What is the standard for judging whether a behavior is civilized in public places? In my opinion, whether it harms the public interest should be the most basic measure. According to this standard, it is obviously unconvincing to condemn the act of destroying public property and students' intimacy as "uncivilized", because the former has direct and obvious damage to the public interests, while the latter has no such harmful consequences.
Of course, from a certain traditional moral standard, some people have reason to think that public intimacy has potential "lethality" to the public interest. However, people who hold such moral standards cannot fully represent the interests of the public and judge everything. "This phenomenon is too common on campus and will not affect others." Obviously, many students don't agree with the school's practice. They are part of the campus public interest. It can be seen that moral standards are not a single standard without directly harming public interests. Therefore, tolerating this moral difference, rather than rejecting it, should become a part of morality and civilization.
In this "uncivilized" exhibition, the school emphasized the protection of students' privacy, reflecting a rational and civilized dialogue attitude. However, the author believes that if the school can further remove the conclusive "uncivilized" label and promote the discussion on this issue with a more neutral value standpoint, the effect may be better.