2014 Referendum

Dante on Fire

DJCR wrote: »

Yes, they just cant be on the ERB. Credit to Paddy for staying out of this one. I've never known Paddy to stay out of anything and he's doing a fantastic job of staying neutral on this one

Sound chief!

I really want a big vote on this and in all honesty which ever way it goes all power to the students for voting it and the students running the campaigns. As for the ERB and me being impartial. That has been difficult yes but the principles of that Committee have to be maintained. I have also read two very different very worthwhile pieces relating to involvement of student officers in referenda (Oxford tells me this is correct)

I have mixed feelings on this. In terms of some of the issues relating to our President Emma being involved in this campaign I think it is essential. From manifesto points you as students voted her in on to objectives for her role and office agreed by and overseen by council and by the countless opportunities to raise objection throughout the year. This person has worked extensively with the University and is at the helm of the project. I would of course expect her to be there.My other feeling is what Oisin Bates raised but I would respect an officer who did not subdue their passion for a student raised issue they are involved in. It would strike me as a very worrying thing if an officer was not engaged in some way be that Yes, Impartial (in order to help the ERB) or No

We get elected on things that we are passionate about doing for students and securing for them. The mandates from council also require us to be involved with campaigns or we can request that we be involved.And well done to the information committee on that!

My personal reasons for not being involved was I want no decision to be made by Paddy Rockett hype (yes or no). I want this to be a well informed, educated decision (not saying that votes for me we're not aided by my awesome surname) for it to either a)go ahead or b)not. I said I wanted this to be the most engaging vote of my terms but for the right reasons: Informed student decision.

ERB is no picnic having to stop petty arguments over a vote that should be so positive and engaging (on both sides) is the reason why national politics bores the hole off me. Throughout this campaign I have seen positive campaigning from both sides and a negative streak unbecoming of you as university of Limerick students. (I will go no further here).

This vote is progressive for both Yes and No because it will be an opportunity for students to fund developments centered around them or use their democratic right to say No. I am excited by the outcome either way.

On that note I am tired and am off to bed for an early rise tomorrow. Whatever the outcome, celebrate together,

Celebrate for your engagement
Celebrate for your passion
And celebrate your involvement in a union that 5 years ago had as little as 15% student engagement.

See you all tomorrow and thank you for your involvement in this vote.

Vote Rockett.

highlydebased

Defeated.

Total valid poll 3914
15% quota 2372
2/3rd of the Valid Poll 2609
YES 63.03% (2467 votes)
NO 36.97% (1447 votes)

freyners

Increase in the Yes vote, majority want it but the super majority kills it again

seen2Bgreen

disappointing result. does this mean that €16m worth of investment in health and recreation facilities is down the tube?
sad also for the employment lost in the construction of the facilities.

Chimaera

At this point all of the projects in this referendum proposal are done. That ship has well and truly sailed.

A few of us were chatting about this after the result, and reckon some of the Arena stuff will get done. Most likely the Arena itself will fund the warmup pool and associated facilities on a commercial basis, since it has a commercial interest in the types of events they can run in them. One likely consequence of this is higher rates for use of the Arena, both for members and casual users as they seek to recoup their investment. It would encompass whatever facilities the Arena can see itself making money from rather than whatever suits the clubs best. The diving pit might happen since it could bring in diving competitions. Likewise the climbing wall might be commercially viable.

Maguire's won't happen. Student Centre won't happen.

Ginge Young

Despite everything, it is shocking that in two years we have turned down 10's of millions of euro in either free or low interest rates....not sure when UL Students will get that chance again.

Ah well, onward and upward hopefully.

Bored Accountant

Having been involved in C&S since 2005 and probably exploring the possibility of these developments since 07 from the Handball Club, it is very disappointing to have it turned down. Great effort by everyone that campaigned for a Yes vote, great work by all Clubs & Societies pulling together to try and improve our campus. Wish I had been around to get involved (damn working in real world)

Twill be another 4/5 years before anything can be put before the students again and who knows at that stage whether funds will be available. I would hazard a guess to say 16 mililon won't cover the same projects in 4/5 years time. A fantastic opportunity missed but thats the joys of having a democratic union!!

wnolan1992

That's a surprising result tbh. Thought for sure it'd pass without the monstrosity that was that Student Centre paper clipped to it...




Shur let's vote again for the craic. :pac:

chrislad

wnolan1992 wrote: »

That's a surprising result tbh. Thought for sure it'd pass without the monstrosity that was that Student Centre paper clipped to it...




Shur let's vote again for the craic. :pac:

Ah jaysus, did they learn nothing from Lisbon!?!?!?! :pac:

Gael23

I voted yes this time having voted No last year. I think it's terrible that even though it was supported by such a large majority it's not happening, but the reason for that is an argument for another day.

Chimaera

What's so ironic in this whole sorry saga is that the project most blamed for the failure of the first vote (the student centre) would have appealed to the broadest range of students.

Jester252

It must suck that it failed again but some of the yes side need to cop on and stop acting like jerks.

Ave Sodalis

Jester252 wrote: »

It must suck that it failed again but some of the yes side need to cop on and stop acting like jerks.

Or at least needed to. I hate to say it, but the YES side may have also been the cause. I don't know about anyone else, but the sheer volume of spam I got from the side on all my Facebook groups and home page, texts, having walked through campus and emails, I was quite tempted to just not vote at all. I did but still, it was very annoying.

freyners

Jester252 wrote: »

It must suck that it failed again but some of the yes side need to cop on and stop acting like jerks.

Cuts both ways, some of the no side have hardly been gracious in victory either

Jester252

freyners wrote: »

Cuts both ways, some of the no side have hardly been gracious in victory either

I've seen a lot more name calling and abuse from the yes side. They also seem to be the ones to start with the abuse.

freyners

Jester252 wrote: »

I've seen a lot more name calling and abuse from the yes side. They also seem to be the ones to start with the abuse.

Not denying that some on the yes side are acting like dicks. However insinuating that only the yes side are acting like jerks in this case is disingenuous at best

Jester252

freyners wrote: »

Not denying that some on the yes side are acting like dicks. However insinuating that only the yes side are acting like jerks in this case is disingenuous at best

Well I've seen nobody with a no standpoint calling someone retarded or a spud.

Kelefants

I've actually had someone from the no side get fairly aggressive towards me and impose himself in my personal space. There have been mistakes on both sides, the difference that I can tell is that the yes side is hurting so our emotions are running high while the no side has no such excuse. Actually much of the replies to my status could be seen as goading the yes side which there simply is no need for.

Since it comes up, the idea of fundraising through alumni donations came up from a kayaking member of the no side (I won't use anyones name without permission). The argument was flattened by an American friend of mine. I curious as to what peoples thoughts on sourcing alternative means of funding are? Any viable suggestions?

freyners

Jester252 wrote: »

Well I've seen nobody with a no standpoint calling someone retarded or a spud.

no but there have seen some on the no side play the racist card

As i said, its on both sides

Ompala

sup_dude wrote: »

Or at least needed to. I hate to say it, but the YES side may have also been the cause. I don't know about anyone else, but the sheer volume of spam I got from the side on all my Facebook groups and home page, texts, having walked through campus and emails, I was quite tempted to just not vote at all. I did but still, it was very annoying.

Agree with this 100%, some of the yes side were just a pain last week, and I would say some people voted no as they were just sick of listening to them

Jester252

freyners wrote: »

no but there have seen some on the no side play the racist card

As i said, its on both sides

Wait what? Where was that?

Kelefants wrote: »

I've actually had someone from the no side get fairly aggressive towards me and impose himself in my personal space. There have been mistakes on both sides, the difference that I can tell is that the yes side is hurting so our emotions are running high while the no side has no such excuse. Actually much of the replies to my status could be seen as goading the yes side which there simply is no need for.

Since it comes up, the idea of fundraising through alumni donations came up from a kayaking member of the no side (I won't use anyones name without permission). The argument was flattened by an American friend of mine. I curious as to what peoples thoughts on sourcing alternative means of funding are? Any viable suggestions?

That's no excuse. If you what it to fly than any rude comment from the no side is due to their happiness of winning.

A lot of the replays from a certain Facebook message, including the original op, where bitter, abusive towards people with a no standpoint and downright petty. I'm kinda disappointed that I support these people.

The yes side when looking for money from the average student, when the proposal was rejected they throw a hissy fit. Greed is not a nice quality.

freyners

Jester252 wrote: »

Wait what? Where was that?



That's no excuse. If you what it to fly than any rude comment from the no side is due to their happiness of winning.

A lot of the replays from a certain Facebook message, including the original op, where bitter, abusive towards people with a no standpoint and downright petty. I'm kinda disappointed that I support these people.

The yes side when looking for money from the average student, when the proposal was rejected they throw a hissy fit. Greed is not a nice quality.

Ill PM you

Kelefants

Jester252 wrote: »

Wait what? Where was that?



That's no excuse. If you what it to fly than any rude comment from the no side is due to their happiness of winning.

A lot of the replays from a certain Facebook message, including the original op, where bitter, abusive towards people with a no standpoint and downright petty. I'm kinda disappointed that I support these people.

The yes side when looking for money from the average student, when the proposal was rejected they throw a hissy fit. Greed is not a nice quality.

I was the said op if you are unaware. Perhaps I was bitter, but at the end of the day I still cannot fathom why the referendum last year failed and the feedback was on the cost. So they cut the cost in half and it fails again. What is equally annoying is that both times we received over 60% of the vote. I can understand why we need more than a simple majority but I dont understand why it must be 66%.

I disagree with you on the point that winners could use the excuse that they were happy with the win. Have you never been disappointed? Frustrated? Those feelings are more likely to cause an outburst and understandably so. That's not to say it's ok to call people names though. I also would not say I was abusive toward anyone, especially not due to them voting no.

Subutai

Kelefants wrote: »

I was the said op if you are unaware. Perhaps I was bitter, but at the end of the day I still cannot fathom why the referendum last year failed and the feedback was on the cost. So they cut the cost in half and it fails again. What is equally annoying is that both times we received over 60% of the vote. I can understand why we need more than a simple majority but I dont understand why it must be 66%.

I disagree with you on the point that winners could use the excuse that they were happy with the win. Have you never been disappointed? Frustrated? Those feelings are more likely to cause an outburst and understandably so. That's not to say it's ok to call people names though. I also would not say I was abusive toward anyone, especially not due to them voting no.

2/3 is the standard proportion for a vote requiring a supermajority, the idea being that for every vote against there must be at least two votes in favour.

Jester252

Kelefants wrote: »

I was the said op if you are unaware. Perhaps I was bitter, but at the end of the day I still cannot fathom why the referendum last year failed and the feedback was on the cost. So they cut the cost in half and it fails again. What is equally annoying is that both times we received over 60% of the vote. I can understand why we need more than a simple majority but I dont understand why it must be 66%.

Maybe it failed because students don't want an extra expense on top of rising fees.

I disagree with you on the point that winners could use the excuse that they were happy with the win. Have you never been disappointed? Frustrated? Those feelings are more likely to cause an outburst and understandably so. That's not to say it's ok to call people names though. I also would not say I was abusive toward anyone, especially not due to them voting no.

Have you never been delighted? Over-joyous? Those feelings are just as likely to cause an outburst and understandably so. While your comments weren't abusive they were petty and aimed towards people on the no side. Other people from both sides had abusive comments.

I'm now glad that the referendum was rejected

Kelefants

Jester252 wrote: »

Maybe it failed because students don't want an extra expense on top of rising fees.



Have you never been delighted? Over-joyous? Those feelings are just as likely to cause an outburst and understandably so. While your comments weren't abusive they were petty and aimed towards people on the no side. Other people from both sides had abusive comments.

I'm now glad that the referendum was rejected

I have been delighted and overjoyed but I've never goaded the losing side. I'm not going to get into an argument over pettiness. If you do have any concerns I'm about campus today and Thursday. If you see me I'm more than willing to go through anything you feel was pettiness!

Jester252

Kelefants wrote: »

I have been delighted and overjoyed but I've never goaded the losing side. I'm not going to get into an argument over pettiness. If you do have any concerns I'm about campus today and Thursday. If you see me I'm more than willing to go through anything you feel was pettiness!

I've also been disappointed and frustrated but I've never posted a bitter status on Facebook. Nobody was "held back". You're first comment after this was directed towards someone who asked the vote count, but it wasn't the answer.

"you can have no excuses now. I look forward to seeing how you plan on raising 16 million."

Later on

"At least I had the courage to get outside and campaign for something I believe in."

Not to mention a post where you called someone work "dire"

Surely you can see how these statements are petty.