The Money Maze…WAIT…No, Money Pit! DCU Labyrinth?

Gunslinger92

smiling_patty wrote: »

I complaint about the email Fr Joe sent out too and all I was told was that it was purely information and not trying to get votes. It is just funny that a second referendum is demanded... Why cant people accept the result? Attending the class rep councils has just opened my eyes tomhow the student union really works and it has nothing to do with being there for the students and representing their interests. How is it representing the interests of the students if the SU president is pro labyrinth? He should have been neutral in this matter. It is also funny that people who are against the labyrinth are being called liars...Childish behaviour ofnsomeone who didnt get what he wanted... Dave is right, one email from the yes side and one email from the no side were approved to be send out and it was the yes side that said that if you didn't have the time to do research ...just vote yes....and if some people are so concerned about the drinking habits of student... Why not propose a ban of alcohol on campus and at all balls? Kavrocks, i feel sorry for you. Just accept the facts and the referendum outcome.

Lol

I agree with the rest of your post though.

lithiumoxide

Urizen wrote: »

I found a couple of half decent articles. Seems legit, if debatable. Enjoy.

A popular science article
http://dailyheal.com/meditation-news/how-a-meditation-labyrinth-balances-your-brain/

A more scholarly approach
http://jhn.sagepub.com/content/24/2/103.abstract

The first article has no references and talks about "balancing" the hemispheres of the brain. I wouldn't trust it as a scientific source.

The second one is scientific, however, and its conclusion (as seen in the abstract) is:

Comparisons of postwalk scores for walkers to nonwalkers showed mixed results in significance of differences.

Meditation and mindfulness are great ways to relieve stress and help mental health, but we don't need to spend €10,000 on a labyrinth when there are people in DCU who need much more urgent attention than chilling out and going for a walk to ease their problems.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

Before anyone reads the rest of this post I would like to make it clear that I am not in any way a supporter of the Sinn Fein party or any of its members. (For what it's worth, I am part English.)

Now.

Would you

Kavrocks wrote: »

DCU Sinn Féin throughout the Labyrinth campaign played on people's emotions and the tough times that so many people are experiencing in order to get people to vote no.

ever goway and get stuffed. You're basically claiming that people aren't intelligent enough to make up their own mind and that SF brainwashed them into voting no by 'playing on their emotions' and other such nonsense. People voted no for two main reasons:

1. They didn't feel that a labyrinth was a cost effective way to promote good mental health among students, or
2. They thought that dropping €10k on what is essentially a garden rockery is bleedin' outrageous (Which quite frankly it is).

We could be right at the top of an economic boom and I guarantee you the vote still would have been a no.

A college students' main exposure to his or her SU is through the occasional large organised event, such as the Summer/Christmas/whatever ball.

It is a fairly common opinion among DCU students that our SU's reputation for organising good acts for these events is outright pathetic.
When asked why they frequently book such crap acts - Jedward, Vanilla Ice and 'The Risk' (who the f*ck were they??) - to name a few, SU reps put on the poor mouth.

"We don't have enough money" they say. "Booking the likes of Calvin Harris, or the Prodigy, or Paolo Nutini, or *insert random pop act guaranteed to draw a huge crowd here* would be too expensive, we can't afford it." And then they go ahead and get Calvin Harris in, it's a raging success, tickets sell out like hot cakes, but they refuse to do it again, even when informed that most people would have been willing to pay 30 odd euro for tickets to a big act like that.

That, followed up by some other pretty crappy financial decisions made by the SU this year, such as almost tripling the security staff at toxic tuesdays for the entire year, when the extra security was needed for the first 3 nights at most, followed by adding a cover charge to the same event, and then cancelling it, the one half decent regular social event our college had, because they couldn't afford to keep it running - purely because of their past actions - spelled a recipe for disaster. Keep reading, I'm going somewhere with this.

Like it or not, the SU is in part at least, an event promotion business, and in my view it has been very poorly run this year. The thing about all this is though, the students are not only its clients, but also its bosses. We pay an expensive registration fee each year, part of which goes towards running the SU.

Now, imagine you are a client of an event promoter. A commonly known one in Ireland is MCD. They turn around and tell you they've decided to book some crappy acts for the rest of the year. Oh and by the way they're going to be very expensive. Oh and sure we'll cancel one or two of the events because no one is paying to go to them.
You ask why they're doing this, and the answer you get is:

"We can't afford to have decent events. But we want to give loads of what little money we claim to have towards building this patio thing. Mental health and that, like. It'll be good craic when you're drunk."

I think the landslide no vote was the only logical, realistic reaction to the whole scenario.
The notion of holding a second referendum is pretty offensive. "You'e too stupid to make your minds up properly and you picked the wrong answer, try again."

MrPirate

Demi Thousands Rain wrote: »

That, followed up by some other pretty crappy financial decisions made by the SU this year, such as almost tripling the security staff at toxic tuesdays for the entire year, when the extra security was needed for the first 3 nights at most, followed by adding a cover charge to the same event, and then cancelling it, the one half decent regular social event our college had, because they couldn't afford to keep it running - purely because of their past actions - spelled a recipe for disaster. Keep reading, I'm going somewhere with this.

There's a difference between not being able to afford it, and being told by the local gardi as well as the university to shut it down due to constant incident reports.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

MrPirate wrote: »

There's a difference between not being able to afford it, and being told by the local gardi as well as the university to shut it down due to constant incident reports.

Actually, if you read the official email sent out, there was no mention of any such order to stop the event or reprisal of the weekly late license. If there was even a sniff of the Gardai being involved they would have plastered them all over it to prevent a populist backlash.
Also, I sent off 3 emails, a few days between each, to a certain member of the SU asking who exactly made the call to stop running Tuesday nights with no response, which in my opinion says a lot.

MrPirate

Demi Thousands Rain wrote: »

Actually, if you read the official email sent out, there was no mention of any such order to stop the event or reprisal of the weekly late license. If there was even a sniff of the Gardai being involved they would have plastered them all over it to prevent a populist backlash.
Also, I sent off 3 emails, a few days between each, to a certain member of the SU asking who exactly made the call to stop running Tuesday nights with no response, which in my opinion says a lot.

You see, when you work every single Toxic of the year, you see and know the behind-the-scenes actions. Finance wasn't as aspect.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

MrPirate wrote: »

You see, when you work every single Toxic of the year, you see and know the behind-the-scenes actions. Finance wasn't as aspect.

Oh sure, because the staff are consulted on every aspect of the event. Most of all, the obtaining of the liquor license. I've worked in bars before mate, that's not how it works. Fair enough use anecdotal evidence to back up your point but if you expect me to believe that you're dreaming.

Sure if the Gardai weren't comfortable with late night events happening on campus any more how did the SU get the late license for the summer ball?

EDIT: Also, it's strange that you claim it was nothing to do with money when the last two toxic tuesdays were almost completely empty and clearly made losses.

MrPirate

Demi Thousands Rain wrote: »

Oh sure, because the staff are consulted on every aspect of the event. Most of all, the obtaining of the liquor license. I've worked in bars before mate, that's not how it works. Fair enough use anecdotal evidence to back up your point but if you expect me to believe that you're dreaming.

Sure if the Gardai weren't comfortable with late night events happening on campus any more how did the SU get the late license for the summer ball?

EDIT: Also, it's strange that you claim it was nothing to do with money when the last two toxic tuesdays were almost completely empty and clearly made losses.

*Le sigh*

A couple of
reasonably relevant articles.

Feel free to muster up a conspiracy theory. Student safety at large was at risk. Thus, this was largely a factor when it was closed. Hell, the official email even said student safety.

ANYWAY, BACK ON TOPIC.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

MrPirate wrote: »

*Le sigh*
A couple of completely irrelevant articles.[/URL]

Feel free to muster up a conspiracy theory. Student safety at large was at risk. Thus, this was largely a factor when it was closed. Hell, the official email even said student safety.

I love the way you're pointing me towards those as a distraction from the fact that you just blatantly lied.
Those articles are about the queuing problems experienced in the first 2 or 3 weeks of semester 1. After that the queues died down considerably and were completely non-existant by the end of Sem. 2. Yet toxic was still apparently closed on grounds of 'student safety'.
Tar it as a conspiracy theory if you must. Doesn't change the fact that it's clear as day why tuesday nights were shut down.

And this is on topic. The fact that tuesday nights were stopped is, in my view, a part of the reason why there was a no vote for the gardening project. That and the fact that it's a huge waste of money. If they want to give funding towards combating mental health issues, pay for another counsellor.

MrPirate

Demi Thousands Rain wrote: »

I love the way you're pointing me towards those as a distraction from the fact that you just blatantly lied.

Lied? I've done no such thing. From article two:

Students’ Union President, Ed Leamy, said: “Tuesday nights are raising some serious concerns amongst local residents, the Gardaí, the SU and university management. Local residents have had damage done to their cars and bins have been overturned regularly.”

Those articles are about the queuing problems experienced in the first 2 or 3 weeks of semester 1. After that the queues died down considerably and were completely non-existant by the end of Sem. 2. Yet toxic was still apparently closed on grounds of 'student safety'.

No queues? Perhaps when you got in, but say that to those who were on the doors working. Student safety was at risk. Maybe you were too plastered or just not paying attention when a student would get thrown out for starting a fight.

Tar it as a conspiracy theory if you must. Doesn't change the fact that it's clear as day why tuesday nights were shut down.

I do tar it as a conspiracy theory. Believe whatever you like, however.

And this is on topic. The fact that tuesday nights were stopped is, in my view, a part of the reason why there was a no vote for the gardening project. That and the fact that it's a huge waste of money. If they want to give funding towards combating mental health issues, pay for another counsellor.

Grand so. Just let it be known that I won't be discussing the reasons (or "theories") why Toxic was closed after this post.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

MrPirate wrote: »

Lied? I've done no such thing. From article two:

No queues? Perhaps when you got in, but say that to those who were on the doors working. Student safety was at risk. Maybe you were too plastered or just not paying attention when a student would get thrown out for starting a fight.


I do tar it as a conspiracy theory. Believe whatever you like, however.

Grand so. Just let it be known that I won't be discussing the reasons (or "theories") why Toxic was closed after this post.

Yes you did. You claimed you as an employee were kept in the know about licensing issues. Load of rubbish.
On what planet does raising concern among the Gardai = them not granting the license?

I haven't been 'plastered' at a toxic tuesday since 1st year and anyone who expects to run a late night event where alcohol is being served without fights breaking out needs a reality check. Amazing how toxic managed to survive so many years before now with plenty of fights breaking out. Most of the extra 'security' were standing around doing nothing all night anyway. Half of them were on the front door, you know, the one where no one was coming in. Funny also how the SU claim it's about student safety and send the precious fragile students into town instead of keeping them close to home. Great idea.

MrPirate

Demi Thousands Rain wrote: »

Yes you did. You claimed you as an employee were kept in the know about licensing issues. Load of rubbish.
On what planet does raising concern among the Gardai = them not granting the license?

If you actually read my post, you'd see that I never actually mentioned anything about the late license.

phantom_lord

How come other venues are able to run larger student nights than toxic tuesday without a hitch? Are dcu students just particularly boisterous?

ldxo15wus6fpgm

MrPirate wrote: »

There's a difference between not being able to afford it, and being told by the local gardi as well as the university to shut it down due to constant incident reports.

MrPirate wrote: »

You see, when you work every single Toxic of the year, you see and know the behind-the-scenes actions. Finance wasn't as aspect (of it being shut down).

MrPirate wrote: »

If you actually read my post, you'd see that I never actually mentioned anything about the late license.

You sure as hell referred to it.

Noodleworm

I feel this thread has gone very off topic.
The money being discussed was for labyrinth. I don't think it was up for grabs for the likes of booking big acts at events.
Theres a thread for toxic tuesday already, say what you want about it,
its gone now.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

Noodleworm wrote: »

I feel this thread has gone very off topic.
The money being discussed was for labyrinth. I don't think it was up for grabs for the likes of booking big acts at events.
Theres a thread for toxic tuesday already, say what you want about it,
its gone now.

That's not the issue though.
What I'm saying is that the notion of the SU throwing 10 grand at a rockery is pretty offensive considering they've just shut down our one weekly event and always put on the poor mouth when asked about ball acts etc.

extopia

Demi Thousands Rain wrote: »

they've just shut down our one weekly event

"Our"? Who's the "we" here, paleface?

extopia

hobbit of the shire wrote: »

Anyway rant over, enjoy the labyrinth next year for those who will still be here

That was a rant? Nah.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

extopia wrote: »

"Our"? Who's the "we" here, paleface?

Pale face? Is that meant to be some sort of insult?
'Our' and 'we' as in the general body of undergrads in DCU. The people who make up the vast majority of this university. Who else?

Konata

Please keep posts ON TOPIC.

Please treat other posters with respect. No problem with discussions and debates - just avoid resorting to insults.

If any posters have a problem with a post please REPORT it and let the mods deal with it.

Thank you