Before joining Cambridge, I was advised to create a Facebook account. I now know why: the informal online spaces, largely operating as Facebook groups and pages, mark a definitive aspect of the so-called ‘Cambridge experience’. Whether you’re selling a Revs ticket on ‘Ticketbridge’ or anonymously shooting Cupid’s arrow on ‘Crushbridge’, these spaces are integral for students – even if just as a distraction method in your lectures. But something is missing from this current array: we don’t have a confessional space dedicated to complaints.

The catch-all page for confessions is, of course, Camfess, but when complaints come through we often see discourse against negativity, or simply minimal engagement. Are these responses correct – is it all just arbitrary complaining and pointless negativity on the internet, or are we feeding into a particular complacency that means we lose an opportunity for accountability? While perhaps symptomatic of a dying Cambridge Facebook culture, I believe this actually points to a bigger problem: we actively lack a designated (online) space for complaining. While pages such as Camfess can operate as such, if we truly want to create a culture of accountability in Cambridge, we need to acknowledge that it is more complex than just having a general online space.

“Are we feeding into a particular complacency that means we lose an opportunity for accountability?”

‘Grudgebridge’ provides the salient case study for this conversation. It does (or rather, did – more on that to follow) what it says on the tin: a space for students to voice both trivial concerns and complaints, as well as a forum for sharing experiences or ‘evidence’ of serious behavioural concerns in Cambridge. “Grudgebridge to Queens’ for deciding anyone who receives the Cambridge Bursary will no longer be supported under the Queens’ Bursary,” or “Grudgebridge to the third-year engineers who voted not to take a break in the middle of a two-hour lecture” display the generic format. Unsurprisingly, it was also filled with plenty of petty or foolish posts, but I don’t think this means we should dismiss it – that’s just the nature of internet culture. There are, of course, valid concerns about this leading to bullying or false claims, but it still begs the question of whether a complaint-specific confessional page can aid in shedding light on situations in the University that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

The death of Grudgebridge followed a series of events sparked by Caesarian Sunday in 2018. Leaked onto the Facebook page was a video taken in The Regal’s smoking area of the Trinity Hall all-male drinking society (the Crescents), where an individual stated that “inclusivity [is the] single biggest problem facing the Crescents in the modern age”. They were banned from the college bar, the Crescents garden party was cancelled, and soon after, the society disbanded. Days later, a Grudgebridge admin posted an update stating that “AS OF TODAY, GRUDGEBRIDGE IS DEDICATED TO TAKING DOWN DRINKING SOCIETIES”. The page was then flooded with anonymous allegations of bullying and sexual harassment. Varsity notified readers less than a month later that the “crusade” had come to an end, with administrators condemning it as a “hate platform”. While this culminated in a complete fiasco, I believe there is something to be learnt from both the page when it was active, and what the loss of the platform means for us now as Cambridge students.

The immediate fallout saw labels of McCarthyism and witch-hunts, including CUCA critiquing the entire debacle as “blatant slander without accountability,” particularly after Grudgebridge’s mission developed “beyond [the] eradication of drinking societies, with a number of posts making unsubstantiated allegations about the culture within CUCA in accusing members of behaviours including racism, sexism, classism and bullying”. Rather than comparisons to the Red Scare, I think another common parallel offered at the time more fitting: the #MeToo movement.

I do not intend to argue that this is the primary way we should go about reporting sexual harassment and malpractice; an anonymous platform protects the whistleblower but simultaneously gives unjust power to the deceiver. The administrators admitted they could not verify everything posted. There are formal routes for a reason, and these are invaluable, but not everyone is comfortable pursuing formal action – for some, Grudgebridge may have provided an invaluable space to air necessary grievances and shed light on uncomfortable topics.

“Colleges can only comfortably uphold an exclusionary culture when they are not questioned and reminded of their pasts”

While the page was deleted after claims of it being a “hate platform,” it also encouraged an accountability around the behaviour of drinking societies and led to tangible change: one third of Cambridge’s drinking societies committed to a formal code of conduct. Whether or not these are being followed eight years later is a different question, but without having these online spaces that promote accountability we simply move further away from fostering a safe and fun student life.

So, is Cambridge student culture at risk of, or already falling into, complacency regarding bad behaviour? Perhaps for the eagle-eyed reader, you will have spotted that, again, Trinity Hall has found itself at the centre of a classist display. These ‘new policies’ don’t reflect a shift, they reflect a longstanding culture in the College – under a decade ago members clearly felt comfortable spewing classist rhetoric in public, and at that, in broad daylight in a Wetherspoons. Colleges can only comfortably uphold an exclusionary culture when they are not questioned and reminded of their pasts. We shouldn’t let the misbehaviour of colleges and students go undocumented, and we must cultivate the spaces where we are able to challenge this behaviour.

I’m not necessarily making a case for the revival of Grudgebridge – online spaces, particularly those whose purpose is to complain, can very quickly fall into bullying, and it is the role of the administrators to make sure that baseless complaints targeting individuals are blocked – but we should not write off complaints pages solely for a fear of bullying. We have something to learn from the successes and failures of Grudgebridge: sharing anecdotes and widespread discussion is important for creating a better and more informed university culture. Without these spaces, we lack a key source of accountability and miss an opportunity to create tangible change.