While Terry said that Harvard’s investment in Sudan, not Senior Gift Plus, was divisive, the movement served its purpose even if it sparked some incensed exchanges between the two sides.

“People got all wrapped up in Senior Gift versus Senior Gift Plus because that looks cute in newspapers and makes for good dinner time conversation,” he said. “The real triumph of Senior Gift Plus is that it forced the entire campus to talk about Darfur for months, where we had refused to before—with all the columns and protests outside, we could ignore that.”

Gallo, though, said that much of the campaign’s draw stemmed from its lack of requirements for most members. “Part of the reason people signed on to Senior Gift Plus is it’s an easy way to not give money,” she said.

But Terry said it was effective for being so provocative, and that quieter methods of activism had simply been ineffective.

“One of the great things about our whole movement was that it started out with the divestment petitions and the columns and the conversations. Those were rejected,” Terry said. “We did Senior Gift Plus. The entire campus flips out. It’s picked up by Air America and German TV, just everywhere, right. Harvard is just thrown for a loop. They make the decision to divest faster than they probably would have.”

—Staff writer Elisabeth S. Theodore can be reached at theodore@fas.harvard.edu.