher education, so I am optimistic that there will be some kind of new funding in the Governor’s budget,” Sheehy said. “It is unlikely that he will be able to address the full extent of SCHEV’s recommendations.”

The decision rests solely with the Virginia government.

“We like to think that were very influential, but the legislators are dealing with a limited amount of money,” Nelson said.

Incoming students will now be able to apply directly into the Education School’s program rather than waiting until their second year. Photo by Scott Miles

The Education School announced this week that it will offer a new four-year kinesiology major starting in fall 2012. High school seniors will now be able to apply directly into the program rather than having to wait until spring of their second year.

Kinesiology majors will enter an interdisciplinary program concentrated on the sciences of human movement, with specialty areas in sports medicine, exercise physiology, health and physical education, and adapted physical education.

Previously, students applied to this program in their second year and began to take classes in their third year.

Program Director of Kinesiology Luke Kelly said a two-year program limits students’ ability to “explore and choose.”

“Our goal now is to get the students as first years … and expose them to the various careers they can pursue with this degree,” he said.

With the new four-year program, kinesiology majors will learn the core of the major during their first two years. During their last two years, students can specialize in areas within the major.

“This gives students more time and flexibility to explore more options,” Kelly said.

Kelly hopes the combination of first years and upperclassmen in the major will be beneficial for kinesiology majors. “We are going to use a mentoring system, so we can allow the upper-level students to more or less serve as a mentor for the incoming students,” he said.

Fourth-year Education student Lauren Schmidt said she does not think the program will have too much of an effect on upperclassmen, but will be beneficial to first years.

“I think it’s a great opportunity because spreading out what we had to do in two years into four really gives you the opportunity to get involved in other things, other majors and activities, or even a minor,” she said.

She added that expanding the program will allow students to pursue requirements for post-professional fields.

“There are a lot of requirements you have to take for [post-professional fields] outside of the actual major, so giving them more time will make it easier,” she said.

Current first-year students can apply to the kinesiology program this year. The deadline is Nov. 1, and admitted students will take EDHS 3500, “Introduction to Kinesiology,” next semester.

Second-year students can apply next semester, by a Feb. 15 deadline.

Prospective students can apply directly into the kinesiology program through the general application for admission.

Carol Browner, a former Obama administration official, visited the Law School yesterday to discuss environmental protection. Photo by Scott Miles

Carol Browner, former director of the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy under President Obama, spoke yesterday at the Law School about environmental protection and public health challenges facing the United States.

Browner, who was also the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency under President Clinton, talked about the environmental apathy before 1970.

“City after city, state after state had essentially failed to protect the environment,” she said.

In 1970, however, the first Earth Day was established, prompting nearly 21 million people across the nation to protest pollution and promote environmentalism, she said. Later that year, President Nixon established the EPA, which works to establish and regulate environmental policy.

Although the EPA has enacted many new environmental policy measures throughout its history, Browner said environmental protection is a continuous process.

“The task of environmental protection can not be completed in a year, a decade, or even a lifetime,” she said. This task has become even more important today with the recognition of global climate change, she added, noting that global carbon dioxide emissions have nearly quadrupled since 1950.

Browner said the emergence of global climate change has more permanent effects, even if people don’t notice all of them. Weather reflects these abnormal changes in the global climate.

“This year in April we had 600 tornados in United States in one month,” she said. Rises in sea level are also indicators of global climate change, and these rises are “not reversible,” she said.

Failing to mitigate climate change now would lead to an “irreversibly changed planet,” Browner said.

Despite mounting evidence of environmental shifts, she said a central problem in changing these shifts is the unwillingness to act.

“We must be prepared, as we have been in the past, to set standards based on the weight of the evidence,” Browner said. She added that 98 percent of scientists agree on the reality of climate change despite the doubts of the minority.

Browner is convinced that American ingenuity can help us “rise to the challenge” posed by global climate change.

She said the relentless nature of the 24-hour news cycle may have confused the public about the importance and implications of climate change, however. Extensive media coverage of the economy has made it hard to sustain a conversation about climate change.

“We seemed to have returned to an old argument in Washington — that we have to choose between the environment and the economy,” she said. Browning said innovative environmental solutions and a strong economy are mutually beneficial, so no choice is necessary.

Despite the challenges, Americans “must rededicate ourselves” to work together to find a solution and rise to the challenge, she said.

The event was sponsored by the Student Legal Forum, a Law School organization dedicated to keeping aspiring lawyers informed. The Environmental Law Forum and the Virginia Environmental Law Journal co-sponsored the event.

Law student Emily Auerbach said she “liked the way that [Browner] was looking towards the future” and that she appreciated her moderate approach to controversial issues. “She had us meet at a middle point where we could all agree that improving the environment is important,” Auerbach said.

Occupy Charlottesville can now camp out in Lee Park for 30 more days. Photo by Scott Miles

The Charlottesville Department of Parks & Recreation granted Occupy Charlottesville an automatic permit renewal extension Tuesday, allowing the group to remain in Lee Park for 30 more days. The extension will renew the group’s permit to the City of Charlottesville 10 times, every three days.

The group has been in Lee Park since last Monday, protester Zac Fabian said.

Prior to this extension, Occupy Charlottesville had to apply for a renewal every three days, beginning Oct. 18. Brian Daly, director of the Department of Parks & Recreation, said he does not recall a permit renewal of this nature occurring in the past.

—compiled by Grace Hollis

Earlier this week, President Obama announced he was taking unilateral action to restructure the process by which some individuals are expected to repay their student loans. The policy change is meant to respond to an increasingly ominous situation in the market for college financing. According to the New York Federal Reserve, outstanding student loan debt is expected to exceed credit card debt for the first time this year, and students are experiencing little hope for improvement as job prospects remain dim and tuition rates continue to climb.

Therefore, the president deserves praise for taking action, albeit of a limited nature, to assist those who must take out loans to afford college. Yet the financial barriers preventing students from attending and completing college are too large to be solved by any single executive order, meaning that further measures will be needed to ensure both that citizens have a route to economic security and that the U.S. economy has the supply of college graduates that it needs to perform to its fullest potential.

Unfortunately, some policymakers have been calling for reforms of precisely the wrong sort. Congressman Ron Paul, a Republican presidential candidate, said last weekend that he wishes to eliminate federal student loans entirely since he believes they have been the driving force behind tuition increases. This is very narrow analysis, however, since it neglects a number of more important factors influencing college expenses. Notably, faculty and staff health benefits and energy costs have become much greater financial burdens for universities. Since public institutions have also experienced a sharp decline in state appropriations, their only option has been to increase tuition to maintain the level of quality that students and policymakers have come to expect.

As this process has played out, the subsidized loans provided by the federal government have been crucial to keeping higher education within reach of the broad swath of lower- and middle-income Americans whose best avenue to economic stability is a college degree. Hence, the president’s decision to relax repayment requirements on those loans is a well-targeted policy that will allow more students to pursue higher education and, in doing so, boost the nation’s economic performance.

Most prominent among the changes enacted by the president is a recalibration of the income-based repayment plan, which limits the monthly payments of loan recipients. The new repayment process will reduce the amount that borrowers are expected to repay monthly from 15 to 10 percent of their discretionary income. Although recent graduates and many current students will not benefit from the new repayment plan, it might encourage prospective students to use federal loans as a mechanism by which to further their education.

Moreover, the reduced monthly payments increase the likelihood that loan recipients will graduate on time since they may no longer have to work part-time jobs while in school to earn money for eventual loan repayment. And once they do graduate, loan recipients benefitting from the lower monthly payments will have more money in their pockets to spend on other goods and services that will generate additional economic activity.

For all this, the steps taken by the president are meager compared to the challenges facing contemporary students, recent graduates and higher education, in general. Yet they represent the limit to what can be accomplished with a non-functioning Congress that is unwilling to contemplate more significant reforms that would incentivize efficiency at universities and restrain the cost growth in other economic sectors that is driving up tuition. Thus, in addition to the knowledge they may gain in the classroom as a result of the president’s reforms, students can take away from this episode a lesson in political science that reveals congressional dysfunction to be among the biggest obstacles to more affordable higher education.

WHAT MAKES a debate? Merriam-Webster defines it as “a regulated discussion of a proposition between two matched sides.” The type of competition implied by this definition is a far cry from the free-for-all contests which television viewers have taken to calling the Republican “debates” of the 2012 election season.

The debates have proven popular: According to The New York Times, the Republican debate aired on Fox in September attracted 6.1 million viewers, almost twice as many as some of the Republican debates in 2007. There have already been nine such events featuring assorted members of the GOP field with many more planned, but the prevalence of style over substance at these debates forces reflection on the sad condition of politics in the United States.

Debate attendees have cheered at the mention of Rick Perry’s staggering execution record, booed at a gay soldier who asked if “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” would be reinstated and gleefully shouted “yeah” when Ron Paul was asked if the uninsured should be allowed to die. I cannot imagine there are many conservatives who have heard all of these responses and thought, “That’s the side I’m proud to be on!”

Of course, the most spectacular performances tend to come from the candidates themselves. Following the Oct. 18 Nevada debate, the defense Herman Cain offered of his “9-9-9” plan — or “9-0-9,” or whatever it will have mutated into by the time this is printed — was criticized for its regressive slant. Exaggerations about the impact of “anchor babies” or the devastating cost of foreign aid — 1 percent of the federal budget — continue to run rampant in a zone where factual accuracy is recommended, but by no means necessary.

In a special affront to University students and alumni, Michele Bachmann quoted Thomas Jefferson in a September debate to support her argument that separation between church and state is a “myth.” Ironically enough, FactCheck.org says she cites the very 1802 letter in which Jefferson lauds the First Amendment as putting “a wall of separation between Church & State.” Such rhetoric is beyond parody.

So if the substance is not important, what is? Most commentary on the debates seems to stress who “appears” the most presidential. Considering that electoral success is the end goal of all who take the stage, that makes enough sense. Rationally speaking, now is not the time to attempt to sort out difficult questions of right and wrong, but to simply win.

The one exception to the norm seems to be Ron Paul. Putting aside politics for a moment, it is hard not to feel sorry for the man during debates. He is the only one consistently writing down what his opponents say so he can confront their ideas instead of reciting pre-packaged talking points designed to easily win over audiences. Pushing his late 70s, Paul shows how an antiquated and un-sexy discussion of serious constitutional questions looks compared to glimmering, media-friendly platitudes.

Possibly the saddest moment from the GOP debates came on Sept. 12 when Paul and Rick Santorum addressed one another when disccusing the War on Terror. Santorum said Paul’s website “basically blamed” the United States for the 9/11 terror attacks before repeating the old line that terrorists hate us for our freedoms, an assertion completely disconnected from reality. After Santorum received applause, Paul attempted to explain why Islamic terrorists have encouraged violence against the United States: As terrorist leaders have written themselves, it has been because of military bases in the Middle East, support for Israel and perceived mistreatment of Palestinians. Yet Paul’s analysis met only with heavy boos.

Let this be a lesson to all you future GOP contenders: Do not try to convey an intellectually honest message, especially one that goes against your base’s preconceived notions. Play politics as usual and tell the masses exactly what they want to hear for maximum results. Naturally, the same applies for Democrats, and there is little reason to expect that argumentative substance will make a surprise comeback when risk-averse President Obama is facing off with his still-unknown Republican challenger.

Mary Beard, a writer for the British newspaper The Guardian, wrote a reflection last February on oratory following the stunning success of the 2010 film “The King’s Speech.” She noted that even in the 2nd century, Romans asked why the quality of their oratory was in decline. The Roman historian Tacitus suggested that the Empire’s waning rhetorical quality was related to the fact that one-man rule meant there were no real issues to be discussed and debated.

What has caused the removal of substance from political debate in our modern era? The dominating effect of corporate money? Elections that have grown to resemble advertising campaigns for two highly similar products? From ideological extremism, or excessive moderation? Perhaps it is a little of all of these. Regardless of the cause, it seems impossible to argue that oratory strongly tied to a healthy democratic tradition flourishes today.

As Republicans have shown, persuasion and substantive debate have taken a backseat to the massive pubic relations and advertisement blitzes which accompany the elections of our time. It does not seem like too much of a stretch to imagine we would be better off if our priorities were rearranged. Meaningful democracy brings meaningful debate. Let us aim for both.

Sam Carrigan’s column appears Fridays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at s.carrigan@cavalierdaily.com.

“NICE GUYS finish last.” Even though most of us have been stung by this idiom from an overly competitive coach, parent or friend many times before, is there actually any validity to this notion? And what does “finishing last” even mean?

In sports, “finishing last” is pretty simple: Either your boat crosses the finish line before the other crew’s or it does not. Yet pop culture and media extend the meaning of this phrase to imply much more. If left unanalyzed, this broader meaning could affect your behavior in unintended ways.

A common interpretation of finishing last relates to the pursuit of careers, or more generally, wealth. This expands the idea of “nice guys” to mean men who make the conscious decision to put others before themselves and, as a result, occasionally finish last. What this translation implies is that for a man to be financially successful, he must exhibit the same aggression in the workplace as a competitive sprinter shows during a race.

Pop culture surrounds us with this way of thinking. I will not even try to name all of the pop songs that feature the narrative of a typical “nice guy” being dwarfed in terms of talent, sex appeal or wealth by the more assertive protagonist.

If you are familiar with the ABC show, “Modern Family,” you will know about this phenomenon. There are many points where Phil, the “nice-guy” father of the Dunphy family, butts heads with his “no-nonsense” father-in-law, Jay, about various family affairs.

What this program blatantly conveys to the audience is that being more assertive will bring you more success. The father-in-law has married a remarkably attractive woman, has a large home and seems to purchase a new Mercedes-Benz every other show. Unfailingly, Jay’s most prominent trait is being a “hard-ass.”

Moreover, researchers from Cornell University, the University of Notre Dame and the University of Western Ontario have discovered an inverse correlation between a worker’s agreeableness and his earnings. Twenty years worth of data and more than 10,000 respondents produced results which concluded “that agreeableness is negatively related to income and earnings.”

Yet my mother has always taught me the traditional idea that it is necessary to show love for others and that harm or defeat should never be wished upon them. She says God gives happiness and joy to those who please Him, and curses with vanity those who sin by chasing wealth.

As University students currently desiring academic, social and economic success, the question therefore remains: Do we change our behavior to be like the aggressive jerk who always seems to be on top? To answer that question, it is crucial to define what “finishing first” means for you.

In our community of trust, we must distinguish between being overly confident and breaking rules. The aforementioned researchers did not find any indication that “less agreeable” individuals have a lower standard of integrity. Thus, it is not necessarily immoral to behave more aggressively so long as one follows the rules.

Just as there are no set binary rules for being a so-called “nice guy,” there are obviously varying degrees of assertiveness. If you are unsure of what level suits you best, you could set up an experiment where you consciously make an effort to vary your level of assertiveness and note how your friends, family or peers respond.

As Dale Carnegie, author of “How to Win Friends and Influence People,” tactfully writes, “Success is getting what you want. Happiness is wanting what you get.”

Andrew Kouri is a Viewpoint writer for The Cavalier Daily.

Date: Friday, 0ctober 14
Time: 7 p.m.
Location: Lemongrass

Maria:
Major: Chemistry/biology premed

Sexual orientation: straight

Hometown: Barcelona, Spain

University involvement: UNICEF

Hobbies: Cooking, traveling, oil-painting, volunteering

Ideal date person: Funny, social, smart, tall, [in] good shape, pretty eyes, handsome, interesting to talk to, witty, charming, classy and quirky — This is ideal, of course.

Ideal date activity: Food and entertainment. I like to be pleasantly surprised.

Deal breakers: Smells bad, shorter than me, not interesting to talk to.

Describe a typical weekend: I’ll usually go out on Friday night and get work done on Saturday morning and then go downtown for a walk with my friends and go out again on Saturday night. Sundays are relax/work days to get ready for the upcoming week.

If you could date any celebrity, who would it be?: Adam Brody or Josh Hartnett — close call.

Have you ever streaked the Lawn?: No.

Brag about yourself — what makes you a good catch?: I am cultured, pretty interesting to talk to, energetic and very social.

Describe yourself in one sentence: Down-to-earth, knows how to have fun, reliable, approachable, realistic and dynamic

Matt:
Major: pre-comm

Sexual orientation: straight

Hometown: Bernardsville, N.J.

University involvement: Rugby, Advertising and Marketing Association, Entrepreneurship Group at McIntire, St. Elmo Hall fraternity

Hobbies: I enjoy things which push me physically. I have recently learned kitesurfing, spearfishing and rock climbing. I also surf, snowboard and wakeboard.

I enjoy reading — currently “Atlas Shrugged” — and killing spare time on reddit

Ideal date person: I dislike normal people. My date would have to be eccentric in some way, though that can quickly take a turn for the worse — e.g. extreme animal hoarding. Weird is fun. I am 6-foot-3 and prefer relatively tall girls. Beyond height, physical/racial characteristics don’t matter much to me, besides basic attractiveness of course. Funny is welcome, but emasculates me as I try to top her jokes. Intelligence is sexy — she better read books. Must have a wild side.

Deal breakers in a date: Texting while we are mid-conversation. I will terminate the date if this occurs.

Describe a typical weekend: Normally includes a rugby game, followed by some work crushing, followed by some two carbon compound crushing with my fraternity. I try to do something new every weekend. As much as I love playing sports, I don’t find watching them to be all that enjoyable. I’ll skip the football game and go hiking.

If you could date any celebrity, who would it be?: My family went on a cruise once that Blake Lively happened to be on. We hung out twice and she bought me Jagerbombs. I fell in love. We argued about politics and I was impressed by how little she knew about what was happening in the world. Someone had sent her a box of Obama swag and she thus became a Democrat. She’s classy, but knows how to party — see: The Town.

Have you ever streaked the Lawn?: First time was during orientation

Brag about yourself — what makes you a good catch?: I do not have any children, diseases or World of Warcraft accounts. I have all my chromosomes and teeth. One time I saw a double rainbow in real life.

Matt: I actually overslept our meeting by a half hour. So we still met up at the Rotunda, just not at the designated time. I called her and she was also the only person at the Rotunda at that time.

Maria: I was a little frustrated when he showed up 30 minutes late. I was just waiting there, and I saw this guy sitting there. I was about to go ask him, but then he just got up and left. I was like, “oh shoot, he just left.” Some guy came up to me and was like, “Hey are you Kerry?” I was like, “Are you kidding me, you get here 30 minutes late and you get my name wrong?” but he was going on another Love Connection date. They ended up sitting at the table next to us. But [Matt] called me. I told him where I was, sitting on the edge of the steps.

Matt: [When I found her, I thought] she looked foreign. She was pretty. I liked her scarf.

Maria: I was surprised. I don’t know what kind of people sign up for Love Connection. He was good looking.

Matt: We decided to go to Lemongrass. We talked on the way to Lemongrass.

Maria: He asked where I wanted to go, and suggested Basil or Lemongrass. I had heard of Lemongrass, but had never been there before, so we decided to go there.

Matt: I liked her dinner better than mine, and she liked my dinner better than hers. So that’s something. I got something beef; she got something chicken.

Maria: He asked me who I was … It wasn’t actually awkward at all. We had a nice conversation. It just kept flowing. It was enjoyable. I really don’t like going on dates, but it was good.

Matt: I asked her if she could be reincarnated as an animal, what kind of animal she would be. That led to a good conversation. I want to say she wanted to be a dolphin, but I don’t remember. I should remember.

Maria: We had things in common, but I couldn’t really tell you what they are. We both snowboard, which is cool, because lots of people ski. We’re both out-of-state, which was cool, we’re not NoVa. He’s from the North.

Matt: We seemed very similar. It sounds like she likes to go out. We haven’t actually gone out together. We had that. She’s intelligent. She’s from Spain. I take Spanish, that’s a little thing we shared.

Maria: We decided we were going to order Happy Birthday dessert. So I went to the bathroom, and he told the waitress it was my birthday and I was his girlfriend. They brought us fried ice cream.

Matt: We finished up dinner, and then she had to meet up with friends. So we couldn’t hang out afterwards. I walked her to Arch’s. It was really just a dinner.

Maria: I was meeting some friends at Arch’s, so he just walked me over. We just hugged.

Matt: I was contemplating going in for the kiss on the cheek, foreign-exotic thing, but I dropped the ball.

Maria: We texted a couple times, but we haven’t met up. I actually saw him jogging the other day. But I wasn’t going to yell for him.

Matt: I’m not sure if we’ll really talk or text in the future. She texted me asking about places to live next year. So, I don’t know. It might blossom into something good.

Maria: If we casually run into each other, it would be cool to hang out, because we know we get along. But I don’t know if I’d ask if he wanted to go on another date.

Matt: I know her name, so I could Facebook friend her. I probably should do that. I think we’re on the friend level now.

Maria: I’d give it a 7. He’s not a guy I would usually go for, but we had a nice conversation and I wasn’t bored.

Matt: Out of 10, since it was only dinner I would give it a 6, but I feel like it had potential to be a 9.