Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Starting a society?

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    elmyra
    Registered Users Posts: 1,755 ✭✭✭elmyra


    dajaffa wrote:
    I'm not bashing, but like I think larger societies are kinda cared about more. The Qsoc lark was sorted relatively quickly, but like a decision about radsoc for example took months.

    Sorry jaffa darlin, that wasn't aimed specifically at you. Larger socs do seem to have it easier, I just don't think that Butler does a bad job. I'm not sure why minisocs have it hard. When is physiosoc makin' a comeback?

    My great society idea? Dirty Soc. ;)


    My general rant just came out of a feeling that there is a huge UCD board tendancy to just say things that entirely aren't true just because you can. C&E holiday? Yeah right. Societies are all about the checks and balances. Pffft, people will believe anything, mainly cos they want to. Cranky? Yes I am, I can't find my book by my professor for monday's exam. Pooh. I miss the rant thread.

    Anyway, yeah, societies, who needs 'em?


  • Options
    #63
    Stabshauptmann
    Registered Users Posts: 4,885 ✭✭✭Stabshauptmann


    ryansx wrote:
    Does anybody know anything about a planning society that existed a few years back?Its is mentioned of the geography and planning website anways. If its defunct is the procedure for reforming a society the same as starting a new one?
    In practive you need to pop down to the societies officer, Richard Butler (upstairs in the student centre) and talk to him. He will make it as easy as he can for you to get up and running.


  • Options
    #64
    Stepherunie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,158 ✭✭✭Stepherunie


    ryansx wrote:
    Does anybody know anything about a planning society that existed a few years back?Its is mentioned of the geography and planning website anways. If its defunct is the procedure for reforming a society the same as starting a new one?


    I know some societies have managed that but we tried to do that and we had to do the whole procedure again. It's not really that bad because if it's a defunct society trying to get the paperwork that had previously accompanied the society like the constitution and bank account details could be a pain in the ass to organise.


  • Options
    #65
    dajaffa
    Registered Users Posts: 1,121 ✭✭✭dajaffa


    elmyra wrote:
    When is physiosoc makin' a comeback?


    Step 1: Get in touch with ppl in charge of current, non-official physiosoc

    Step 2: Find out if there ever was an official one

    Step 3: Ah cross that bridge when we come to it


  • Options
    #66
    Stepherunie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,158 ✭✭✭Stepherunie


    As far as I know PhysioSoc if official - they just refuse to have a stand every year at the freshers tent so lose most of there grant.

    That's what I was told before anyways.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    dajaffa
    Registered Users Posts: 1,121 ✭✭✭dajaffa


    Stepherunie wrote:
    As far as I know PhysioSoc if official - they just refuse to have a stand every year at the freshers tent so lose most of there grant.

    That's what I was told before anyways.


    Well one of the 4th year reps got onto the people running it + apparently it isn't. I'd say there's a fair chance that it's one that was official before but became defunct in the eyes of the societies council. Prob similar too radsoc, what with us all being off-campus before.


  • Options
    #68
    Het-Field
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,350 ✭✭✭Het-Field


    dajaffa wrote:
    I'm not bashing, but like I think larger societies are kinda cared about more. The Qsoc lark was sorted relatively quickly, but like a decision about radsoc for example took months.


    Personally, I think QSoc should have3 been totally derecognised. Last year's committee squandered every cent that was given to them, and they were given a lot. I remember in Retrosooc's formative days in Mid 2004, i remember helping out with the stand, and tryiing to recruit members. Brian Canney and the rest of his committee put so much effort into making that society work, and now its still in its third year, which a respectable number of members. However, in 2004 had the society gone bust (much like QSoc last year), it would have been struck off, and there would have been no recourse. This however, is not the case with QSoc.

    I believe that it should have been struck off, but however. tHE sOCIETIES cOUNCIL should not give them a grant this year. And fair play to Mike Pat if he gets the society going, then it should be completly recognised, but if that doesnt happen, it should go


  • Options
    #69
    Stabshauptmann
    Registered Users Posts: 4,885 ✭✭✭Stabshauptmann


    TBH, retro soc have zero presence on campus from what I can see and they went from being one of the largest societies to one of the smaller ones.

    Qsoc are on probation, one more strike and they're out. They got 250e this year, thats the bare minimum the committee gives out


  • Options
    #70
    cast_iron
    Registered Users Posts: 2,454 ✭✭✭cast_iron


    Kaptain Redeye wrote:
    Qsoc are on probation, one more strike and they're out.
    Could the Mystery Tour debacle not be considered their 'one strike'?


  • Options
    #71
    dajaffa
    Registered Users Posts: 1,121 ✭✭✭dajaffa


    Kaptain Redeye wrote:
    TBH, retro soc have zero presence on campus from what I can see and they went from being one of the largest societies to one of the smaller ones.

    Well both vice-auditor and auditor resigned quite early in the year so that goes some way to explaining that.
    cast_iron wrote:
    Could the Mystery Tour debacle not be considered their 'one strike'?

    I highly doubt it. No need to go into detail again but in fairness there were some problems that arose outside of their control at too short notice to fix.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Stabshauptmann
    Registered Users Posts: 4,885 ✭✭✭Stabshauptmann


    Im not in a position to know, but I get the feeling that we havent heard the last of the mystery tour debacle


  • Options
    #73
    Het-Field
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,350 ✭✭✭Het-Field


    dajaffa wrote:
    Well both vice-auditor and auditor resigned quite early in the year so that goes some way to explaining that.



    I highly doubt it. No need to go into detail again but in fairness there were some problems that arose outside of their control at too short notice to fix.

    Well if people are unwilling to commit time at the first instance, they shouldnt run for high ranking committee positions. Once you finish first year, everybody has a fair idea about how much timje goes into running a society, and this should be considered when each society has its AGM


  • Options
    #74
    Stabshauptmann
    Registered Users Posts: 4,885 ✭✭✭Stabshauptmann


    my experience is that very VERY few ppl know the time that goes into running a society


  • Options
    #75
    cast_iron
    Registered Users Posts: 2,454 ✭✭✭cast_iron


    Kaptain Redeye wrote:
    my experience is that very VERY few ppl know the time that goes into running a society
    Very true. In fairness, it's to be expected, as until you've actually done it, how would one know?
    Also, alot depends on how well you want it to run. The more you put in, the more you get out. If you plan on doing a really good job, it will take up alot more time than expected.


Advertisement