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
Political allegiance of SU
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Sid_Justice wrote: »There is probably a lot you're not aware of.
Techy, techy...No I didn't, I never said or implied that. I don't care if the SU don't respond to my posts, I have really have nothing to say to them. If however I was a student with a genuine issue relating to welfare or education I'd hope that the SU officer would bother their backside to review it at some point, either for future reference or giving advice.
Again you don't understand and your inexperience is this area is obvious. People who have problems don't always choose the channels appropriate to the magnitude of their problem. someone could have a very serious problem but rather than going to the highest authority on it, they share it with peers. This is how society some times works.
Like your bit below (which I'll add in above), ultimately, it's up to the student to be able to look after themselves. There's only so much an officer can do.
No need to condascend to me on how people go about seeking help with their problems. That's not to say that when an officer doesn't show up here to respond, we have the right to bítch and moan about them. It's not their primary point of contact for students. It'd be quite a bit down the list.My rationale was twitter was not a centralised or collated source of information, you couldn't expect (or should you) the SU people to keep abreast of everything happening on twitter or facebook but certainly they should be aware of direct correspondence to their particular accounts.
Facebook has the ULSU page which seems to have a hive of activity but merely the inconsequential type. It's also moderated by the SU so they can remove posts that don't make them look good, e.g. my comment about Sulis/itd/rsmart having emergency support.
By their nature facebook and twitter need constant vigilance because they're dynamic entities. Boards is a lot more static and is far more realistic for a SU officer to dip into to gauge student attitudes.
And again, its static nature points to much less use by students overall. UL Boardsies are few and far between IRL.
Boards is down the food-chain from the officers' perspectives.You and your cronies are one to talk.
Who're my cronies?
I'd love to have some cronies
0 -
Sid_Justice wrote: »That's exactly what I said
Serious reading comprehension problems on this board lately.
Sid I was pointing out that YOU voted for Daly.
So it is your fault he is in
So Sid why are you blaming others?0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
You're all entitled to opinions, though an individual may disagree, and will fundamentally disagree on some issues.
It is an amazement to me how anyone can manage to have so much time to criticise A) an organisation, more particularly
an individual within and more consequentially C) those who for no other reason than their personal experience would seek to defend that individual (That individual may be more than capable of defending him/herself, but I imagine would be most appreciative of the sentiment). A and B are absolutely fine with reason. C on the other hand is not.
Perhaps I shouldn't be surprised if someone who would be elitist and pick lots of holes would have such a privileged path through the educational system . If an individual had enough time to operate at least 2 Twitter accounts, 2 Facebook accounts, an active "talk to joe" account on Boards.ie and undertake yet another degree, here at UL to add to their Trinity, UCD and DCU credentials, they should lecture in magic or time travel. Should we perhaps warn the NUIG, UCC and NUIM forums that the institutional tourist is coming for them when you're finished with us?
If an individual is supposedly more educated, chronologically more mature and more world informed than the rest of us, we might expect they would not reduce themselves to mocking people who work at McDonalds by attempting to infer inferior experience on another individual's part for having worked there (despite the fact they never did)
Perhaps such a person should look at their own references, or is it lack of them that may lead to them taking an extended scenic route through the third level system.
In my view such a person would do well to critically analyse what they actually want before deciding what the rest of us should be doing/thinking. Such a person, you would imagine, would be intelligent enough to realise that only one person would be shown up through constant attacks on individuals, or perhaps it's a deflection, perhaps it's a form of projection of such a person's own self loathing and emptiness.
All that's purely hypothetical of course
0 -
-
You're all entitled to opinions, though an individual may disagree, and will fundamentally disagree on some issues.
Thanks for bestowing us our entitlement to hold opinions that differ to yours.It is an amazement to me how anyone can manage to have so much time to criticise A) an organisation, more particularly an individual within and more consequentially C) those who for no other reason than their personal experience would seek to defend that individual (That individual may be more than capable of defending him/herself, but I imagine would be most appreciative of the sentiment). A and B are absolutely fine with reason. C on the other hand is not.
It's simply my duty to the truth and full transparency. I have identified a number of flaws in how the SU of this university operates and I felt obliged to communicate that to those whom such information may benefit.
Some of the flaws were inherent to the organisation but others were more closely associated with individuals within.
My problem with the 5/6 people on this forum who seemed to have rushed to the defence of the SU and to certain individuals is because they are obviously biased to said organisation. Nobody is doubting that the 5 sabbatical officers are particularly charming, charismatic, good natured and fun individuals. Therefore they have a great many friends amongst the student body a couple of which post on this forum. However, my criticisms weren't really of a personal nature or personality based. I never said anyone with the SU was a bad person I just said they're bad at their jobs. So for me, it doesn't really matter if best friends of said SU officers come on this forum proclaiming they're excellent human beings. It's irrelevant. In my opinion some of the SU officers are bad at their job. Nobody has given me proof they're good at their job, only short sighted individuals have told me how nice they are.
So it's very valiant of you to want to protect the 4/5 friends of yours/the SU who have basically done nothing but shill on this forum but I'd rather the truth, unbiased and unadulterated.Perhaps I shouldn't be surprised if someone who would be elitist and pick lots of holes would have such a privileged path through the educational system . If an individual had enough time to operate at least 2 Twitter accounts, 2 Facebook accounts, an active "talk to joe" account on Boards.ie and undertake yet another degree, here at UL to add to their Trinity, UCD and DCU credentials, they should lecture in magic or time travel. Should we perhaps warn the NUIG, UCC and NUIM forums that the institutional tourist is coming for them when you're finished with us?
You have plenty of time to bitch and moan about me on facebook DD but then again, you have no exams, no actually remit that can be enforced, no boss, and no actual role.If an individual is supposedly more educated, chronologically more mature and more world informed than the rest of us, we might expect they would not reduce themselves to mocking people who work at McDonalds by attempting to infer inferior experience on another individual's part for having worked there (despite the fact they never did)
You mean older when you say chronologically more mature and you mean imply when you say infer. To address your points, I'm not sure why you got so offended about remarks about McDonald's. How do you know I haven't worked there?Perhaps such a person should look at their own references, or is it lack of them that may lead to them taking an extended scenic route through the third level system.
You got upset when I implied you're probably not fit for much work outside of the SU is that it? And now you wish to retaliate by saying because I did a MSc it was obviously because I couldn't get a job? Is that it? Is that your deep, hidden, cryptic insult you wish to make? I may cry.In my view such a person would do well to critically analyse what they actually want before deciding what the rest of us should be doing/thinking.
I know what I want. I think everyone else should be working hard at their individual degree in this college otherwise they're wasting their time. I don't see how you can argue with that.Such a person, you would imagine, would be intelligent enough to realise that only one person would be shown up through constant attacks on individuals, or perhaps it's a deflection, perhaps it's a form of projection of such a person's own self loathing and emptiness.
What is this wondrous mirror I have in which I can deflect and project through? But let's no digress with quasi-psychology and pseudo-intellectualism , I think you've over stated the criticism you've received on this forum. If memory serves me, all I wanted to know is what happened with the C&S money and what infrastructure allowed such unsavoury activity to happen. I said you went on a holiday from the SU to work for FF. This is a fact.
I said in my opinion the editing of An Focal left a lot to be desired. On longer reflection, I changed my mind to that the editing is adequate.
I said in my opinion that ULFM was badly managed but in light of the mitigating circumstances it was understandable and excusable.
I said in my opinion the education officer should pay closer attention to threads on this forum relevant to that remit. I have not changed my opinion on this.
I said in my opinion the campaigns officer should do a better job of promoting key events, since then I have been informed that their operations budget has been impaired due to funding crisis in the SU.
The welfare officer has been left rather unscathed to this point.
Just to repeat, I have nothing personal against any SU officer, they all really nice people, I just think they're crap at their jobs. In the same vein, I think Keith Young and Barry Kennedy would have been excellent at their jobs but don't seem like good craic. Just sayin'.All that's purely hypothetical of course
Why are you hiding between this pompous rhetoric and imitation legalese. If you're taking about me, address me by my handle on this forum. You obviously took the trouble of looking up my facebook account, finding as much information about me as possible to come on this forum and throw it back at me as an insult. It's very difficult for you to take the higher moral ground on this topic when you've engaged in the same tricks.
So seeing as I have your attention again Derek Daly President of the SU what have i said that has been so unacceptable in your opinion? While you're at it, can you explain why you were in the USA recently and who paid for it?0 -
Advertisement
-
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement