What time does trinity close to the public? want to lock my bike there

ruprect

What time does trinity close to the public? I wanted to lock my bike there as it is safer than on the street, away from vandals and theives. But I will not be back until about 11 tonight.

Stargal

The door is locked at midnight and after that only residents can get it.

Don't know about it being much safer than on the street though tbh, I've heard loads of stories about bikes getting stolen. Apparently the best thing to do is to try and lock it in full view of one of the security cameras. And make sure you have a really good lock (although my boyfriend's bike was stolen despite him having the strongest and most expensive lock he could find).

Nietzschean

yeah m8 of mine had 2 bikes stolen out of tcd within a year, both with huge expensive locks in very public areas..... if anything tcd is probally less safe than some random street as they know to go look in tcd for nice bikes...

ruprect

Yes the trick is to lock it in a place visible by cameras, but also lock it next to a better bike with a bad lock!

I would think the kicking in of wheels and other vandalism is less likely in trinity.

Are there any other places you would suggest as safe in the city centre? I was thinking of a garda station.

NewOxfordReview

Lock your bike somewhere else. Trinity isn't a public bike park.

ApeXaviour

NewOxfordReview wrote:

Lock your bike somewhere else. Trinity isn't a public bike park.

lol

Don't mind him^^ OP, he's always like this.

NewOxfordReview

It's the truth. Are you paying your registration fee so the security guards can protect the bikes of freeloaders? People forget that we actually pay to go here!

xeduCat

Trinity pulls a lot of tricks with registration fee money (administrative costs, space charges etc), although security isn't one of them for the moment anyway. What do people think should be the best policy here: proactive exclusion of non-members of the 'College community' (i.e. as used by Cambridge/Oxford especially during the summer months), or continuing with the presumption that public access is accepted/tolerated/encouraged?

NewOxfordReview

If you walk to the back of the Ussher, there is a ramp system ready to open out onto Nassau Street, and payment booths ready to use. I don't know if College intends to use these. They may have been installed "just in case" a decision to charge everyone in is made.

I once heard David Norris say that he much prefers College now that lots of people come in. Once upon a time, people didn't just walk on in. It reminds me of the scene in Quackser Fortune has a Cousin in the Bronx when Gene Wilder sneaks into Trinity.

People should know, anyway, that walking in and around Trinity isn't a God-given right unless they are connected to the College. If I had my way everyone would wear a gown to make their connected-ness obvious and tourists would pay just to get a peek. But I don't see that happening.

xeduCat

As far as I recall, the Nassau St system is designed to charge and process visitors to the Book of Kells, although it seems to be in hibernation for the moment. It was in the original designs for the Ussher library anyway.

My experience of the Cambridge charging-system is that the louder/more obviously 'touristy' you look, the more likely you are to be charged, especially during term. I.e. if you have a large camera around your neck and proclaim loudly how hard it is to get a damn coffee in this country, you pay, but if you're carrying a backpack or briefcase and just walk on in, you don't.

NewOxfordReview

I suppose it's assumed that most tourists coming into Trinity will go to see the Book of Kells and so the money will be extracted from them that way. I don't know if that can really be assumed though. Some kind of system at the gates would deter casual visitors.

I also think that leaving the Westland Row gate closed all day would be a good idea. If it's left on swipe access only then people would be discouraged from using Trinity as a shortcut.

I suspect if fees were reintroduced fully then students would care a little more about what randomers are using the College.

People don't seem to know that the Pav is really a members' bar and that all non-members (i.e. non-students: all students become members of the Club (DUCAC) at registration) are supposed to be signed in by a member.

Keep the commonfolk out! Town v Gown riots!

wheresthebeef

Personally, I think college should have better security in regulating who comes in and out. In the school of nursing we have had over 5 incidents in Michaelmas term where a member of the public entered the building under the auspices of using the coffee shop and subsequently harrassed and bullied students.
Being on college ground should be safer than wandering the streets. College should bear some duty of care towards students and staff in protecting them from visitors or members of the public who would enter college premises to cause damage to persons or property. And that duty of care should start with pre-emptive measures to keep unneccesary people off campus. Randomers shouldnt be wandering the grounds, or the buildings of TCD for unknown purposes.

ilovemybrick

wheresthebeef wrote:

Being on college ground should be safer than wandering the streets. College should bear some duty of care towards students and staff in protecting them from visitors or members of the public who would enter college premises to cause damage to persons or property. And that duty of care should start with pre-emptive measures to keep unneccesary people off campus. Randomers shouldnt be wandering the grounds, or the buildings of TCD for unknown purposes.

slightly off thread but the only serious incident so far this year (and according to the Doc in TCD med center THE most serious assault in his thirty years plus as doctor here) was caused by another member of college who had been signed in as a guest and then preceded to seriously assault someone else. tcd-ers are no less dangerous than anyone else. following the rules and only having registered students on campus didnt help in that situation

ApeXaviour

ilovemybrick wrote:

slightly off thread but the only serious incident so far this year (and according to the Doc in TCD med center THE most serious assault in his thirty years plus as doctor here) was caused by another member of college who had been signed in as a guest and then preceded to seriously assault someone else.

Signed in as a guest in somebody's room on campus?

ilovemybrick wrote:

tcd-ers are no less dangerous than anyone else.

Well I'd tend to disagree to an extent due to the added deterrent of disagreeable actions resulting in academic as well as legal consequences. Also I'm sure there's a statistic somewhere which shows students commit less victimed crimes than your average punter. (we tend not to be from troubled upbringings, be destitute, have heroin/cocaine dependencies, be involved in gangs, see a future career in crime and also we tend to be mostly women )

wheresthebeef

we need one of those robbing bastards who does insurance quotes to do a risk analysis to see in what situation we would be most likely to be assaulted, abused, harrassed, or stolen from.

1) Current Public Campus situation
2) All access to TCD Campus and buildings controlled by swipe card and permitted for registered students, staff or signed in guests. (I know that might be excessive, but just as an example of the opposite side of the coin)

I bet option 2 would result in a lesser risk analysis for students and staff to be the victims of a crime etc...

Time Magazine

Wow, that tower of ivory has re-inforced financial ignorance. Allowing people in makes it a tourist attraction. My economic mind tells me a charge on the door is ludicrous.

During the Leaving Cert, when I was in town, I often had strolls around campus to motivate me to study and get my points. Should I have been turned away at the door for not proffering cash? Grow up.

College is safe. It's safer than the streets.

NewOxfordReview wrote:

People should know, anyway, that walking in and around Trinity isn't a God-given right unless they are connected to the College.

It's still not a God-given right, buddy .

NewOxfordReview

It might not now be a God-given right, but now it's a Leaving Cert and money-given right.

Tourists will still come if they have to pay in. A euro in? Any tourist would be mad not to pay.

europerson

I don't mind tourists or randomers wandering around College, as long as they don't interfere with the running of academic side of things. In anycase, they don't clog up College too much or its restaurants, etc. The only slight problem area is the gap between the 1937 and the Old Library. It's right that College is locked up at night. After all, it is a residential college. Town versus gown riots would be a step too far, methinks.

MrJoeSoap

NewOxfordReview wrote:

It's the truth. Are you paying your registration fee so the security guards can protect the bikes of freeloaders? People forget that we actually pay to go here!

NewOxfordReview wrote:

Lock your bike somewhere else. Trinity isn't a public bike park.

NewOxfordReview wrote:

It might not now be a God-given right, but now it's a Leaving Cert and money-given right.

Is this guy for real? Keep the ordinary folk out of Trinity time is it? :rolleyes:

Nietzschean

MrJoeSoap wrote:

Is this guy for real? Keep the ordinary folk out of Trinity time is it? :rolleyes:

People are entitled to their opinion, if your not going to add anything to the conversation......you know where the door is.


Personally i'm inclided to somewhat agree, to charge for entry , or to stop all entry except students/staff/visitors and paying tourists to visit the book of kells would fund grounds keeping and security , and probally cut those costs down quite a bit also. Allowing more funds to be used for academic purposes.

Time Magazine

It is profitable to allow people to freely roam. The costs are relatively meagre.

It incentivises people to visit the Book of Kells.
It subsumes the spare capacity of the college, where marginal cost tends to zero.
It is an advertisment for the college in itself.
It projects a favourable, friendly brand upon the college, consistent with the general image of Ireland to tourists.
It allows for greater spread of information of the college thus enhancing its reputation.
It prevents ill-will from the public at large, already a significant road-block, and thus facilitates their recommendations (etc.) of the campus.
The freedom of movement within the college is a great bargaining tool with government - the tourist industry is in shreds as it is.

And the main reason why I'd oppose such a move, it's not being a wanker.

ilovemybrick

ApeXaviour wrote:

Well I'd tend to disagree to an extent due to the added deterrent of disagreeable actions resulting in academic as well as legal consequences.

youd think that. unfortunately in this case the victim of the assault was punished (ie lost some of their resident's privileges) a lot more severely than the perpetrator.

ApeXaviour

Well yes, but did the victim choose to press charges? If he had I suspect the assailant would be far the worse off..


Also i'd be of the "let them roam free" school of thought.

ilovemybrick

ApeXaviour wrote:

Well yes, but did the victim choose to press charges? If he had I suspect the assailant would be far the worse off..
.

once again youd think that. charges were pressed and not much done about it.

ApeXaviour

ilovemybrick wrote:

once again youd think that. charges were pressed and not much done about it.

Ok I really don't know anything about this other than what you're telling me. But if it is a case of an actual assault, rather than just a fight gone bad. Then charges brought through the proper due process would likely have resulted in some serious financial and/or criminal damages to the assailant.

ruprect

Nietzschean wrote:

People are entitled to their opinion, if your not going to add anything to the conversation......you know where the door is.

I think it was the tone it was mentioned in, arrogance. "I'd like everybody walking around in robes, looking down on the commoners passing through in awe of us, damn riff raff". I remember tossers like that from my college days, guys going about proudly wearing horrible sweatshirts with college names emblazoned on them like they were something special.

So you would install turnstiles and have people queueing up? hmm very practical, I am sure students would love that with their own queue to swipe cards in. Maybe a dontaion box like museums.

Nietzschean

ruprect wrote:

So you would install turnstiles and have people queueing up? hmm very practical, I am sure students would love that with their own queue to swipe cards in. Maybe a dontaion box like museums.

actually it wouldn't work that horribly wrong really, the only major issue to doing it would be goldsmith hall.... unconnected to campus currently and with lecture theatre's full of people moving at once turnstiles wouldn't work(~300 in some of those lecs) , though for most of the normal gates you could do it... there are other ways of doing it than swiping though, if one was to implement a college wide system RFID tags would be more suitable.......

I think it was the tone it was mentioned in, arrogance. "I'd like everybody walking around in robes, looking down on the commoners passing through in awe of us, damn riff raff". I remember tossers like that from my college days, guys going about proudly wearing horrible sweatshirts with college names emblazoned on them like they were something special.

To the best of my knowledge he's actually a staff member.

enda wrote:

It is profitable to allow people to freely roam. The costs are relatively meagre.

It subsumes the spare capacity of the college, where marginal cost tends to zero.

Thats making some pretty large assumptions right there, anything from extra grounds keeping staff to take care of litter or possible damage to flowers/grass etc. To extra security because of so many people passing through. To the probable huge insurance bill for public liability.

It incentivises people to visit the Book of Kells.

People? not really, someone's not going to decide to look at the book of kells after entering the college, normally they have entered the college to look at the book of kells.

It is an advertisment for the college in itself.
It projects a favourable, friendly brand upon the college, consistent with the general image of Ireland to tourists.

An advertisment? you really think it makes a major impact on the daily thousands of commuters who walk through the college? Geee i'd like to go here? as they rush to work?

It allows for greater spread of information of the college thus enhancing its reputation.

I really don't see how, allowing people through isn't likely to increase that at all, its damn smack in the centre of town with tcd students going into everything in town, working or frequenting, which keeps the college's profile pretty high. How it 'enhances its reputation' i'm lost on, getting foreign students in enhances our reputation probally, getting guest speakers in does, but i fail to see how letting commuters wander through the college does that.

It prevents ill-will from the public at large, already a significant road-block, and thus facilitates their recommendations (etc.) of the campus.

They would get over it, college just has to outline simple security and economic reasons, i really can't see how anyone would really hold it against them and create some sort of 'road block' . And their recommendations of the campus? i.e. to bring more randomers walking through?

The freedom of movement within the college is a great bargaining tool with government - the tourist industry is in shreds as it is.

Its pretty good, but most tourists as i've already said are headed for the book of kells when they enter the college, they could be given the option of getting a ticket which allows them back into the college for a few days after the visit, thus allowing them lots of time to look at the old buildings. (Bare in mind these same tourists that you love are a pain in the neck in some of the old buildings, namely the museum building where they all decide to wander about).

And the main reason why I'd oppose such a move, it's not being a wanker.

thats just stupid imo, its not a question of being a wanker, as has been outlined earlier, there would be saftey concerns, economic concerns and so on.

Time Magazine

Nietzschean wrote:

Thats making some pretty large assumptions right there, anything from extra grounds keeping staff to take care of litter or possible damage to flowers/grass etc. To extra security because of so many people passing through. To the probable huge insurance bill for public liability.

The college's budget as of 2004 is €208m, with 2,676 staff. With depreciation of Fixed Assets standing at nearly €500,000 a week, "increased litter and security" is f*ck all. Although I take your point on insurance, I don't expect it's as big as people think because I'd assume the State would pay for insurance if it was of considerable expense.

People? not really, someone's not going to decide to look at the book of kells after entering the college

You'd be very surprised. Many people don't know TCD, but wander in and go "Oh the Book of Kells!" while in Front Sq.

normally they have entered the college to look at the book of kells.

Normally, but a good third (educated guesstimate) realise thereafter. Why do you think there're so many advertisements without directions per sé? To attract people.

An advertisment? you really think it makes a major impact on the daily thousands of commuters who walk through the college? Geee i'd like to go here? as they rush to work?

You mis-interpreted my point. It's a commerical advertisment, not an educational one.

I really don't see how, allowing people through isn't likely to increase that at all, its damn smack in the centre of town with tcd students going into everything in town, working or frequenting, which keeps the college's profile pretty high. How it 'enhances its reputation' i'm lost on, getting foreign students in enhances our reputation probally, getting guest speakers in does, but i fail to see how letting commuters wander through the college does that.

Someone walks in, enjoys the air, takes a photo, goes back home to Canada, shows off the photo.

I'm not suggesting charging fees would not raise any money, I'm making the point that the elasticity of not charging for entry to the grounds is not as preferable as charging for entry to the Book etc.

They would get over it

Well if analysis of the grudge that persists of the founder being British/1916/a Catholic ban of college/the "last bastion" aura shows that the average punter still has somewhat negative connotations (come on, how often have you heard "Oh Trinity :rolleyes:" - it's even been hinted at in this thread twice), I'd strongly suggest we do our utmost to never become "unfriendly" again.

college just has to outline simple security and economic reasons

Which I don't think exist. But the people have to make the simple points of the positive economic externalities that accrue from the open access of the college and that the taxpayer is giving us over €80 million in direct subsidies - and therefore deserve a shout with regard their economic situation.

i really can't see how anyone would really hold it against them and create some sort of 'road block'.

Quite recently I at a party where they were talking about college (I hadn't spoken yet) and someone waffled on about the "snobby West-British c*nts in Trinners." Hey, at least we're West-Brit now and not British, eh?

And their recommendations of the campus? i.e. to bring more randomers walking through?

See the positive externalities and implicit benefit effect as detailed above.

Its pretty good, but most tourists as i've already said are headed for the book of kells when they enter the college, they could be given the option of getting a ticket which allows them back into the college for a few days after the visit, thus allowing them lots of time to look at the old buildings. (Bare in mind these same tourists that you love are a pain in the neck in some of the old buildings, namely the museum building where they all decide to wander about).

I'd dispute your claims about the Book; and additionally now like to make the point that if the college was private attendence at the Book would fall even further because of the less-friendly image of the college. I don't accept the argument that "people want what they can't have" so charging in would be beneficial; I just don't think the elasticities of demand are like that. But I take your point about Musuem Building. But there could always be swipe access.

thats just stupid imo, its not a question of being a wanker, as has been outlined earlier, there would be saftey concerns, economic concerns and so on.

I've just spent far too long in the computer room when I should be in the library arguing the economics of it, but I take your point on security. But I feel perfectly safe in college, far more so than on Grafton St, even though it's less frequented (less likely to be helped). Yeah there's the unfortunate assault, and it's shocking that there were not greater punishments, but weighing that up against the financial benefits is like weighing me up to Ecksor in a fight for authority tbh.

wheresthebeef

Would there be anything to be said for putting the doors to more buildings on swipe access? or more areas within buildings behind swipe access.
I queried that possibility in relation to D'Olier Street, and was told the expense of installing swipe doors was actually quite high due to the cost of equipment and wiring etc...

ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI

NewOxfordReview wrote:

**** off you ****...

shay_562

Originally Posted by ruprect
So you would install turnstiles and have people queueing up? hmm very practical, I am sure students would love that with their own queue to swipe cards in. Maybe a dontaion box like museums.

actually it wouldn't work that horribly wrong really, the only major issue to doing it would be goldsmith hall....

Just a thought, but isn't a swipe-card system pretty impractical for peak times of students going in and out? I know they have them in the libraries and the like, but there's nowhere near the same volume of traffic as you'd get at the nassau street entrance. Having queues of students running out into the streets trying to get in and out may be nice in a PR sense (ie, "Look at how desperate people are to get into Trinity!"), but maybe not so much for the students who are being hassled over it.

And I kinda agree with Angry Banana that the whole thing about not wanting a reputation as an insular, snobby college is an important one - why would people bother listening to economic and security reasons (to whatever extent they actually exist) when they can read the headline saying "Snobby Trinity closes doors to public" and draw their own conclusions. It should never be overestimed how ****ing stupid people can be.

cuckoo

I think faux fortress Trinity would create a false sense of security within the railings. It's understandable that a community, albeit a loosely held together one such as TCD, wants to think that all the scary people who do bad things are outsiders; we have to remember that Trinity students and staff are human too with all the failings that implies.

Anyone who's ever experienced the after effects of the 'hide the book'/'rip out the relevent pages' habits of some of our fellow students knows that trinity students are capable of being deceitful barstewards, screwing over their own classmates.

On the subject of security, i'd like if there was a bit more lighting around college, especially for the walk from the Hamilton Building to Front Square.

Ditto me on all the stuff Angry Banana said about the economics.

Crash

I dunno how i feel about the idea of shutting off the college in that way, however i would agree with swipe access in ALL areas of college.

nearly everywhere i deal within in college academically is swipe access - and its nice to have. it does enclose sections of the campus but at the same time, it means that when you're dealing with those areas, especially late at night, you feel that little bit safer.

I disagree with your point RE: the book of kells and people only realising they want to go to it after they go into college enda - i've worked at many a job in trinity directing people and most of the people i've seen in college falls into a few different groups - business people on their way through, staff, students, tour groups, and the odd solo tourist people. the last group are generally always heading towards the book of kells, and in the case of some, are willing to wander in to anything they see as interesting. for instance at registration last year i had some random americans join the queue. i believe Vinks on here had some random tourists wander into his offices once (which iirc are the backarse of nowhere) so there are points to be said to keeping the academic nature of college.

i doubt anyone here can say they actually enjoy the tourgroups and the people taking pictures in college coming up to the summer months - i find it ridiculuously annoying.

i'd agree with Cuckoo on the lighting point though - it gets a bit dark along the way. though with rooms in the GMB, new square etc its hard to put lights up where it effects peoples living standard.

John

I think shutting the college to the public is an awful idea. Restricted access to buildings in college is a better option but why lock everyone out? I mean the guy walking to work in the morning, leaving nothing but the sound of his footsteps, is hardly a horde of barbarians at the gate. And believe me, locking down the college won't deter the nastier elements of society from getting in. Where there's a will, there's a way. I've encountered dodgy characters in restricted areas of college, they'll get in where they can.

xeduCat

John2 wrote:

I've encountered dodgy characters in restricted areas of college, they'll get in where they can.

I've encounted you in house 6 late at night too, while alone and vulnerable. It was traumatic.

Nietzschean

ZWEI_VIER_ZWEI wrote:

**** off you ****...

2 week ban for abusive post

ApeXaviour

Just on this general topic. At about midnight last night I and a couple of friends were pottering merrily at the crossroads beside the pav. When a white lancer decides screech through the grass patch with the wooden sculpture and smash through the fence there. The car then turns towards the civil engineering building, entire 30 - 40 feet of fence in tow, and flys past us. It stops, reverses at rubber burning pace leaving it's bumper and fence behind, does a handbrake 180 and speeds off. By this time the little piaggio security van had obviously been alerted and was in chase. It was hilarious..

Obviously somebody had come in, stolen the car and gone on a joyride. Doubtful the car was driven in for this purpose, also doubtful it was a student.

Time Magazine

Hehe, when I was walking out of college last night a couple of lads (don't think they were students) said "AHAHA! Would you look at the size of that f*cking van?!"

Long live Tiny.

In other news, the toilets in the Berkeley are out of order.

Pet

Sounds like the work of scumbags. Knackers out!!

cuckoo

Angry Banana wrote:

Hehe, when I was walking out of college last night a couple of lads (don't think they were students) said "AHAHA! Would you look at the size of that f*cking van?!"

Long live Tiny.

The real name is the Noddy Van. It always makes me smile.

Swipe cards have been mentioned a lot up thread, but they're not foolproof. There was a spate of things being stolen from the library a couple of years back and in the end they caught someone red handed as it were and they had a stolen student card.

So, in order for the swipe system to make us completely safe cards that have been replaced would have to be cancelled from the system, nobody could ever hold the door open for others and all staff and students with legit cards would have to be angels.

And, it really wouldn't be practical for high traffic places like the arts block, which is a shame as it is perhaps the most insecure place in college, blue lights in the downstairs toilets and all.

Andrew 83

I would be strongly against Trinity closing its gates to the public. That would make it out to be some Ivory Tower above everyone else. Those who go to college are not 'above' those who do not, unfortunately a lot of those who make it to Trinity have achieved more academically than those who do not make it to college due to the inequalities of society hence what they were born into rather than for any toher reason. The individual's hard work is key yes, but so is their background.

Suggesting that those in Trinity are somehow privileged above the rest of society in that they are above them and should exclude the general public from their campus is completely wrong. They've been privileged by birth in a lot of occasions and we should be fighting to make everyone more equal in that regard to break down the invisible walls preventing people from entering Trintiy as more than just random passers by in for whatever reason.


As regards bikes I have had 2 stolen, both of which had 2 locks on them, one wire and one U. Strong locks in all situations. I feel security shoudl be doing some more policing of the places where bikes are mainly locked as I don't see much evidence of them doing so. I have actually stopped someone who was in teh process of trying to break a bike lock in Front Square but I've never seen security do it. To break a good U lock requires a car jack, to break a wire lock a good clippers. Although this is a quick operation, with proper supervision it should be relatively rare.

Until this situation is improved I'll leave my insurance money in the bank and continue using my 40 euro Garda auction bike (itself a victim of another robbery!).

Outside campus I've had bikes attempted to be stolen on George's Street from the look of the locks when I've returned to the bike, I've locked bikes numerous times on the ranks at the bottom of Dame Street opposite College Green Bank of Ireland with no problems.

europerson

Angry Banana wrote:

Hehe, when I was walking out of college last night a couple of lads (don't think they were students) said "AHAHA! Would you look at the size of that f*cking van?!"

Long live Tiny.

Seconded.

In other news, the toilets in the Berkeley are out of order.

Anyone, who has been using them of late, would have realised that, even before the "do not cross this line" plastic tape went up!

europerson

Andrew 83 wrote:

I would be strongly against Trinity closing its gates to the public. That would make it out to be some Ivory Tower above everyone else. Those who go to college are not 'above' those who do not, unfortunately a lot of those who make it to Trinity have achieved more academically than those who do not make it to college due to the inequalities of society hence what they were born into rather than for any toher reason. The individual's hard work is key yes, but so is their background.

Suggesting that those in Trinity are somehow privileged above the rest of society in that they are above them and should exclude the general public from their campus is completely wrong. They've been privileged by birth in a lot of occasions and we should be fighting to make everyone more equal in that regard to break down the invisible walls preventing people from entering Trintiy as more than just random passers by in for whatever reason.

Good Lord, the President of Ireland was privileged enough to be elected to office, but wait: Áras an Uachtaráin's private rooms are closed to the public, and even the public rooms are only open at certain times. Oh, I hope this isn't creating inequality. Sorry, I must fly: I have to attend to a stranger, who has just happened upon "my" sitting room. Isn't life so much better since we've rid ourselves of private property? Eh, I should think not. The assertion that people, who are not members of an institution, would feel excluded from it, were they not allowed to enter, is somewhat puzzling.

we should be fighting to make everyone more equal in that regard to break down the invisible walls preventing people from entering Trintiy as more than just random passers by in for whatever reason.

I'm not quite sure what that means, but, thankfully, we have good cast iron railings to separate us from the city centre in general. Trinity is an oasis of calm in the noise and bustle of the city.

And, lest there be any confusion, I'm for access for all to College property, save, of course, labs, lecture theatres, offices, etc. It is right that we should share with the wider world our beautiful architecture and ambience. Reducing this issue to one of class politics or "I feel left out" syndrome is beneficial to neither side of the argument. Perhaps, we shall refrain from that sort of illogic.

Thirdfox

Andrew 83 wrote:

Until this situation is improved I'll leave my insurance money in the bank and continue using my 40 euro Garda auction bike (itself a victim of another robbery!).

Outside campus I've had bikes attempted to be stolen on George's Street from the look of the locks when I've returned to the bike, I've locked bikes numerous times on the ranks at the bottom of Dame Street opposite College Green Bank of Ireland with no problems.

Sorry to go off thread but where can you go to partake in a Garda auction? What kind of stuff do they sell there? (Would it be too much to hope that law books used in a brutal murder may be put up for sale? )


Oh and I think people should most definitely be allowed to wander around Trinity (but as mentioned above not the lecture theatres etc.) Although sometimes you do get irate tourists who start shouting at you for walking across the front square... I did have a lecture to go to you know!!!

cuckoo

Thirdfox wrote:

Sorry to go off thread but where can you go to partake in a Garda auction? What kind of stuff do they sell there? (Would it be too much to hope that law books used in a brutal murder may be put up for sale? )

Details are announced by the guards as a press release, which they put up here:

http://www.garda.ie/angarda/press/2006/pressbox.html

There's a bike auction coming up on March 23rd.

back on topic/

i'd hate to see trinity being closed off as i enjoy sitting beside the cricket pitch on sunny days and taking a break from the city centre. i have this romantic image of bringing in my kids so they can toddle around on the grass and be bored by mammy's stories..."and that building over there has the JS physics labs in it, and over there outside that bulding called the Pav is were mammy used to drink lots of cans...".

europerson

cuckoo wrote:

i'd hate to see trinity being closed off as i enjoy sitting beside the cricket pitch on sunny days and taking a break from the city centre. i have this romantic image of bringing in my kids so they can toddle around on the grass and be bored by mammy's stories..."and that building over there has the JS physics labs in it, and over there outside that bulding called the Pav is were mammy used to drink lots of cans...".

Funnily, I have the same ideas of bringing my children across the cobbles!

Thirdfox

Sorry to hijack once again but do auctions of other items ever come up? Thanks for the link Cuckoo

on topic:

The argument could be made that you can relax in St. Stephen's Green...

europerson

Thirdfox wrote:

The argument could be made that you can relax in St. Stephen's Green...

Yes, but it's nice to be able to relax in different places.

Thirdfox

europerson wrote:

Yes, but it's nice to be able to relax in different places.

I agree completely... but would management?

Hitchhiker's Guide to...

midnight

Crash

Swipes arent foolproof - anyone that thinks that is a fool. they are, however, more foolproof than open access at the moment - so they'd at least bring about a slight increase in safety and security in the situation.