Arts block co-op

Mr.Nice Guy

Blush_01 wrote:

MNG, did you see Hilpers between 1 and 2 yesterday? It was just as full as ever. So fantastic, hundreds of euro worth of student money were forked out for posters and stickers that made no bloody difference. If everyone made the decision to boycott on their own terms, there'd be the exact same effect - yet with less cost to the student body. How about putting the wasted money from the boycott posters into the student hardship fund instead? That never occurred to anyone. You're b!tching about something that's ridiculous.

If only one person boycotted the place then it was worth it. The key thing is to draw attention to their extortionate prices. I very much doubt that people expected the one boycott to transform Hilpers overnight.

However the very fact that we are talking about this issue right now proves that the boycott has done its job. Awareness has been raised about the rip-off cafe that is Hilpers.

Blush_01 wrote:

What's more, if you're meeting friends in Hilpers, you don't have to buy something.

Well if I've just come out of a lecture and I'm about to get lunch it would be pretty pointless not to eat something.

blush_01 wrote:

People need to get over their mental block or chip on the shoulder about Hilpers. It's a business. It's there to make profit.

It can make a profit without ripping people off. I see British Gas today raised their prices by 22% I think. I guess your solution would be to just ignore it as they're a business and they're entitled to make money, right?

blush_01 wrote:

I'm an Arts student and I get it, so surely it's not too difficult a notion to grasp.

You seem to have difficulty with the notion that students don't want to pay 80 cents plus for a little bar of chocolate and around a euro for a piece of fruit.

I reiterate that the fact we are debating this issue means the boycott did its job. :cool:

John_C

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I reiterate that the fact we are debating this issue means the boycott did its job. :cool:

Raising awareness is only a small part of the job, a piece of fruit still costs a euro.

The co-op raises awareness and offers a cheaper alternative while it's open. It's not a long term (or even medium term) solution. You can be certain that during exams when demand for cheap coffee is probably at it's highest, volunteers for the stand will be very thin on the ground.

Mr.Nice Guy

John_C wrote:

Raising awareness is only a small part of the job, a piece of fruit still costs a euro.

I agree with you but at least it's a start.

Riamfada

Id man the stand. Sure i spent a fair bit of the day there on wednesday.

Little bit more banter there then in the arts cafe

John_C

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I agree with you but at least it's a start.

Definately but like I said earlier a free kettle in the SU shop would be quite simple and effective.

Riamfada

John_C wrote:

Definately but like I said earlier a free kettle in the SU shop would be quite simple and effective.

Actually if you brought coffee....... yeah


what about if you take hot water from the arts cafe and add your own coffee??? Can they stop you or charge you for hot water?


I think i just saved myself money and got better coffee

singingstranger

Still charge you the 70c for the hot water, Grimes...

Riamfada

thats not too bad if i just bring a far of coffee with

Red Alert

blush you misunderstand the point that the campus is not a free-market economy. it's an oligopoly of about four different food/coffee suppliers. so in fact the art's cafe have a bye-in to the general i'm in a hurry student. therefore they can fleece us till kingdom come.

support we got on to the corrupt commercial office of the college and saw about introducing some competition in the arts cafe. such as an SU shop in the arts block located at the other side of the U shape where Hilper's is?

Blush_01

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

You seem to have difficulty with the notion that students don't want to pay 80 cents plus for a little bar of chocolate and around a euro for a piece of fruit.

And yet they still shop there on a very regular basis - you even said yourself if you come out of a lecture and you're hungry, you'll go there. The SU shop is less than a minute further away. That's friggin' laziness right there. In black and white.

You know, I never thought you were as deliberately obtuse as this before. If you think it's too expensive in Hilper's and want it cheaper, buy it somewhere else. You want it all, and can't have it all, that's what's p!ssing you off. To reiterate what I said a few days ago, grow the hell up!

Mr.Nice Guy

Blush_01 wrote:

And yet they still shop there on a very regular basis - you even said yourself if you come out of a lecture and you're hungry, you'll go there. The SU shop is less than a minute further away. That's friggin' laziness right there. In black and white.

It's not. It's convenience. This point has been made to you but your mind is closed.

blush_01 wrote:

You know, I never thought you were as deliberately obtuse as this before.

The only one obtuse here is yourself. You have difficulty comprehending that students dislike being ripped off. Why, I do not know.

blush_01 wrote:

If you think it's too expensive in Hilper's and want it cheaper, buy it somewhere else.

That's one idea, also known as 'giving up'. Another idea is to actually strive for change, also known as 'standing up for what's right'.

blush_01 wrote:

You want it all, and can't have it all, that's what's p!ssing you off. To reiterate what I said a few days ago, grow the hell up!

I don't want it all, I want fairness. I suppose you are just as hostile towards Eddie Hobbs? I guess he 'wants it all' as well, right?

I don't know why you are being so hostile. I'll choose to ignore your personal comments towards me as well.

If you're prepared to shell out for extortionate prices, good for you. Good luck to you.

Some of us would prefer to be treated fairly though and the prices at Hilpers are most unfair.

panda100

Just on mr nice guy's point that the boycott 'raised awarness'.

Raising awarness of issues in UCD campus is pointless as anyone involved in a society would know.The general majority of students will not change their habits due to increased awarness on campus.

Sorry to keep coming back to the world aid soc fair trade example but we started at the same time as the rip -off campaign and we are the only ones who have made a diiference whereas the rip off student union/labouryouth ran campaign is stagnant.

Two years ago,world aid soc decided to do the same thing as the rip-off campaign is doing by raising awarness of the fact that only one outlet sold a choice between fair trade and non fair trade coffee.Infact most of you probably saw this option in hilpers at the time.Of course raising awarness did nothing and hardly anyone availed of the fair trade tea option.
Then this year,we decided that if a difference was to be made we really had to lobby the managers.We really had to do our research in what was the cheapest fair trade option and it took a lot of work but eventually we managed to get many outlets on camous to change all their tea over to the fair trade option.Theferore,now when a student buys a tea in hilpers or the restaurant they are making a difference to developing countries without realising it.

Therefore,while the creating awarness campaign was easier,and took a lot less hard work it proved ineffective.We spent loads putting up posters etc but really all it did was gain awarness for world aid soc.Which really at the end of the day we didnt want to do,we wanted to make a REAL difference to countries in the developing world. Our second tactic of meeting with the managers etc,was a lot more hard work finding out facts and figures and organising meetings with all the outlets.While this didnt garner any publicity for world aid soc cos negotiating was done behind closed door,This campaign was effective as hilpers and the restaurant changed over to fair trade products.

Thus back to mr nice guys suggestion that the co-op raises awarness.This is my point about the union.They are great at creating awarness but this at the end of the day is tottally ineffective and achieves nothing cept a couple of hundred expensive posters which will never be used again.

The_Minister

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

It's not. It's convenience. This point has been made to you but your mind is closed..

Its laziness. It would be convienience if it was five minutes away not a one minute stroll from Theatre L or the Library.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

The only one obtuse here is yourself. You have difficulty comprehending that students dislike being ripped off. Why, I do not know..

I think she means that you refuse to acknowledge that there are viable alternatives to eating there.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

That's one idea, also known as 'giving up'. Another idea is to actually strive for change, also known as 'standing up for what's right'..

Thank you. Good for you with curing AIDS?....Cancer?.....oh wait, its just COFFEE!
My hat goes off to you taking such a firm principled stand against .....coffee prices. Watch out Bono, someone else wants the Nobel Peace Prize!

OK, I'm done.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I don't want it all, I want fairness. I suppose you are just as hostile towards Eddie Hobbs? I guess he 'wants it all' as well, right?.

He was biased and unfair. (enjoyable but some of what he said had to be looked at twice)

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

If you're prepared to shell out for extortionate prices, good for you. Good luck to you..

They are not extortionate. You are paying for all the stealing, all that convienience which you rate so highly, all the staff, the insurance etc. Heres an idea.....go somewhere cheaper.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Some of us would prefer to be treated fairly though and the prices at Hilpers are most unfair.

So go somewhere else! Don't organise a group hissy fit.

The_Minister

Grimes wrote:

My own personal opinion is that they probably make profits on their overheads.

Please explain. As a student of Economics I nearly shat myself when I read that. I think revenue will want to talk to you.....:D

Mr.Nice Guy

Firespinner wrote:

Its laziness. It would be convienience if it was five minutes away not a one minute stroll from Theatre L or the Library.

No, it's convenience. If you leave a lecture at 1 o'clock and you have a choice of queuing at the Restaurant or grabbing a snack in Hilpers, the latter option is mighty tempting and has nothing to do with laziness.

Firespinner wrote:

I think she means that you refuse to acknowledge that there are viable alternatives to eating there.

She can inform me herself of what she meant if she likes.

Firespinner wrote:

Thank you. Good for you with curing AIDS?....Cancer?.....oh wait, its just COFFEE!

This is a red herring.

Firespinner wrote:

My hat goes off to you taking such a firm principled stand against .....coffee prices. Watch out Bono, someone else wants the Nobel Peace Prize!

My hat would go off to you too but choosing to ignore problems isn't a very admirable trait. Watch out Bono, someone's as loaded as you obviously!

Firespinner wrote:

He was biased and unfair. (enjoyable but some of what he said had to be looked at twice)

I disagree.

Firespinner wrote:

They are not extortionate.

They are. Paying a euro for a bit of food is a disgrace.

Firespinner wrote:

Heres an idea.....go somewhere cheaper.

I do. Doesn't mean I should ignore the problem altogether. Here's an idea - if you like Hilpers and their rip-off prices so much...continue to go to Hilpers.

Firespinner wrote:

So go somewhere else! Don't organise a group hissy fit.

The only one throwing a hissy fit is yourself. If Daddy can splash the cash for you until your heart's content, good luck to you. Some of us would prefer not to be ripped off though.

panda100 wrote:

Raising awarness of issues in UCD campus is pointless as anyone involved in a society would know.The general majority of students will not change their habits due to increased awarness on campus.

If that's true then you better stay silent on all these union matters you keep bringing up. Raising awareness is 'pontless' after all, right?

panda100 wrote:

Thus back to mr nice guys suggestion that the co-op raises awarness.This is my point about the union.They are great at creating awarness but this at the end of the day is tottally ineffective and achieves nothing cept a couple of hundred expensive posters which will never be used again.

If an alternative to Hilpers is offered and people decide being ripped-off is unacceptable then the boycott will have done its job. You just naturally assume that the boycott will fail and that making a stand is pointless. That's defeatist.

Chinafoot

Uhmmm....one thing. Blush suggested going elsewhere. MNG says thats giving up. But surely going elsewhere is effectively boycotting the place?

Therefore they lose business when you don't go there......

The_Minister

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

No, it's convenience. If you leave a lecture at 1 o'clock and you have a choice of queuing at the Restaurant or grabbing a snack in Hilpers, the latter option is mighty tempting and has nothing to do with laziness..

Surely you don't mind paying extra for the added convienience........

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

This is a red herring..

No its humour (bad humour) laced with sarcasm

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

My hat would go off to you too but choosing to ignore problems isn't a very admirable trait. Watch out Bono, someone's as loaded as you obviously!.

Oh yes I'm loaded

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

They are. Paying a euro for a bit of food is a disgrace..

Not when cheaper food is easily available

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I do. Doesn't mean I should ignore the problem altogether. Here's an idea - if you like Hilpers and their rip-off prices so much...continue to go to Hilpers..

I don't go to Hilpers. Some of us shop around.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

The only one throwing a hissy fit is yourself. If Daddy can splash the cash for you until your heart's content, good luck to you. Some of us would prefer not to be ripped off though..

I work to get money thank you very much.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

If an alternative to Hilpers is offered and people decide being ripped-off is unacceptable then the boycott will have done its job. You just naturally assume that the boycott will fail and that making a stand is pointless. That's defeatist.

The boycott was unnessacery to set up an alternative. It was just posturing.

Mr.Nice Guy

peachypants wrote:

Uhmmm....one thing. Blush suggested going elsewhere. MNG says thats giving up. But surely going elsewhere is effectively boycotting the place?

Therefore they lose business when you don't go there......

There's a difference though between one person ignoring the place and an organised boycott.

If you or I decide to eat elsewhere, the problem isn't being addressed but if there's an organised boycott then it at least sends a message to Hilpers.

Whether they listen to us of course is another matter but sure we can only try our best...

Mr.Nice Guy

Firespinner wrote:

Surely you don't mind paying extra for the added convienience........

As long as it's reasonable...

Firespinner wrote:

No its humour (bad humour) laced with sarcasm

Well it detracts from the main issue.

Firespinner wrote:

Not when cheaper food is easily available

I disagree.

Firespinner wrote:

I don't go to Hilpers. Some of us shop around.

Then what's your problem?

Firespinner wrote:

I work to get money thank you very much.

Well I'm surprised at how you tolerate those who seek to take so much of what you earn.

Firespinner wrote:

The boycott was unnessacery to set up an alternative. It was just posturing.

No it was necessary seeing as the only alternatives being offered were silly suggestions like "go somewhere else". In other words, let it go and give up and accept the bad state of affairs.

That's defeatist.

Riamfada

I really cant read through all those quote wars people. I just cant

The_Minister

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

As long as it's reasonable....

It is considering the short distances involved.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Well it detracts from the main issue..

It was to point out that your language was unnessacerily grandoise.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Then what's your problem?.

You are making a mountain out of a molehill.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Well I'm surprised at how you tolerate those who seek to take so much of what you earn..

I spend wisely. They do not lie to me or trick me. I am my own man and need no nanny Union looking over my shoulder.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

No it was necessary seeing as the only alternatives being offered were silly suggestions like "go somewhere else". In other words, let it go and give up and accept the bad state of affairs..

How about this. The people who set up the stand could have gone to the union and asked about creating an alternative like Panda said. No glorey, no fuss just focused meaningful action. But that won't get you elected.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

That's defeatist.

No its civilised. Let them charge what they want and let those with money to burn happily burn it.

beanyb

I heard Dave Curran on Belfield FM on my way home from college today. Sounds like he's pretty much doing what panda has suggested and is trying to organise a bulk buying situation with other colleges to make the SU shops cheaper. Now that I reckon is far more productive than Enda Duffy's crusade!

Mr.Nice Guy

Firespinner wrote:

It is considering the short distances involved.

It's completely unreasonable.

Firespinner wrote:

It was to point out that your language was unnessacerily grandoise.

My language was fine. Your comment was designed to be a distraction.

Firespinner wrote:

You are making a mountain out of a molehill.

I've done no such thing.

Firespinner wrote:

I spend wisely. They do not lie to me or trick me. I am my own man and need no nanny Union looking over my shoulder.

You seem awfully concerned about the Union for someone who claims to be unaffected by it. Why don't you just boycott the boycott if you're so wise?

Firespinner wrote:

How about this. The people who set up the stand could have gone to the union and asked about creating an alternative like Panda said. No glorey, no fuss just focused meaningful action. But that won't get you elected.

I'm no fan of UCDSU but they have done more on this issue than the apathetic crowd.

Firespinner wrote:

No its civilised.

It's defeatist. Civility has nothing to do with it.

Firespinner wrote:

Let them charge what they want...

No because that's a defeatist mentality that will see students continue to be ripped off.

Firespinner wrote:

..and let those with money to burn happily burn it.

They're also burning those who haven't money to burn. That's the point.

Not everyone is defeatist. Deal with that reality.

arbeitsscheuer

Grimes wrote:

I really cant read through all those quote wars people. I just cant

Quote wars make baby jesus...



















... stab himself in the eyes repeatedly until he is so immersed in pain that he no longer can remember such dreadful postings.

The_Minister

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

It's completely unreasonable..

Its reasonable.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

My language was fine. Your comment was designed to be a distraction..

It was not deseigned to do anything other than point out your Lord of the Ring style language. (ie. overblown, massive battle looming...etc)

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I've done no such thing..

You clearly have.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

You seem awfully concerned about the Union for someone who claims to be unaffected by it. Why don't you just boycott the boycott if you're so wise?.

They do it in my name. They claim to act for me and they use my name for their purposes. They speak for students but most students don't care either way. They take our voices and wield them as weapons in their own battles.

Besides I never eat in the Hilpers anyway so I can't boycott the boycott.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I'm no fan of UCDSU but they have done more on this issue than the apathetic crowd..

There is no issue, except the one that has been created.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

It's defeatist. Civility has nothing to do with it..

Why fight when there is no need to? The boycott is trying to create a situation of winners and losers. If enough people care they will go elsewhere. I myself had a delicious if somewhat soggy pizza in the downstairs restaurant beside the student bar today for less than 4€. Not bad at all.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

No because that's a defeatist mentality that will see students continue to be ripped off..

No because if they charge too high then people will leave.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

They're also burning those who haven't money to burn. That's the point..

If people don't have money to burn then they would not go there (unless they were muppets), since there are viable alternatives

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Not everyone is defeatist. Deal with that reality.

I think you mean some people feel an implacable need to bitch and moan without taking simple quiet remedies. I bet you are with Eircom and still bitch about the phonebill.

Scraggs

seriously this quoting has to stop! I'm being driven insane. It was an interesting thread before this quote war nonsense started and now its just too confusing for my poor little head!

Chinafoot

It is possible to respond to someone's post without quoting every single line.

Its getting rather annoying lads.

The_Minister

peachypants wrote:

It is possible to respond to someone's post without quoting every single line.

But we have points for every line

peachypants wrote:

Its getting rather annoying lads.

Possibly but they kinda spawn each other:D

Chinafoot

You may have points for every line, but everyone here is well able to read the post that you are responding to, therefore it is not necessary to quote every single line.

Blush_01

Hear hear.

And MNG, if you take a look at what Firespinner said in relation to my previous posts (not that far back, I'm sure you'll find them yourself, it might be a little inconvenient, but not too difficult!) you'll see that, when taken in the context of my previous posts, what (s)he said was incredibly accurate. In fact, (s)he seemed to grasp exactly what I'm sure every other person looking at the same post grasped. That your point is invalid. You pay for convenience. And honey, what is a boycott made up of if it's not comprised of a large group of individuals? If you have a problem, boycott. If everyone else does too, let them personally boycott. Hilpers either survives or goes under. Do not try to convince me that you are right when you have admitted your own laziness is the reason you shop in Hilpers. I don't accept that as an excuse. You want a viable alternative? You've been given plenty. You just don't like them. So I'm done repeating myself. I'm sure it's as frustrating for everyone else as it is for me. You continue being a rebel without a cause. It won't get you anywhere, but at least you'll have something to whinge about, right?