Motions...

Kevin_rc_ie

sometimes people have arguments in order to solve problems. I see no purpose orfunction to this one. Well it's not really an argument yet. We'll see.

Nietzschean

Kevin_rc_ie wrote:

sometimes people have arguments in order to solve problems. I see no purpose orfunction to this one. Well it's not really an argument yet. We'll see.

your no stranger to the pointless arguement yourself kev

Miles

Who the hell is Ronan? I'm not Ronan; are you Ronan? Well that's two off the list.

Why would you ban coke?

Evilution

Kevin_rc_ie wrote:

sometimes people have arguments in order to solve problems

For the life of me I can't think of any examples offhand!

SkyLynx wrote:

and i'm up at half 2(and in college) doing study/assignments...this is only providing something to do to try avoid more work...

Dude, if you don't have anything done by now, forget about it until tomorrow. Or monday morning, bright and early :eek:
As much as I promised myself I'd stop procrastinating after last year, I find myself doing it again this year. Take friday for example; up at 5.30am to get an essay done for 12. Got the bastard done in about 2 hours too.

Nietzschean

Miles wrote:

Who the hell is Ronan? I'm not Ronan; are you Ronan? Well that's two off the list.

Just look at the who's who thread.

Why would you ban coke?

it was banned over union people being killed in some south american country, even though our coke is manufactured n bottled in ireland......but its a 'stand' apparently :rolleyes:

Miles

I see. Thanks.

Kevin_rc_ie

your no stranger to the pointless arguement yourself kev

yes i am

Evilution

SkyLynx wrote:

it was banned over union people being killed in some south american country...

Daft, wasn't it?

ApeXaviour

Evilution wrote:

Daft, wasn't it?

While staying away from petty arguments mostly because I'm mildly inebriated: I'd just like to point out that it was the student body that voted for the ban on coke. You seem to be of the impression that they imposed it on us.

Silly boy..

Nietzschean

eh as usuall like about 80% of the student body didn't vote cause they couldn't give a ****e about su things, general apathy, it really is the student body's own fault if they don't agree with it for not voting but still...it does seem silly. Anyway my office is beside a door onto westland row to centra so i'll live...

ApeXaviour

3 problems I have with that:

- 80% didn't vote, so 20% did. 20% from across the board is more than enough for any poll to get an accurate outlook on consensus. Unless you're of the opinion that people who wanted to keep coke in were "less likely" to vote, which is just absurd.. Coke has not been shown to cause apathy!

- Well this isn't really a problem more of an agreement. Good god it doesn't matter, coke is still in the machines, in the buttery/pav and in the highly accessible nassau st, westland row, westmoreland st and grafton st shops.

-A student with an office!? What is the world coming too?

Nietzschean

3 problems I have with that:

ApeXaviour wrote:

- 80% didn't vote, so 20% did. 20% from across the board is more than enough for any poll to get an accurate outlook on consensus. Unless you're of the opinion that people who wanted to keep coke in were "less likely" to vote, which is just absurd.. Coke has not been shown to cause apathy!

How about the fact the majority of coke drinkers are sci/computer type people who be programming into the wee hours and yes care a hell of alot less about the SU than people in the arts block would.

- Well this isn't really a problem more of an agreement. Good god it doesn't matter, coke is still in the machines, in the buttery/pav and in the highly accessible nassau st, westland row, westmoreland st and grafton st shops.

it also costs more as a result though

-A student with an office!? What is the world coming too?

Ah i have it for my other duties than being a student...



O and wtf are u doing up?

Agent Smith

smith votes


1.nay
2. yay
3.yay


that is all

Wow. Last time I checked this, there was 1 reply. Now there's 43. Well ain't that something.

Not gonna reply to most of the expected flack I got - all I wanna say is that I didn't put my name up: most people don't know I changed my name from Ace_Rimmer to Myth over the past week or 2. I threw this up just to inform, tried to be impartial and informative, so if you don't like what I wrote, well I don't really care. I just thought it was interesting, thought some of you might too...

Crash

ppfffft, hack.


anyhow i find this all very hypocritical. the smoking one is being proposed at the same time as two are being considered taking off the books, one even stating in the motion "because it basically did nothing". secondly re: referendums i think theres also a motion concerning the ****e turn out (as though the SU can magically fix it, go figure :rolleyes:) but yeah - gotta go write up something now.

sleepingbeauty

woh you people were busy last night...why yez were all up that early on boards ill never understand :rolleyes:

going back to a post from like 3 pages ago ....

crash_000 wrote:

so, if anyone wants to see me make a fool of myself and get up and speak against the first motion (and, basically, for the other two) come and have a look on monday. Also cant believe one of my mates was the proposer to all three.

ill be there to have a laugh lol i started reading those motions and it was like proposed: cormac and again and again...funny at the time

ApeXavior wrote:

-A student with an office!? What is the world coming too?

SkyLynx wrote:

Ah i have it for my other duties than being a student...

a 3rd year with an office wtf??!! even with those 'other duties' :rolleyes:

Agent Smith

your invited to his office blankcanvas,


you can do a bit of "research" for us all

Neil

Before you condemn Cormac, ask him about the motions, and you'll find out more about the situations behind them. Or wait til tomorrow.

Neil wrote:

ppfffft, hack.

Bastard! :P

sleepingbeauty

Before you condemn Cormac, ask him about the motions, and you'll find out more about the situations behind them. Or wait til tomorrow.

dont worry i wasnt condemning him, its all good

your invited to his office blankcanvas, you can do a bit of "research" for us all

hrm i think i should have thought a bit harder before i typed that post :rolleyes:

Crash

I'm condemning cormac :P

Agent Smith

I'm condemning cormac, and so's my wife

Sweet

ApeXaviour

SkyLynx wrote:

How about the fact the majority of coke drinkers are sci/computer type people who be programming into the wee hours and yes care a hell of alot less about the SU than people in the arts block would.

Subjective pishtosh IMO.
We've had this chat before. It won't lead anywhere until one of us conducts surveys and polls etc.
Except on the give a shít / effort ratio, that task rates somewhere in the order of plancks constant.
Shall we just both agree that southy is nice?

SkyLynx wrote:

O and wtf are u doing up?

I was drinkin into the wee hours with mates. Had quite a bit actually. Surprised the sentances I wrote were so legible. The whole brussels drinking holiday then straight into christmas/new year period has made me temporarily immune to this ethanol jive methinks.

Nietzschean

agent smith wrote:

your invited to his office blankcanvas,


you can do a bit of "research" for us all

blankcanvas wrote:

hrm i think i should have thought a bit harder before i typed that post :rolleyes:

anytime Sophie :cool:

Nietzschean

ApeXaviour wrote:

Subjective pishtosh IMO.
We've had this chat before. It won't lead anywhere until one of us conducts surveys and polls etc.
Except on the give a shít / effort ratio, that task rates somewhere in the order of plancks constant.

If we had facts it wouldn't be a random pointless debate...

Shall we just both agree that southy is nice?

I think i can manage that

Evilution

ApeXaviour wrote:

While staying away from petty arguments mostly because I'm mildly inebriated: I'd just like to point out that it was the student body that voted for the ban on coke. You seem to be of the impression that they imposed it on us.

Silly boy..

I actually wrote a reply to this last night but boards stopped working on my PC for some reason so I couldn't post it. Can't be bothered repeating it either.
And i know they didn't impose it on us, but they brought the motion up in the first place.

Silly boy? Sonny, I'm probably a lot older than you so behave yourself :rolleyes:

John

Does anyone know why the quick change of opinion on Coke? I voted against the ban but I accept the fact that it was passed. I just would have thought the SU would be able to stick to their guns. Or did they just want to give Coke a slap on the wrist? Or was Pepsi not as nice as they thought?

Andrew 83

John2 wrote:

Does anyone know why the quick change of opinion on Coke? I voted against the ban but I accept the fact that it was passed. I just would have thought the SU would be able to stick to their guns. Or did they just want to give Coke a slap on the wrist? Or was Pepsi not as nice as they thought?

A class rep has brought the motion to Council to have the second referendum. All it needs to go to Council is one seconder. It wasn't the President etc that decided it might be an idea to run it again or anything like that.

I hope that there isn't another Coke one as it's too soon to the last but that the other two are passed so that the student body can have its say and decide on what it wants.

xeduCat

OK, a couple of yis have slagged me off in person for lurking for so long without posting, so here goes...

It's not 'the SU' (the evil forces. mwah ha ha) that are bringing this motion. There are over 150 members of the SU Council, and they all have the same rights in terms of bringing motions etc. Sometimes motions are brought by officers; sometimes they aren't. Sometimes motions are supported by officers; sometimes they aren't. It varies, really.

For the meeting tomorrow, there are 8 motions - only one of which involves the full-time officers (the sabbats) putting something forward. Personally I know I won't vote for all the motions, and some of them, I haven't made up my mind on. When it comes to Council, anyway, I'm the secretary so as long as a motion isn't out of order or submitted past a deadline, it will make it forward for debate.

As for the stuff on Coke, Nestlé and tobacco products, it's up to Council whether or not to call a referendum - if you want to find out, come to the meeting tomorrow (Hamilton-Joly, at 7pm). More importantly, if you're a TCD student (as most of you are, I presume...), email your class rep and tell them what you think and how you want them to vote.

If any of those motions are passed (needs 75% margin), then a referendum is called. I'm pretty certain it's going to a be a fun debate, regardless of the result. So it's not about 'the SU' seeking publicity by putting down a motion..it's just the normal stuff that goes on at Council (where any class rep can put in a motion), albeit with a bit more of a buzz to it.

As it's Council that comes up with policies, I can safely say that there is no "SU" view about any of the motions, at least not until 9pm tomorrow night. As of today, Coke and Nestlé products aren't available in the shops. Tobacco products are. If any of the motions are passed, then it's up to everyone to make up their own minds and vote in the referendum, if/when it happens. The SU officers, resources, etc. will not take sides in a referendum.

Evilution

EduCat wrote:

As for the stuff on Coke, Nestlé and tobacco products, it's up to Council whether or not to call a referendum

Can you just remind us again why we're banning these things? Its hard work keeping up-to-date on which global conglomerates we're snubbing - is that why SU officers take a year out to work at it full-time?