New Constitution Referendum 12th/13th of April

Chinafoot

I'm voting for

I'll unsticky this for now but to those of you who are complaining of it being biased. How about you go and post one yourselves and we can put them both together?

singingstranger

What New Constitution?

You could always just try and stick Byrno's post to the top of the thread, it's the perfect pro- post to go before HappyCrackHead's anti- post.

pretty*monster

I'm voting for

singingstranger wrote:

You could always just try and stick Byrno's post to the top of the thread, it's the perfect pro- post to go before HappyCrackHead's anti- post.

Why should the pro-post go first?

[/whining]

singingstranger

What New Constitution?

pretty*monster wrote:

Why should the pro-post go first?

[/whining]

For the same unspoken logic as putting 'YES' before 'NO' on a referendum ballot! :rolleyes:

Scraggs

but alphabetically NO comes before YES

[/sh!t stirring]

singingstranger

What New Constitution?

My arguments exactly - it's just done that way out of etiquette/formality/whatever.

pretty*monster

I'm voting for

I was only messing with you Gav.

singingstranger

What New Constitution?

pretty*monster wrote:

I was only messing with you Gav.

Hmm, I wonder was it the ':p' that gave it away?! :rolleyes:

anonymous_joe

Should be an apathy vote option. I know there's a new constitution, I don't care.

singingstranger

What New Constitution?

anonymous_joe wrote:

Should be an apathy vote option. I know there's a new constitution, I don't care.

Then surely, just as in the real world, you just don't vote.

anonymous_joe

Nah, because my apathy is a sign of disgust at the entire fatuous process, rather than genuine indifference. Thus I want to register said disgust.

singingstranger

What New Constitution?

Hmm. What's the online equivalent of spoiling your vote - spamming or something?

scop

anonymous_joe wrote:

Nah, because my apathy is a sign of disgust at the entire fatuous process, rather than genuine indifference. Thus I want to register said disgust.

The question is are you disinterested or uninterested.

Dont answer I am not sure if I am geniunely indifferent or just indifferent. :eek:

Chinafoot

I'm voting for

panda100 wrote:

But I just think in order for something to be stickied it shouldnt be so biased. The first post should be the constitutinal admentments before kevs rant

I meant to say....there is no reason why it shouldn't be stickied. It is a thread, something that you can reply to. The whole point is to get a debate going. If you think its so biased (personally I don't but hey what do I know) then post a response.

It was stickied to make people aware that these referendums were coming up. Something which very few people seem to have been aware of.

Now, back on topic.

Red Alert

I'm voting for

^^ hear hear

It does appear tho' that the SU are loving this new mail system, as they now can spam all the UCD accounts with ease.

singingstranger

What New Constitution?

Red Alert wrote:

It does appear tho' that the SU are loving this new mail system, as they now can spam all the UCD accounts with ease.

Actually, technically they can't - it's Mary Clayton's (VP for Students) email account that they're sent from.

Red Alert

I'm voting for

it's the Campus Pipeline administrator it's sent from, Clayton's one only came today.

Blush_01

Don't Know?

Red Alert wrote:

Why are we paying already for a student centre that the SU seem not to use. The astra hall is a money spinner for the college.

I think the SCX or whatever name some idiot marketing guru came up with is an utterly pointless idea. There are plenty of rooms in college. I've never had any hassle getting any rooms for stuff - they should do their homework and get a room for a date before publicising an event.

We do not need a theatre nor cinema. There's a super cinema-grade sound/video system over in the UIC behind eng. A similar installation in somewhere like Theatre L or P would be a much better idea, for much less money. We already have LG1 which does look cool - i think the very essence of a basement theatre would be lost in a bland new building. As for a debating chamber, no way.

Why doesn't someone address why Commerce is allowed to withold its rooms in the Quinn School from use by societies? I think services shouldn't give any commerce-related societies like C&E or QSoc rooms elsewhere like in arts or eng and then that would put the ball in the court of the commerce faculty.

The thing is, there's plenty of room in Eng. It's not that far from anywhere, and there are funky things to look at in the building.

Elmyra - AGMs can be held anywhere, not just in the Arts Block. TBH, after the fuss people made about LawSoc being the LAW society, maybe the AGM should be confined to Roebuck? (Sorry, cat and pigeons.) In all seriousness, you don't have to be in the Arts block for a meeting, Eng is across the concourse. I also suggested to John that he try Eng for the JazzSoc AGM. There are facilities we're not using on-campus. Why build more for them to be left empty too? I've made this point before, I'm not making it again here. I just think that the only people who'll be any better off are the big societies, and the little ones will have to make do as they always have done.

Kev, well done on this. I probably wouldn't have payed any attention to the changes if you hadn't, but I'm glad I know what they're at. I agree that it does seem a little odd that everything's being rushed through, and the signatures thing is very fishy. I also second the "if you don't know, vote no" motion. They'll always have another referendum next year if they really want to change it that badly.

arbeitsscheuer

Tenner says it won't make quorum anyway (and hence justification for my abstention from voting).

I'm not going to tell people that if they don't know the changes then vote no, that's just incredibly stupid - If you don't know, and can't be arsed finding out, then don't vote. Simple as.

Lisapeep

What New Constitution?

Any results out yet?

arbeitsscheuer

Nope.

As has already been posted, the vote on the constitutional amendments has been postponed til next thursday/friday, and in terms of the programme officers and Student Centre vote there doesn't seem to be any result yet. Maw.

singingstranger

What New Constitution?

Yes carried by about 1350 to 650 roughly. The IAB are yet to declare the 10% quorum needed.

panda100

What New Constitution?

peachypants wrote:

I meant to say....there is no reason why it shouldn't be stickied. It is a thread, something that you can reply to. The whole point is to get a debate going. If you think its so biased (personally I don't but hey what do I know) then post a response.

It was stickied to make people aware that these referendums were coming up. Something which very few people seem to have been aware of.

Now, back on topic.

It wasnt just me who said it was biased ,a few other people said it was too.

I never said it should be unstickied I was just trying to be fair to both sides of the argument by suggesting happycrackhead could have altered his first post giving what the constitutinal changes are and when to vote.Then in a following post he could have stated his case.Its would just mean when people read the first post they would get all the facts without going straight away into a no campaign.
This wasnt to offend happycrackhead-his argument was very convincing but Its just that I thought in a sticky it should be a bit more fairer to both sides.In a normal thread its sorta different but I think a sticky should be unbiased to start with,thats jsut my thoughts, apologises to everyone,back to the topic I suppose.

Chinafoot

I'm voting for

panda100 wrote:

It wasnt just me who said it was biased ,a few other people said it was too.

I never said it should be unstickied I was just trying to be fair to both sides of the argument by suggesting happycrackhead could have altered his first post giving what the constitutinal changes are and when to vote.Then in a following post he could have stated his case.Its would just mean when people read the first post they would get all the facts without going straight away into a no campaign.
This wasnt to offend happycrackhead-his argument was very convincing but Its just that I thought in a sticky it should be a bit more fairer to both sides.In a normal thread its sorta different but I think a sticky should be unbiased to start with,thats jsut my thoughts, apologises to everyone,back to the topic I suppose.

Instead of giving out about whats posted how about you actually go and write what you deem to be a "fairer" post?

You could have started a whole new thread on why people should vote yes if you liked. Hell, we could've even put them together. Considering the post involved and the repercussions of a yes vote (you may see Kev's opinion as biased but to be honest he's fairly spot on with regard to what would happen) it was important for people to see it as these elections get very little attention.


I gave my reasons for it being a sticky and I only removed it because Kev asked me to.

As far as I am concerned this is the last off-topic response on this thread.

Back. On. Topic.

panda100

What New Constitution?

For the record I was going to vote no yesterday so I would have no need to have written a 'yes' argument.An unbiased post is one that just gives the link to the constitutinal changes that is what I meant it has nothing to do with me not being bothered to write my own unbiased account. I was just trying to be fair to those who were campaigning for the yes vote. Anyways I didnt vote in the end cos I totally forgot,It just slipped my mind.

Chinafoot

I'm voting for

Panda banned for off-topic posting despite having been warned.

Folks the "biased" nature of the original post is not the topic of this thread. Nor is the decision for it to be a sticky or not.

The thread is about the upcoming referendum and the consequences of it - be they good or bad. As I have said already, if you disagree with the OP then post a response about the constitutional changes and why you think they would be beneficial to the students. The whole point is to get a debate going and also to alert the students who use this forum to the fact that there is a vote taking place.

Now for the last time....back on topic please.

Byrno

What New Constitution?

This is a link to the proposed new SU Constitution.

http://www.ucdsu.net/attachments/apr2006/proposed_new_constitution_2.pdf

Vorsprung

Anyone got another link to the old constitution? There was one given at the top of the thread but it doesn't work.

Thanks

Red Alert

I'm voting for

No, you see it's better for the SU-insiders if nobody can actually see what it is.

pretty*monster

I'm voting for

The old (pre Peirces changes though) constitution is here: http://www.ucdsu.net/resources.html
(quite tricky to find on the new website)