Censorship of ULSU discussions

ULChieftain

CJKeane wrote: »

Apologies for the delay but due to various scheduling conflicts between the board members we have been unable to reach a quorum for the past two board meetings so we have not been able to pass the minutes. We have a board meeting scheduled for this Wednesday and I am sure that by thursday evening more minutes will be approved and posted. I assure you that my statement was genuine and that there is no conspiracy to withhold information from the public. Remember that the board is comprised of mostly students and we are not immune to the hectic schedule which is common to this part of the semester.

Conor Keane
Production Manager, ULFM

Surely the old minutes don't need a quorum or should have been passed already? (from like week 1?)

Since there is 10 on the board, do you need 6 people for quorom? Have you really been missing 5+ people each time for a board meeting? From my club if we miss two meetings in a row we are deemed unelected so we make sure people never miss more than two meetings!

(off-topic question, what's ulsuelect?)

Jester252

Apart from all the other things I’m having to juggle; administration, representation, advertising, marketing etc, ULFM has been going from strength to strength. For a while there, there seemed to be a small faction on boards.ie who disliked the radio and what we were trying to achieve with it… but then I realised that it went deeper than that and that those in question were suffering from two things: penis envy and a severe case of sour grapes. I realised this about a month ago and have been happier ever since! We had a huge get together last week for presenters and producers of the station. Over 70 people attended this talk/workshop and it was a really positive event. A few of the Board Members gave talks about what not to do, how to input your music onto the SAM software, how to better your presentation skills etc. I’m in the middle of organising another night like that soon seeing as it was so well received.

http://sucommunications.wordpress.com/
Good to see that an elected official can take criticism well :pac:

freyners

jesus christ...thats silly thing to right

wnolan1992

freyners wrote: »

jesus christ...thats silly thing to write

Pretty accurate though...

canned_ulkc

I haven't criticised ULFM and I don't intend to.
In light of the criticism that has been leveled I think that much of it wasn't constructive. I don't think that's a reason to apparently dismiss it all in such a way.

Regardless of whether criticism is constructive or not, someone in a sabbat position should be expected to be mature - to take it on the chin and take a look at inspecting the accuracy of such criticism no matter how harsh or difficult to hear.

Such a statement from Kelly can be interpreted as indicating that she simply doesn't care about listener opinion - by resorting to terms like "penis envy" and "sour grapes" I think further adds to an "Us and Them" situation which seems to me to becoming rampant within ULSU.

wnolan1992

canned_ulkc wrote: »

I haven't criticised ULFM and I don't intend to.
In light of the criticism that has been leveled I think that much of it wasn't constructive. I don't think that's a reason to apparently dismiss it all in such a way.

Regardless of whether criticism is constructive or not, someone in a sabbat position should be expected to be mature - to take it on the chin and take a look at inspecting the accuracy of such criticism no matter how harsh or difficult to hear.

Such a statement from Kelly can be interpreted as indicating that she simply doesn't care about listener opinion - by resorting to terms like "penis envy" and "sour grapes" I think further adds to an "Us and Them" situation which seems to me to becoming rampant within ULSU.

She was clearly referring to the 1-3 obvious trolls on here that were just picking holes in every move the SU made for three weeks ("Derek Daly is a FFer!" *rabble rabble rabble* "Ye're all a bunch of corrupt bastards" *rabble rabble rabble* "ULFM is sh*t and should be shut down and bring back Wired." *rabble rabble rabble*).

Any valid criticism was taken on board. A lot of the criticism that was brought up in the infamous ULFM thread was addressed in the presenters meeting she mentioned there.

canned_ulkc

wnolan - unfortunately, that's not what people read into it. I know that Kelly specifically mentioned a small faction but on the surface it reads that any criticism was taken as weightless.

If indeed criticism is taken on board then I applaud Kelly for that, I just wish the communication of that would be clearer.

As I said, there does appear to me to be an "us and them" attitude developing and I think that there are many things fanning that particular fire.

freyners

whatever her intention, it reads terrible and has the potential to piss off a lot of people here.

I actually stayed away from ULFM discussion in general as the operation of radio is very foreign to me and understood it was only beginning. I applaud the work she has put into it, especially now as it is continuously improving.

However it reads very badly and looks like bad attempt to garner sympathy and a snide put down at people who dares criticise her. Id expect more out of a elected official, especially a comms officer. I understand she is probably upset at some of the crap that was wrote about her (i defended her on some of it in this very thread) but she would be well advised to take that down and not sink to her abusers level

Reiver

Hate to dredge up ULFM again but have to love what was written on Kelly's noticeboard yesterday.

"Today I am: (insert various duties)" then WHAM

"Putting ULFM minutes online- a completely neccessary use of my time"

I love democracy!

J_E

Reiver wrote: »

Hate to dredge up ULFM again but have to love what was written on Kelly's noticeboard yesterday.

"Today I am: (insert various duties)" then WHAM

"Putting ULFM minutes online- a completely neccessary use of my time"

I love democracy!

Mmm...I think that's another example of a real lack of professionalism, and it's only going to cause more arguments. There's no need to be saying things like that even if you do feel that way, and it just makes you look bad and completely negates the professional look that ULFM is going for.

OhMSGlive

Reiver wrote: »

Hate to dredge up ULFM again but have to love what was written on Kelly's noticeboard yesterday.

"Today I am: (insert various duties)" then WHAM

"Putting ULFM minutes online- a completely neccessary use of my time"

I love democracy!

DISCLAIMER: What I'm about to say is my own opinion, not that of ULFM, the CO or anyone else.

Don't get me wrong, the CO is one of the soundest people you'll ever meet. But this is only feeding the trolls everyone else is trying so hard to surpress. Some of us practically everyone involved (myself included) is trying their damned hardest to bring ULFM to the level of professionalism that we believe it could achieve. Obviously, it's comments like this and what she posted on her blog (although she is entitled to her own opinion) that act as a proverbial road block on this path. She's lovely once you get to know her, but there needs to be a sense of professionalism when dealing with her job.

That's my two cents on it, anyway.

Jester252

OhMSGlive wrote: »

DISCLAIMER: What I'm about to say is my own opinion, not that of ULFM, the CO or anyone else.

Don't get me wrong, the CO is one of the soundest people you'll ever meet. But this is only feeding the trolls everyone else is trying so hard to surpress. Some of us practically everyone involved (myself included) is trying their damned hardest to bring ULFM to the level of professionalism that we believe it could achieve. Obviously, it's comments like this and what she posted on her blog (although she is entitled to her own opinion) that act as a proverbial road block on this path. She's lovely once you get to know her, but there needs to be a sense of professionalism when dealing with her job.

That's my two cents on it, anyway.

I understand that it is her own opinion and she does have a right to it. My only problem is the fact she posted it under the SU communications officer blog
What I am about to say is just an example
Does anybody remember Davis Norris and the letter?
During that the biggest issues people had (from what I gather for T.V and the radio) is that it was sent on official government paper. This is akin to that story.

Writing is the best way for people to expresses they thought. It is how sites like this exist.
I would have no problem with her posting this on her Facebook or even under her boards account as long as SU communications officer is not tied to it.
This type of stuff just makes it look like the elected official doesn't care about the average student opinion
She is a lovey person and I hope ULFM is a success just maybe in future wait 24 hours after writing the blog before posting it

reunion

OhMSGlive wrote: »

Obviously, it's comments like this and what she posted on her blog (although she is entitled to her own opinion)

If it is her own personal blog, then it shouldn't be linked on the ULSU website (http://ulsu.ie/officers/communications).

I actually think Kelly's goal is troll boards, her post on the ULFM thread kickstarted it Link to post and when it started to die down, she added to it starting it all over again.

This clearly serves no purpose but highlights Kelly's unprofessional behaviour and to boost her ego.

Side note:
if you are reading this kelly, we (I didn't anyway) didn't dislike the radio but were concerned about the lack of listeners and transparency (and dictatorship approach) regarding ULFM.

Also your strength to strength arguement: 6 unique listeners currently, 61 all time high and over 70 presenters and production staff. My radio penis is so envious....

wnolan1992

Same Disclaimer as OhMSGlive, the opinions expressed here are my own, always will be, and should never be construed as those of ULFM.

I'll echo some of the points already made.
Kelly is sound, and I think we can all agree that she's had to put up with some utter crap, especially on here, in the past few weeks, so I think it's pretty understandable that she's somewhat upset seeing as she's putting in so much work for ULFM

I would agree that posting that blog was probably not the best idea, especially since it's the official SUCommunications one, not her personal one. But that said, that blog is meant to give us an insight into the personality of those we elect to the sabbat team.

I wouldn't go as far as to say it was unprofessional. Just in my opinion it was just a venting of emotions of what appeared (judging by the first paragraph or two) to be a stressful week.

That's just how I read it though, I can see how it could have been interpreted differently. As Jester said, probably would have been better to sleep on it before posting, rather than posting at 3 in the morning after a long day of work.

OhMSGlive

reunion wrote: »

If it is her own personal blog, then it shouldn't be linked on the ULSU website (http://ulsu.ie/officers/communications).

Maybe because she wants people to read it? I dunno. Granted, it could do without the association to her job, but still, you gotta advertise to get yourself known.

reunion wrote: »

I actually think Kelly's goal is troll boards, her post on the ULFM thread kickstarted it Link to post and when it started to die down, she added to it starting it all over again.

This clearly serves no purpose but highlights Kelly's unprofessional behaviour and to boost her ego.

I just read through her posts there (in a non-stalker way). Granted, it might seem that her simple goal is to troll boards and wreak havoc, but personally, and from working with her, I don't see this to be the case.

If I may, what if you spent ages working on a new project only to hear nothing but criticism on a website within the first week of its launch. Wouldn't you feel even the slightest bit of disappointment? Ok, fair enough, she could have been a lot more professional in her reply, but you can see where she's coming from in some way.

Anyway, we've all gone COMPLETELY off topic here!

CJKeane

As promised: Minutes of ULFM Board Meetings

Nockz

OhMSGlive wrote: »

Maybe because she wants people to read it? I dunno. Granted, it could do without the association to her job, but still, you gotta advertise to get yourself known.



I just read through her posts there (in a non-stalker way). Granted, it might seem that her simple goal is to troll boards and wreak havoc, but personally, and from working with her, I don't see this to be the case.

If I may, what if you spent ages working on a new project only to hear nothing but criticism on a website within the first week of its launch. Wouldn't you feel even the slightest bit of disappointment? Ok, fair enough, she could have been a lot more professional in her reply, but you can see where she's coming from in some way.

Anyway, we've all gone COMPLETELY off topic here!

I'd ope, after being elected as a Communications Officer, that I could communicate my dsappointment in a positive light, or have the know-how to realise posting said disappointment will make me look silly. :rolleyes: