Created as an online space for members of the University to discuss their views of sensitive or controversial issues, Open Oxford now faces difficulties as a series of bans have led to questions about the administrators’ rights to impose limits on the subjects evoked.

The group’s objective has been to “encourage vigorous but respectful discussion of any topic people are interested in.” Judging that a few of its members had strayed from this original line by posting what admins Jacob Williams, Alex McGann and Alex MQ called “in-jokes and frivolous humour” in their recent online explanation, several of its members were removed from the conversation.

This removal of members is not a one-off, with the admins making it clear that in the future they “reserve the right to remove posts and ban members for abusive and off-topic posts.

“Necessarily this will be somewhat arbitrary but so are all rules. We’ll try to warn people whenever possible before removing them, and we’re happy to readmit members who were removed if they agree to abide by these guidelines.”

Reactions to this have divided the active users of the group, some of which decided to create Open Rebellion in response to Open Oxford’s meltdown.

Sophia Nash explained this division, telling Cherwell, “The OOverlords have betrayed their loyal subjects. We have risen up in defiance of this dictatorship, to stand up for free speech in all its forms and because idk, we were bored.”

The word “purge” was rapidly adopted by members of the group to describe the series of bans. According to Eleanor Sharman, “The admins may yet see the error of their ways, but any revocations of their Purge will now be too little, too late. Original Open Oxford has fallen.”

Alex Doody, a third year German student currently on his year abroad also called for the admins of Open Oxford to resign. He told Cherwell, “Considering the entire raison d’être of Open Oxford as a group to facilitate Free speech, be that serious discussions, polls or even pure shitposting, an antidote to all these other proscriptive Facebook groups, I was initially shocked that a rogue admin would do this, and have become increasingly disgusted as it has become apparent that this may be a coordinated effort.

“I am angry at the way admins have handled this and acted in a way of which Stalin would be proud, and see this as an affront to the very Principles OO was founded to defend. The Admins should resign in shame,” he claimed.

Like the majority of members and former members of Open Oxford expressing their opinion on the meltdown of the group as a space for free discussion, Elrica Degirmen joined Doody in her statement to Cherwell. “This is an affront on the freedom of speech. Freedom of speech ensures that people are able to talk about topics that they want to discuss with others and there is no requirement to always debate “intellectual” subjects.

“Anyone could have banned individuals who make posts on things they do not want to be reading about and indeed no one is obliged to be in the group. It is a great shame that the administrators of Open Oxford thought they could just remove people for arbitrary reasons but it was pleasing to see other members taking a stand against them through continuing their discussions on other related groups.”

Some had a more positive attitude towards the removal of certain members, however, with Ed Mahoney telling Cherwell, “The removed people have a habit of ‘shitposting’ and spamming with unintellectual rubbish.” He added that they formed “a sort of clique which made it difficult for many to follow.”

More on this story: OO Admins apologise for “purge”.

Analysis: Politics and purges in cyberspace

Green Templeton College must be breathing a sigh of relief: no longer will it have the distinction of being Oxford’s newest college. Instead that honour will be held by a new college, the first since the merger of Green and Templeton Colleges in 2008, and the first built since Kellogg College was constructed in 1990.

The new college, to be named ‘Wartshog’ is projected to cost nearly £1b over the course of its construction. Though most of this, about £600m, will come from the coffers of the University and its constuent colleges, much of the rest will be donated by Joanne ‘Jo’ Rowling, perhaps better known by her penname ‘JK Rowling.’

Worcester Professor Josephine Quinn, a Buildings and Estates Subcommittee member, told Cherwell that Rowling was highly involved in the project’s conception and committed to building a college explicitly for the ‘gifted.’

“Her idea was fully fleshed out,” Quinn said. “And I must say it was brilliant – flew past the committee without a modification. Despite being new, the college will be built in the style of outdated architecture – Rowling showed us photos of an old Scottish castle – and open only to those who deserve to be there by dint of birth.”

Quinn explained that Wartshog College will take a revolutionary approach to determining admissions. Rather than requiring the ‘talented’ apply, it will send out postcards – to be returned by July 31 – to those whom the college deems to have just the right attributes for study at the University. Those students will be offered a one-of-a-kind education, all the while cloistered off away from the prying eyes of the masses.

The University said in a statement, “We view the creation of Wartshog as a way to truly begin moving forward into the 21st century. Oxford is continuously in the process of modernisation and advancement in order to stay truly competitive as the world continues to globalise. Accordingly, we are in full agreement with Ms Rowling’s plans to build a college where you will be able to graduate without having spent anytime interacting with anyone who is not in some way fundamentally similar to you.”

Students have lauded the University’s announcement. David Lawton, a second year at St Hilda’s told Cherwell, “I am shocked and impressed by the foresight of the University. In announcing that the new college would be built exactly in the model of pre-twentieth century architecture, they subvert our understanding of what modern truly is. And the decision to only accept those with certain ‘abilities’ means that Oxford will continue to maintain its firm hold at the top of whatever university rankings are next scheduled to come out.”

When asked whether he thought it was problematic that most of those who would attend Wartshog came from families that also attended Oxford, Lawton said, “Well, that’s only most, right? Every year I’m sure there will be at least a few who come from families in which neither parent attended a similarly presitigious institution.”

When contacted, Rowling told Cherwell, “I have always found Oxford a beautiful, magical place, perfect for nurturing ‘special skills.’ Not just that, but the University is the ideal mingling ground for bright young people and I’m sure that the relationships they form here will continue to shape their personal and professional lives for decades to come.”

In addressing the fears that students from atypical backgrounds could face discrimination and mudslinging, Rowling said, “It’s possible – but I think the education Wartshog will provide will be more than commensurate for any such problems. After all, they could always choose not to attend, couldn’t they?”

At press time, the University was announcing plans to identify potential applicants to Wartshog and other colleges as early as birth and make sure to accept them when they were old enough for admission.

Muslim leaders in Oxford have condemned the suicide bombing that occurred in Pakistan on Sunday this week. 70 were killed and 300 injured at Lahore after a bomb was detonated at the city’s Gulshan-E-Iqbal park during Christian Easter celebrations.

It is thought that the majority of the victims of the attack were women and children, of which many were Muslims.

The founder of The Oxford Foundation Imam Monawar Hussain told Cherwell the attacks were “utterly senseless” and left him “deeply saddened.”

He added, “These were senseless and wicked attacks aimed at the Pakistani Christian community celebrating a significant religious holy day in the Christian calendar. My thoughts and prayers are with the victims, their families, friends and the people of Pakistan.

“As a father, it’s heart-breaking to witness the images of families and especially children playing, rejoicing and having fun, being cut down by such an horrific and callous act. As a Muslim, the Prophet’s words, ‘he who is not merciful to children is not one of us’ keep reverberating in my mind.”

A breakaway faction of the Taliban militant group, Jamaat-ul-Ahrar, which once declared allegiance to IS, claimed responsibility for Sunday’s attack.

Director of Cowley’s Oxford Islamic Centre Hojjat Ramzy said, “All Muslims condemn the killing of innocent people in Pakistan. We are praying for the families of the victims. Our heart goes to those who lost their loved ones.”

Since the attacks on Easter Sunday, Muslim communities worldwide have condemned the suicide bombing in Pakistan.

Oxford University Islamic Society told Cherwell, “The Oxford University Islamic Society would like to express its grief and shock at the heinous events of Lahore, and extend its heartfelt condolences and prayers to the people of Pakistan, and to all those around the world affected by terrorism. We note that the bombing, which targeted Christians and claimed predominantly Muslim lives, was an attack on Pakistani society, and we utterly reject this attempt to divide religious communities in Pakistan.

“We pray for unity on the values of peace, compassion and mercy, and demand for the venerable Christian community in Pakistan the unconditional tolerance, respect and protection that is specifically postulated by Islamic teachings. All peoples around the world are involved in a common struggle against violence, and we support wholeheartedly any group working for peace and an end to war.”