ULSU and Fianna Fail

TheProdigy

cson wrote: »

Do you think it fair to quote a post from a completely unrelated thread to this one? You could at least have the decency to find the stick, with which you are so eager to beat Derek with, within this thread, forum or ULSU publication.

Well why didn't you quote the post by 'YNWA 17' where he used quotes from other threads to make accusations against previous campaigners? Or does it only matter when it is in relation to your bum-chums?

ynwa_17

TheProdigy wrote: »

Well why didn't you quote the post by 'YNWA 17' where he used quotes from other threads to make accusations against previous campaigners? Or does it only matter when it is in relation to your bum-chums?

Back to the petty comments are we?

The quote you took from cson mentioned the following:

within this thread, forum or ULSU publication

All my quotes were taken from threads within the the UL forum on this website.

cson

I came into the thread to see posts following my one on the previous page hence my reply. Again, I would think it unfair to engage in thinly veiled personal attacks using posts from an unrelated thread and forum.

I'm not even going to give you the satisfaction of engaging with your puerile and childish attempt at a rise in the last line.

TheProdigy

ynwa_17 wrote: »

Back to the petty comments are we?

The quote you took from cson mentioned the following:



All my quotes were taken from threads within the the UL forum on this website.

Petty comments? I was highlighting a case of double standards more than anything. He said the quotes were derived from another thread, I was simply highlighting yours were also.

If by petty comments you mean the homophobic, derogatory and insulting posts directed at me by a certain poster do not fret, they were removed to save that person the embarrassment of spouting such venom.

TheProdigy

cson wrote: »

I came into the thread to see posts following my one on the previous page hence my reply. Again, I would think it unfair to engage in thinly veiled personal attacks using posts from an unrelated thread and forum.

I'm not even going to give you the satisfaction of engaging with your puerile and childish attempt at a rise in the last line.

That was what I was highlighting in relation to ynwa_17 previous posts which you have confirmed you would find it unfair to conduct such activities.

ToadVine

cson wrote: »

Do you think it fair to quote a post from a completely unrelated thread to this one? You could at least have the decency to find the stick, with which you are so eager to beat Derek with, within this thread, forum or ULSU publication.

I honestly dont want to get involved in any UL infighting or other feuds. Also, I resent the accusation that I am looking for "sticks" with which to beat Derek. I can confirm that I have never met this person, and have no stake in his (alleged) future campaign for the UL student Presidency.

To put my post and ninty9er's quote above in context ... I was doing some research on political views/beliefs and how these are expressed on public fora. I looked primarily at politics.ie and boards.ie for this research. I came across ninty9er's post and it stuck in my mind as an incredible and outrageous thing to say. When I saw this debate earlier today, I felt it was relevant in the context of the point I was making. Also, I don't think ninty9er has ever apologized or withdrawn the remark, so I am presuming he still holds those views. Ninty9er has also not attempted to edit or remove the post, and he must have known he was making those comments on a public forum. Thus his comment is fair game and there to be quoted (irrespective of the thread or forum).

To reiterate the point I am making ... I believe a persons views are relevant to the job or position they hold. An individuals views may be influenced by the political party to which they belong, but membership of the political party per se is not particularly relevant. Thus, imho, it is extremely important that prospective student voters should be made aware that ninty9er holds a strong personal view that 3rd level fees should be reintroduced. Prospective student voters should also be aware that ninty9er is of the opinion that a convicted rapist might make the best Taoiseach ever to serve, as this may be relevant to the way he would do his job if elected SU president.

ToadVine

And one more thing I forgot to say above ...

Does anyone really believe that someone who believes in the reintroduction of 3rd level fees will fight and lobby as hard as they possibly can to keep free 3rd level education? As a UL student, would you rather have someone fighting your corner who passionately believes education should be free, or someone who believes 3rd level fees should be re-introduced? I know which I'd like fighting for me.

Final point ... if ninty9er is a member of FF, how can he reconcile supporting motions to re-introduce 3rd level fees as part of his role in OgraFF, and yet campaign to Brian Cowen to keep free fees? Would anyone really be able to take him seriously? What all students need these days are SU leaders who are passionate, non-conflicted, and believe 100% in what they are saying and doing. Fair play if UL students elect ninty9er to SU positions in the future, but they should be fully aware of what he stands for, and know about the "other hats" he wears when with his OgraFF friends.

ninty9er

Can a mod just change the title of the thread to Derek Daly please.:rolleyes:

ToadVine

ninty9er wrote: »

Can a mod just change the title of the thread to Derek Daly please.:rolleyes:

Hi Derek.

Have you been offended by my posts? I'd really like to hear your opinion on what I've been saying.

Also, people seem to think I'm beating you with a stick. Perhaps you could clarify what you meant when you said ...

ninty9er wrote:

Only for laws prohibiting criminally prosecuted (or whatever the correct phrase is), there is no reason why a convictred rapist, murderer or whatever you're having yourself, could not be the best Taoiseach ever to serve.

Link to this post here ... http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=55750246#post55750246

Do you still hold these views?

Genuinely interested in your answer.

Insect Overlord

Quoting posts from two and a half years ago? Jesus, that's some grudge to hold...

mulner92

I don't really see what the big deal is. Everybody's entitled to their opinion. Whenever I've gone to the ULSU, i've found them very helpful, all that concerns me i guess

TheProdigy

ninty9er wrote: »

Can a mod just change the title of the thread to Derek Daly please.:rolleyes:

Why do you view this thread as an attack on you? I cannot see how anybody could view the thread as being anything other than civil? You are in a noticeable position, to which you have to be prepared for people to question your motives and actions. Not everyone is going to come on here and lick your bum as such.

Not too mention that any altercations were created by your acquaintance constantg, who came on and proceeded to make homophobic and insulting comments, which can be quoted if needs be. Any attacks are evidently coming from your side of the turf Derek, in the form of people trying to defend your position/motives.

SarahBeep!

Has it ever occured to ANYONE there are no motives?

TheProdigy

SarahBeep! wrote: »

Has it ever occured to ANYONE there are no motives?

I would hazard a guess and say that has occurred to someone yes.

SarahBeep!

TheProdigy wrote: »

I would hazard a guess and say that has occurred to someone yes.

And has it ever occured to you?

TheProdigy

SarahBeep! wrote: »

And has it ever occured to you?

Of course, and if he wasn't involved with a corrupt political organisation my view of such would be heightened. Incorporate the fact that a select few are defending him in not so much an amicable way and you would wonder what type of associates and dealings Derek is involved in.

My issue is in relation to concealing his pro fees opinion, which will happen during his forthcoming presidential campaign. Choosing not to disclose such information is doing a disservice to the student body as, if they were aware of such views, he would not receive significant support to be elected, which may still be the case either way as this information will most definitely become available to the electorate via alternative methods.

The cat has got the cream but he needs to be careful it doesn't get all over his whiskers.

Jigga

Just to clarify: this thread was not personal, is not personal, and won't be made personal by me. I am simply raising some justified concerns.

As charming as the analogy with pregnancy advice is, it's not really the same is it? We're not asking the student unions to build campaigns for a woman's right to choose or some such.

When it comes to fees, the government are introducing them by the backdoor via hikes in registration fees. It's not enough for our representative bodies to passively enquire that the government please stop. Fees are already happening and so opposition needs to be proactive, and that's where having pro-fees people leading anti-fees campaigns becomes a real obstacle.

Unfortunately, when it comes down to it, tagging along with the odd USI initiative isn't really doing anything, and neither is telling people to send a pre-scripted email to their local lame duck TD.

cson

ToadVine wrote: »

I honestly dont want to get involved in any UL infighting or other feuds. Also, I resent the accusation that I am looking for "sticks" with which to beat Derek. I can confirm that I have never met this person, and have no stake in his (alleged) future campaign for the UL student Presidency.

Yet you;

[a] Raise posts he has made on a topic wholly irrelevant to the thread at hand.

Seek to pre-empt an alleged Presidential campaign with a rebuttal in advance of your alleged candidate making any statements on his campaign as of course tis against the rules. And some people play by them.

I dissent from Fianna Fail and other party politics in this country simply because I don't believe there to be a political party in this country to do my vote justice. But by the same extension I refuse to allow certain posters to actively railroad a significant contributor to this forum at their will.

SarahBeep!

TheProdigy wrote: »

Of course, and if he wasn't involved with a corrupt political organisation my view of such would be heightened. Incorporate the fact that a select few are defending him in not so much an amicable way and you would wonder what type of associates and dealings Derek is involved in.

My issue is in relation to concealing his pro fees opinion, which will happen during his forthcoming presidential campaign. Choosing not to disclose such information is doing a disservice to the student body as, if they were aware of such views, he would not receive significant support to be elected, which may still be the case either way as this information will most definitely become available to the electorate via alternative methods.

The cat has got the cream but he needs to be careful it doesn't get all over his whiskers.

I'm not in a political party. I'v never voted. I'm not a close friend of Derek's. I have no problem defending him by saying if you walking into his office with a welfare query/issue that the way he chooses to vote does not effect his answer to you. Does this make me a 'dodgy associate'??

Jigga wrote: »

Unfortunately, when it comes down to it, tagging along with the odd USI initiative isn't really doing anything, and neither is telling people to send a pre-scripted email to their local lame duck TD.

So are you suggesting UL chose a different day to head to Dublin and not show solidarity with other 3rd level institutions and students when we were all mrching with a common aim?

cson

I'm not going hitting red triangles left right and centre but I would expect a certain degree of decorum to be maintained; i.e keeping to thread topic and not heresy about future campaigns.

You embarrass yourself by engaging in such off topic, inflammatory and vindictive behaviour.

Peteee

Guys, try and keep this civilised.

Attack the argument and not the poster.

ToadVine

cson wrote: »

Yet you;

[a] Raise posts he has made on a topic wholly irrelevant to the thread at hand.

Seek to pre-empt an alleged Presidential campaign with a rebuttal in advance of your alleged candidate making any statements on his campaign as of course tis against the rules. And some people play by them.

I dissent from Fianna Fail and other party politics in this country simply because I don't believe there to be a political party in this country to do my vote justice. But by the same extension I refuse to allow certain posters to actively railroad a significant contributor to this forum at their will.

[a] I would argue my posts are very relevant, and that I have a right to make them.

I have not pre-empted any UL campaigns. It was mentioned by a few other posters before my post that Derek may be running for UL SU president at some future time. Mentioned first by others ... not me.

ToadVine

Look, without making this in any way personal, my point is this. I believe the beliefs of a person running for public office should be clear for voters to see. If Derek believes in the re-introduction of 3rd level fees (and indeed, actually works for the re-introduction of fees in OgraFF), this should be made very clear to all his supporters and prospective voters.

Thats all I'm saying. Does anyone have a major problem with that? Or are Derek's supporters saying he should keep this secret?

I'm also making the point that other beliefs of a candidate running for public office may also be relevant. Derek actually posted the folowing ...

ninty9er wrote:

Only for laws prohibiting criminally prosecuted (or whatever the correct phrase is), there is no reason why a convictred rapist, murderer or whatever you're having yourself, could not be the best Taoiseach ever to serve.

Link to this post here ... http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=55750246#post55750246

I believe this is very relevant. He has been on this thread since I've quoted him, and he has not withdrawn his post in any way. Thus, I am assuming he still believes this. This raises further questions in my mind. Does he believe a convicted rapist could be the best ever UL SU welfare officer ever to serve? Does he believe a convicted rapist could be the best UL president ever to serve? Does he draw the line at rape? What about a murderer or pedophile? Does he think they could be the "best ever" people to serve either as Taoiseach or in the UL student union?

These are valid questions. And they apply to anyone presenting themselves for public office, not just ninty9er. Anyone voting for any candidate in any election should be entitled to ask questions about the beliefs and other interests of that candidate. This is especially true when those beliefs clash directly with the job he was elected to do. It's also especially true when the candidate has made such statements in a public forum.

Or perhaps you would prefer secrecy and a system where no questions were allowed? If so maybe a Soviet University in the 60's might be better suited to your beliefs

Peteee

ToadVine, you've quoted this quote 3 times.

If ninty9er wants to respond to it, well that's his decision.

Please stop spamming the quote in this thread.

ninty9er

ninty9er wrote: »

It has been mentioned to me that I haven't responded to this thread and points made since my last post.

I feel there is no further need for me to comment and won't be engaging any further in this thread which although I view as a personal attack on me, I can get over, as it says more about those probing for scandals that don't exist than it says about me.

Knock youselves out guys. Toadvine, take it up on the politics forum.

ToadVine

ninty9er wrote: »

Knock youselves out guys. Toadvine, take it up on the politics forum.

I think it's very relevant on this forum ninty9er. As do many others.

bazkennedy

Can anyone point out a specific incident where Derek or any other Sabbat, past or present has let their political affiliation affect their job?

ToadVine

bazkennedy wrote: »

Can anyone point out a specific incident where Derek or any other Sabbat, past or present has let their political affiliation affect their job?

An impossible question to answer without knowing everything Derek has done in public and private as part of his job. And, with the greatest respect, not the point I am making.

My point is that prospective voters should be aware of the personal beliefs, affiliations, past actions, and other roles of anyone who puts themselves forward for public office. Voters should be able to challenge/question anything that person has said in the public domain. The voters can then make up their own minds about whether or not that person can represent them adequately.

Keeping affiliations and other positions secret, and trying to hide things the candidate has said in public is not fair, and imho represents an attempt to fool the voter.

Do you agree?

cson

What has been or is being kept secret?

I support Arsenal and I'm pretty vocal about it but if I were running for election I wouldn't be adding in a line at the end of the posters saying "by the way I support Arsenal". In essence, my personal beliefs and opinions are for the consumption of those whom I choose to allow hear them.

You clearly have an axe to grind with the constant quoting of the same post. So do us all a favour and change the record like a good lad.

Tragedy

As I'm apparently one of "a select few are defending him in not so much an amicable way", I just want to declare my interests in this.

According to TheProdigy, I'm Tony Canning.

Now, can someone tell me who that is and why some loon is calling me his name?