Censorship of ULSU discussions

DegenerateNo1

Sid_Justice wrote: »

I think if people stopped posting stupid comments saying "calm down" or "relax" we'd have a lot more productive discussion. People on this forum don't seem capable of engaging in a discussion without resorting to infantile internet memes such as kittens or stupid gifs. It's posts like that that should be deleted and the posters' banned. It's ridiculous the type of tripe that gets posted on these forums unchecked and when someone is making a genuine and legitimate post of some signficance they're shouted down for being a troll.

What we've discovered about the UL student over the last couple of weeks are:

The SU are corrupt - engaging in irregular accounting activities, the president duping C&S councils and acting beyond his remit behind their backs
The SU are inept - SU VP makes radio station but hasn't got a clue how to run one, programme one, delegate effectively, run news, do her role properly
Students are vandals - Thomond, Graveyards, Castletroy all vandalised and littered this weekend and every other
Students are immature - can't hold a discussion on this forum without regressing into infantile antics
Students are unintelligent - UL students gain the least 1st and 2.1 class degrees of irelands unis
Moderators - combination of all of the above

While I agree with your some of your post about the SU and their shady actions (and i agree that something should be done) but I think it's a bit rich to paint the whole student population with one brush.
I know i'm getting off topic from this thread but you simply cannot brand everyone in UL the same.

Yes vandalism is a issue in UL but this is a problem in most universities throughout Ireland. Look at NUIG and the whole RAG week issue, or look at UCC every christmas day in Cork their are numerous reports to the gardai etc. from UCC and not neccesarily around CIT. Usually it is a minority of students who partake in Vandalism around UL and the majority of UL students are law abiding. This says more about campus security and the gardai monitoring being ineffective than about the students of UL.

Also just becasue UL have the lowest number of 1.1 degree's does not mean that UL students are unintelligent. In UL there is a method of continous assessment over 3-4 years, compared to other universities within which student grades are determined on one years work. Therefore of course it is more difficult for UL students to achieve 1.1 degree's as they have to maintain a consistency in grades over a huge range of subjects over a number of years. The blame doesn't lie solely on the student population either. UL has to reassess some of its teaching approaches to degree courses to ensure that students perform to the best of their abilities. Probably a lack of a cohesive strategy by the various schools throughout the campus isn't helping students get the best possible chance to achieve.

While there are problems in UL and especially with the SU don't forget that UL graduates have one of the highest emploment rates out of any university in Ireland, therefore how can these unintelligent students be gaining employment throughout the world in a range of professions.

Sorry for going off topic but it's not all doom and gloom like you make it out to be.

wnolan1992

Ah lads calm down. We've had a serious discussion, we got the minutes, now I think we all need to chill and "don't panic" over things. :pac::pac::pac:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZR6wok7g7do

I'll get me coat.

Cossax

DegenerateNo1 wrote: »

While I agree with your some of your post about the SU and their shady actions (and i agree that something should be done) but I think it's a bit rich to paint the whole student population with one brush.
I know i'm getting off topic from this thread but you simply cannot brand everyone in UL the same.

Yes vandalism is a issue in UL but this is a problem in most universities throughout Ireland. Look at NUIG and the whole RAG week issue, or look at UCC every christmas day in Cork their are numerous reports to the gardai etc. from UCC and not neccesarily around CIT. Usually it is a minority of students who partake in Vandalism around UL and the majority of UL students are law abiding. This says more about campus security and the gardai monitoring being ineffective than about the students of UL.

Also just becasue UL have the lowest number of 1.1 degree's does not mean that UL students are unintelligent. In UL there is a method of continous assessment over 3-4 years, compared to other universities within which student grades are determined on one years work. Therefore of course it is more difficult for UL students to achieve 1.1 degree's as they have to maintain a consistency in grades over a huge range of subjects over a number of years. The blame doesn't lie solely on the student population either. UL has to reassess some of its teaching approaches to degree courses to ensure that students perform to the best of their abilities. Probably a lack of a cohesive strategy by the various schools throughout the campus isn't helping students get the best possible chance to achieve.

While there are problems in UL and especially with the SU don't forget that UL graduates have one of the highest emploment rates out of any university in Ireland, therefore how can these unintelligent students be gaining employment throughout the world in a range of professions.

Sorry for going off topic but it's not all doom and gloom like you make it out to be.

I think you missed the point of his post.

DegenerateNo1

Cossax wrote: »

I think you missed the point of his post.

Enlighten me

ULChieftain

DegenerateNo1 wrote: »

I know i'm getting off topic from this thread.

You're right it is getting off topic. Close this thread. Nothing since my last post has been productive or relevant.

Cossax wrote: »

I think you missed the point of his post.

DegenerateNo1 wrote: »

Enlighten me

Do it through the private message system.

Sid_Justice

Who is this UL chieftian who has 6 posts who seems to know everything about boards.ie that he can advocate for closing of this thread.

No need to be closing threads.

wnolan1992

Sid_Justice wrote: »

Who is this UL chieftian who has 6 posts who seems to know everything about boards.ie that he can advocate for closing of this thread.

No need to be closing threads.

Somehow I think he might have a bit more experience than his post count alludes to...

ULChieftain

Sid_Justice wrote: »

Who is this UL chieftian who has 6 posts who seems to know everything about boards.ie that he can advocate for closing of this thread.

No need to be closing threads.

This UL Chieftain is a first year who took the time to read the stickied thread that started with READ FIRST.

You haven't given a reason to not close this thread, instead attempted to attack my credibility through my post count (why you don't note DegenerateNo1's 3 posts only in this thread makes me question who created that account). Adding to another pointless post on this thread.

To speed the thread locking, I'm reporting a post.

wnolan1992

ULChieftain wrote: »

This UL Chieftain is a first year who took the time to read the stickied thread that started with READ FIRST.

You haven't given a reason to not close this thread, instead attempted to attack my credibility through my post count (why you don't note DegenerateNo1's 3 posts only in this thread makes me question who created that account). Adding to another pointless post on this thread.

To speed the thread locking, I'm reporting a post.

I've a reason not to lock it. The thread is about the censorship in ULSU and ULSU discussions, so even if we got some transparency in the form of the minutes, who's to say that in a week's, month's, year's time there won't be another issue like this. Makes no sense to me to lock a thread that has proved one of the more productive in recent weeks on the UL forum.

Sid_Justice

ULChieftain wrote: »

This UL Chieftain is a first year who took the time to read the stickied thread that started with READ FIRST.

You haven't given a reason to not close this thread, instead attempted to attack my credibility through my post count (why you don't note DegenerateNo1's 3 posts only in this thread makes me question who created that account). Adding to another pointless post on this thread.

To speed the thread locking, I'm reporting a post.

Listen get your own logical fallacies in check before you look at mine. Boards.ie doesn't start off with the premise "lock threads unless there is a reason not to lock them" we work from the premise all threads should be let run unless a reason to lock it.

So there is no need for a reason not to close the thread, nor do you have to advocate for locking or keeping open here. Your post is completely inappropriate for this forum and you're obviously a shill.

ULChieftain

wnolan1992 wrote: »

I've a reason not to lock it. The thread is about the censorship in ULSU and ULSU discussions, so even if we got some transparency in the form of the minutes, who's to say that in a week's, month's, year's time there won't be another issue like this. Makes no sense to me to lock a thread that has proved one of the more productive in recent weeks on the UL forum.

Fair enough I suppose but wouldn't transparency of ULSU be a more appropriate thread than a thread about cencorship of ulsu discussions?

Wasn't this started out with the intent of getting the other thread unlocked to continue talking about transparency issues in ULFM? Now that the ULFM minutes are published, isn't that the end of it?

Sid_Justice

What's it to you?

edanto

/UNFOLLOW

regrets I ever stuck my nose in. More kittens needed methinks

Mossin

MrsStuffings wrote: »

Why is it that every time a thread is started on ULSU and the posts are negative, it is immediately locked.

It is censorship of the highest order.

No one can speak ill of the SUSSR or if you do you will be infracted/banned.

The thread earlier bore no similarities to last weeks one bar the title. Last weeks thread related to the poor standard of presenting and shoddy nature of the radio, whereas this weeks one related to the clear totalitarian nature of the ULFM hierarchy.

I understand Spectre and Petee are both long gone from UL now, and in my opinion their former involvement with the union is both clouding their objectivity, and also I feel they are both out of touch with the ul body politic. Neither of them are students in UL so why are they still moderating a forum, in particular one in which they have clear bias towards certain posters and viewpoints.There's obviously a large spectrum of distaste towards ULFM and the way they are operating, so I ask why censor the feelings of those who wish to speak out for change.
It's a disgrace.

This post isn't a complaint against the moderators (I understand the procedure if i want to report one)

This is a post about the bias shown by them re: certain topics and am I the only person who thinks this.

Petee hasnt even been gone from UL a calendar year, after graduating in January 2011 with a Masters, so I wouldnt say he's as out of touch with things as you might think. And having personally known Petee for quite a number of years, I can safely say that he has had no affiliation to the SU, the SU Exec, or SU Shop, or anything SU related. He was never a class rep, he mods a forum which has no direct affiliation to UL.
This is a public forum with rules, and whilst this forum is specifically UL based, it still doesnt allow people to act the maggot. It is designed for discussion.
Then there is the issue of people utilising this forum in 2 capacities. EG. Derek Daly utilising this forum to represent his views as SU President.
In general his posts here are the thoughts of the man himself, and not that of the SU President. When he wishes to address people in that capacity he always says 'this is Derek Daly the SU Pres], in order to clarify that the 2 are seperate.
This is why a persons personal facebook is his own as well, and if he hasnt got his privacy settings changed doesnt alter that fact. [i know thats OT, and from another thread, but I couldnt be bothered trolling through all the nonsense to resurrect what would inevitably turn into another slagging match].

Now, back OT.

SU censorship doesnt exist here imo. I've seen so many threads on the SU over the years, it always boils down to the same things [although this year there does appear to be more substance for debate which is great].
And debate is great, but why go to an internet forum with no UL connection, where most of the SU OFFICERS DONT POST, and seek answers?
Would it not serve a greater purpose to go directly to the SU, get your class rep to raise the issue at meetings, or use the ULSU forums to generate greater debate, and then come back here with more informed judgements, rather than end up in a slagging match. This is the reason that SU threads for the MOST part get locked by mods.
Consider that both mods have been modding education forums for quite a while, I'd say that they are quite capable of making informed decisions on when people are trolling, and imo have rightly closed recent threads when they have passed the point of sensibility.
There is a charter to be adhered to on this forum, and if you generate debate, it will be faciliated correctly within this bounds, and if you think that that is censorship, then take it up with the management of boards.ie, and not with the mods of a sub-forum of education.

Sid_Justice

Mossin wrote: »

Petee hasnt even been gone from UL a calendar year, after graduating in January 2011 with a Masters, so I wouldnt say he's as out of touch with things as you might think. And having personally known Petee for quite a number of years, I can safely say that he has had no affiliation to the SU, the SU Exec, or SU Shop, or anything SU related. He was never a class rep, he mods a forum which has no direct affiliation to UL.

Nice for your to clarify, I presume you're correct. Regardless of whether he has a traceable connection to the SU or not it is indisputable he has acted in a way to protect the SU rather than support the students endeavours to expose any corruption.

This is a public forum with rules, and whilst this forum is specifically UL based, it still doesnt allow people to act the maggot.

Nobody has, or is acting the maggot.

Then there is the issue of people utilising this forum in 2 capacities. EG. Derek Daly utilising this forum to represent his views as SU President.
In general his posts here are the thoughts of the man himself, and not that of the SU President. When he wishes to address people in that capacity he always says 'this is Derek Daly the SU Pres], in order to clarify that the 2 are seperate.

This is not an issue and never has been. Why are you bringing this up, was there an instance were confusion over which capacity DerekDaly was posting in became an issue I'm not aware of?

This is why a persons personal facebook is his own as well, and if he hasnt got his privacy settings changed doesnt alter that fact. [i know thats OT, and from another thread, but I couldnt be bothered trolling through all the nonsense to resurrect what would inevitably turn into another slagging match].

nobody has said the SU aren't entitled to personal opinions, personal emails, personal phones, personal facebooks. What is disputed, is the fact their personal activites have consequences for their professional lives. People may befriend DD on facebook because he is SU president and will consequently to exposed to his pro-ff propaganda. I'm not saying this is unacceptable, I am just acknowledging that it happens and people CANNOT say it doesn't.
Now, back OT.

SU censorship doesnt exist here imo.

You're wrong.

And debate is great, but why go to an internet forum with no UL connection, where most of the SU OFFICERS DONT POST, and seek answers?

It's a public forum I can talk about what ever I want here. It doesn't need to be justified to you. If i want to complain about politicians in the politics forum, the sU in the UL forum and U2 in the music forum it's none of your business.

Would it not serve a greater purpose to go directly to the SU, get your class rep to raise the issue at meetings,

Since when are the two items above mutually exclusive.

or use the ULSU forums to generate greater debate,

This is amazing. You can't even have a discussion about the SU on this forum which isn't supposedely policed by the SU but you expect us to do so on the Ulsu forums, which are dead anyway?

There is a charter to be adhered to on this forum, and if you generate debate, it will be faciliated correctly within this bounds, and if you think that that is censorship, then take it up with the management of boards.ie, and not with the mods of a sub-forum of education.

I have already stated in feedback and in help desk that the moderation of this forum is of questionable standard. I have addressed this with category mods who I think are also unable to see this. If I don't see an improvement I will address it with the admins.

Devore would not be pleased if he knew the SU were using the mods on this forum like sock puppets.

wnolan1992

Be fair Sid. From what I've seen over the past week, the only people that have had bans/infractions against them were people who were bringing personal abuse of SU officers into threads. The only threads that were closed, were the ULFM one, which was a complete and utter joke by the end anyway, and the other ULFM one, which was inevitably going to go the same route as the other one judging by the first few posts.

I think it's been proved by this thread, the thread about political alliegance of the su, and the shop thread, that if we have civil, mature debate, then neither Petee or Sceptre will censor the conversation.

Sid_Justice

I never personally abused any of those wallies but I was banned for a week.

wnolan1992

Sid_Justice wrote: »

I never personally abused any of those wallies but I was banned for a week.

I wasn't talking about you specifically, and I'm not going to thrall through the thread to find the post(s) you were banned for.

Nockz

Sid_Justice wrote: »

I never personally abused any of those wallies but I was banned for a week.

And it was the best week ever!

Jester252

From what I have read here in the last couple of weeks my only conclusion is that the ULSU is the 1%.
I say tomorrow at 12pm we (the 99%) occupy the courtyard and let them know we will not put up with the censorship anymore and we will have our voices heard.

Nockz

Jester252 wrote: »

From what I have read here in the last couple of weeks my only conclusion is that the ULSU is the 1%.
I say tomorrow at 12pm we (the 99%) occupy the courtyard and let them know we will not put up with the censorship anymore and we will have our voices heard.

But the SU is lovely and warm this time of year! How on Earth do we stay outside??

Jester252

Nockz wrote: »

But the SU is lovely and warm this time of year! How on Earth do we stay outside??

How about I change it to occupy SU instead of courtyard so we can stay warm

PROGRAM_IX

Jester252 wrote: »

From what I have read here in the last couple of weeks my only conclusion is that the ULSU is the 1%.
I say tomorrow at 12pm we (the 99%) occupy the courtyard and let them know we will not put up with the censorship anymore and we will have our voices heard.

I love this post so much.

On-topic, I think the mods have been reasonable enough with their bans/locks. There's been a warning or several for every mod action I've seen during the last few weeks. Specifically on thread locks, it's usually been the case that the discussion wasn't moving forward, only descending into two or three posters nitpicking each others posts in that classic, screen-filling Usenet style.* I won't say always because I haven't been involved enough in some of the discussions to comment, but from my experience the mods have been fair, and I haven't seen any outright support of the SU from them.

*Guilty! XD Think I've learned my lesson though.

Polar Ice

Mossin wrote: »

Would it not serve a greater purpose to go directly to the SU, get your class rep to raise the issue at meetings,

In all honesty, it would take one absolutely amazing class rep to raise anything at any meeting, especially if it isn't hoodie or party related.

Mossin wrote: »

or use the ULSU forums

The online ULSU forums are gone about 3 years now. Non-online forums generally tend on you seeking your 'elected' rep to speak at something they generally don't want to attend (e.g. ClassRepsCouncil)

Nockz

Polar Ice wrote: »

In all honesty, it would take one absolutely amazing class rep to raise anything at any meeting, especially if it isn't hoodie or party related.

What Class Rep meetings? (Believe they have been abandoned altogether)

highlydebased

Nockz wrote: »

What Class Rep meetings? (Believe they have been abandoned altogether)

They are still taking place, albeit in a somewhat unusual fashion, 3 times a semester. There was one a couple of weeks ago in the Kilmurry Lodge. There's one next week in a "mystery location". Not an overly ideal setup

Nockz

highlydebased wrote: »

They are still taking place, albeit in a somewhat unusual fashion, 3 times a semester. There was one a couple of weeks ago in the Kilmurry Lodge. There's one next week in a "mystery location". Not an overly ideal setup

"Mystery Locations" should be reserved for drinking binges called a Mystery T... Oh wait..

3 times a semester is probably better off than bi-weekly ones. Only so often you can get free drinks vouchers amirght?

Jester252

highlydebased wrote: »

They are still taking place, albeit in a somewhat unusual fashion, 3 times a semester. There was one a couple of weeks ago in the Kilmurry Lodge. There's one next week in a "mystery location". Not an overly ideal setup

Not the best at all I was at the one in the Lodge not very well set up TBH. The old style was better then the new style because not everyone can drop what they are doing to spend the night a mystery location with less then a week notice. More Reps would be able to attend a know format of the 1 hour every two week at the same spot.
I just wanted to point that out I know it was off topic

Sid_Justice

what's this? class rep meetings are like sleep overs?

sceptre

highlydebased wrote: »

There's one next week in a "mystery location". Not an overly ideal setup

Not even the elected reps know where it's on? While I realise that satire died the day that Kissinger got a Nobel Peace Prize, that's a little, um, unexpected, yes, that word will do.

You guys realise that if your rep is useless and won't raise stuff at meetings, there's a recall procedure in place where you can elect one that isn't wasting valuable sitting space?