Are they manning the gates?

passive

Alright... I don't quite follow this. Are they not allowing any non residents in at all? or just non family? or is it just at night/after a certain hour? Have the fences gotten higher/more troublesome (most important question for myself )

"with all guests having to be off campus by 11:30pm"

wow.. that's a big change. Err..how do they enforce that? Do you sign people in prior to that and they check to see if they cleared off? This does all sound a bit ****...but if it's just around exam time I can see an upside for studious campus-dwellers... haven't actually availed of res social life at all this year, since hardly anyone I know lives there anymore.. Didn't know it had gotten this harsh though.

shanegj

passive wrote: »

Alright... I don't quite follow this. Are they not allowing any non residents in at all? or just non family? or is it just at night/after a certain hour? Have the fences gotten higher/more troublesome (most important question for myself )

"with all guests having to be off campus by 11:30pm"

wow.. that's a big change. Err..how do they enforce that? Do you sign people in prior to that and they check to see if they cleared off? This does all sound a bit ****...but if it's just around exam time I can see an upside for studious campus-dwellers... haven't actually availed of res social life at all this year, since hardly anyone I know lives there anymore.. Didn't know it had gotten this harsh though.

Anybody who doesn't live on campus has got to be out of the resident areas by 11.30.
"visiters brought in prior to 11.00 will be expected to have left the grounds by 11.30" the rules have always been there its just now they are being more enforced

Also Starring LeVar Burton

Tayto2000 wrote: »

Given the timing, I'm guessing this is a late night drunk post?

I couldn't get res when I was an undergrad. If you really don't like it, why not move out and rent like everyone else who isn't living at home? But you'll find there's still rules and if you get an apartment somewhere, you may well find that it's gated access... I've never met anyone who had a problem with this where they are living off campus. Could the root of the problem be that the residences won't be 24 hour party pads anymore if gates go in...?

Why not drop the melodrama and get something done about the res rules, especially in relation to visitors? Short of taking an anglegrinder to them, there probably isn't much to be done about the gates themselves at this point...

Well you guessed wrong, I merely suffer from insomnia and have nothing else to do at that ungodly hour, however you have jumped to conclusions without any numbers whatsover. You claim I rant as a drunken undergrad, when in reality, I'm a concerned postgraduate student who feels that we are being introduced to a Draconian Regime.
Whether or not you're in favour of these gates or not, the majority of students are not - I should know I spent 3 hours collecting a couple of hundred signatures from res stuents yesterday who are against the gates. If you think only drunken louts are against the gates, fair f**ks to you for living such a sheltered existence,but in reality, that is merely not the case.

gubbie

Tayto2000 wrote: »

If you really don't like it, why not move out and rent like everyone else who isn't living at home? But you'll find there's still rules and if you get an apartment somewhere, you may well find that it's gated access...

Because (speaking as a final year) many of us don't have the time to be looking for a new residence and moving out. The rules applied to people living off campus is no where near as strict as on campus. Final years move into campus due to it's proximity and how easy it is to sort out. You send off your application and your deposit and no having to trek up from the other end of Ireland during your holidays and looking for a new residence. Last year we lived next door to our landlady and our one rule was don't trash the place. And if we did, we'd be paying for it. And that's how it was on campus. If you had someone over, you were liable for their behaviour in your apartment.

Gingy wrote: »

I read a 'TOP STORY', article in the University Observer about a robbed laptop from Merville (Which was eventually recovered). There's clearly not that much robberies around campus if that made it into the paper.

There's surprisingly little considering most people are stupid enough to leave their doors wide open nearly all day long

simonrooneyzaga

CaptainNegative wrote: »

Well you guessed wrong, I merely suffer from insomnia and have nothing else to do at that ungodly hour, however you have jumped to conclusions without any numbers whatsover. You claim I rant as a drunken undergrad, when in reality, I'm a concerned postgraduate student who feels that we are being introduced to a Draconian Regime.
Whether or not you're in favour of these gates or not, the majority of students are not - I should know I spent 3 hours collecting a couple of hundred signatures from res stuents yesterday who are against the gates. If you think only drunken louts are against the gates, fair f**ks to you for living such a sheltered existence,but in reality, that is merely not the case.

are you pissed again?

Time Magazine

OMG this is so like that Ted Hughes novel 1982.

Tayto2000

gubbie wrote: »

The rules applied to people living off campus is no where near as strict as on campus.

Yeah, that's my point. Plusses to on campus res are it's a lot cheaper than off campus, more convenient to find as compared to tramping around Dublin with a mobile phone and list of addresses and as handy as it is possible to get for getting to and from classes etc. Downside is there's more rules and despite what some people think it's definitely not a democracy. This is apparently not enough to put people off though as demand consistently exceeds supply.

gubbie wrote: »

Last year we lived next door to our landlady and our one rule was don't trash the place. And if we did, we'd be paying for it. And that's how it was on campus. If you had someone over, you were liable for their behaviour in your apartment.

Same with me, I rented for my last 2 years as an undergrad and was lucky enough to have had a decent landlord and even an actual tenancy agreement! Having been at a few parties in Belgrove, I've seen the damage done to individual flats, that's fine, easy enough to recover the costs from the renters (so be careful who you invite back!). I think the gates are to keep out non-residents who feel free to wreck flats and the surrounds without repercussions as apparently happened in summer this year.

As mentioned by shanegj, it seems to be existing rules being enforced for the first time. Why not focus on getting the res rules themselves changed instead of fixating on the methods by which they're being enforced? If the Dail passed a stupid or draconian law you don't go and protest against the Gardai...

gubbie wrote: »

There's surprisingly little considering most people are stupid enough to leave their doors wide open nearly all day long

Too true!

Tayto2000

CaptainNegative wrote: »

Well you guessed wrong, I merely suffer from insomnia and have nothing else to do at that ungodly hour, however you have jumped to conclusions without any numbers whatsover. You claim I rant as a drunken undergrad, when in reality, I'm a concerned postgraduate student who feels that we are being introduced to a Draconian Regime.
Whether or not you're in favour of these gates or not, the majority of students are not - I should know I spent 3 hours collecting a couple of hundred signatures from res stuents yesterday who are against the gates. If you think only drunken louts are against the gates, fair f**ks to you for living such a sheltered existence,but in reality, that is merely not the case.

Sorry, sorry, it was the William Wallace paraphrasing that got me! Along with, it has to be said, the general tone of belligerence and incoherence that are in contrast to your normal posting style here. You must be very tired indeed... And to be fair, it was an enquiry not an accusation!

...Although you do seem to have leaped to a lot of conclusions on my part in your post! I never said you were ranting nor said you were an undergrad nor have I lived what you seem to think is a 'sheltered existence'. I would consider the residences to be a sheltered existence compared to renting in Dublin.

I like the capital letters for the 'Draconian Regime' though. Out of interest, if you were collecting signatures, are you sure they were all from residents or were you just asking everyone going in and out? Could have been visitors after all...;)

gubbie

Tayto2000 wrote: »

Plusses to on campus res are it's a lot cheaper than off campus

WRONG!!
Glen comes out at over €140 a week. That's not cheaper let alone "a lot cheaper". As does Roebuck where as the other two would be about €125 a week. That's the same as you would be paying (and I did) just beside UCD.

Let me get this right, you've never lived on campus? Just applied and was turned down? If so you're basing your opinions on people's experiences of living on campus on what?

I've talked to many people about the gates and most are not annoyed by the fact that they can't have large parties, but by the fact that their movements will be monitored and restricted. I got up this evening, into UCD from home past 11 and I realised that when the new system comes in I will be expected to walk around to Merville with my heavy bag because they're "enforcing the rules".

panda100

I cant believe there actually enforcing that 'no people round after 11' rule!UCD res seems to be a babysitting service now, can they not treat adults as adults?!

Im a bit confused as to whats exactly happening here.They've sort of set up a passport control type thing where you have to show your student card? Does this operate just after 11?What are the gates they've put up?

I lived in the old roebuck,belgrove and glenomena and never had any probs on campus, there is absolutely no need to bring in these draconian measures!

Tayto2000

gubbie wrote: »

WRONG!!
Glen comes out at over €140 a week. That's not cheaper let alone "a lot cheaper". As does Roebuck where as the other two would be about €125 a week. That's the same as you would be paying (and I did) just beside UCD.

Fair enough, no need to shout. I suspect res will offer worse value for money in the face of plummeting rents everywhere else as well if that's true... But based on a quick and dirty average of €1600pm shared 3 ways off campus it's still competitive. Anyway that's one of my points out of three, you didn't address the other two?

gubbie wrote: »

Let me get this right, you've never lived on campus? Just applied and was turned down? If so you're basing your opinions on people's experiences of living on campus on what?

'Were' turned down if you want to get pedantic and take that tone. Although I'm not obliged to justify my opinions to you, I will say that my opinions of res are based on times I stayed there as a guest (in breach of the guest rules as it turns out now but I didn't know that.) and nights out that ended there when I was a undergrad. Haven't been there lately but I do wander up to go to the shop in Merville every now and then and I saw first hand the mayhem on exams night last summer in Belgrove.

gubbie wrote: »

I've talked to many people about the gates and most are not annoyed by the fact that they can't have large parties, but by the fact that their movements will be monitored and restricted. I got up this evening, into UCD from home past 11 and I realised that when the new system comes in I will be expected to walk around to Merville with my heavy bag because they're "enforcing the rules".

They're putting up gates, not fitting all the residents with ankle bracelets. More melodrama, in the same vein as 'it's being turned into a prison!' comments. You touched on it there when you asked me about my experience of res, but I think those not in res are finding it hard to see what the fuss is about... Maybe you should be trying to get us onside instead of attacking my 'res experience'?

gubbie

Tayto2000 wrote: »

Anyway that's one of my points out of three, you didn't address the other two?

They were clear points. You can't get any closer then 4 minutes walk to your building.

They're putting up gates, not fitting all the residents with ankle bracelets. More melodrama, in the same vein as 'it's being turned into a prison!'

They're putting up swipe systems so students will be "monitored" by res officials being able to tell when they enter the grounds and then how long it takes them to go up to their room. And they're being "restricted" because they can only use certain gates at certain times, despite no prior knowledge before moving in of anything like this.

Also Starring LeVar Burton

Tayto2000 wrote: »

Sorry, sorry, it was the William Wallace paraphrasing that got me! Along with, it has to be said, the general tone of belligerence and incoherence that are in contrast to your normal posting style here. You must be very tired indeed... And to be fair, it was an enquiry not an accusation!

...Although you do seem to have leaped to a lot of conclusions on my part in your post! I never said you were ranting nor said you were an undergrad nor have I lived what you seem to think is a 'sheltered existence'. I would consider the residences to be a sheltered existence compared to renting in Dublin.

I like the capital letters for the 'Draconian Regime' though. Out of interest, if you were collecting signatures, are you sure they were all from residents or were you just asking everyone going in and out? Could have been visitors after all...;)

We were collecting signatures from all students, not just though living on residences, although for the most part it was people who lived there that were going in and out.

yevveh

I don't go to UCD anymore but when I did, shindigs in Belgrove and Merville were fantastic. I know this must piss the hell out of people there, so I can see why res might want to prevent guests coming in. Still, it should be up to the people who pay the rent to decide on whether they want it or not. I'd say a majority would prefer to have it as it was before. If there's too much noise on a weekday, you'll probably get kicked out by an RA. Aside from that, what's the problem? (bar the fact that you mightn't like having strangers sleeping on your couch/bench/floor etc )

Stabshauptmann

I find this all very interesting.
I was on campus on Friday and wanted to take a short cut to roebuck road via the roebuck campus and out past the law building.

I had to pass through two sets of gates, both were closed and manned, and both were opened for me without any to-do.

Compared to many apartment complexes I've been to, the security arrangements are not that strict.

However, UCD isnt the real world. I've seen a very steady move over the past 5 years (Im told by older siblings that they didnt really see much change up until 6 or so years ago) to quieten UCD. Stricter controls on alcohol, restrictions on society activity and advertising, a larger and more rigid security force, the elimination of craic soc.

I dont see this as a positive thing. University is a place of study, but its also about the craic.
I think UCD will lose a lot of appeal and will see a drop off in number, which is something the current admin cares a lot about judging by league tables and advertising.
I also think students are getting less out of the college experience.

panda100 wrote: »

can they not treat adults as adults?!

Heres an honest exercise for you. Think back to yourself in 5th year in secondary school. No doubt you'll notice a huge maturity difference between your younger self and the "adult" you are today. When you were younger though, did you realise how immature you were?

I wouldnt start off any campaign / complaint that students are responsible adults, or that they dont party and cause mischief because right there you've lost the right to be treated as adults for not either recognising the truth or obscuring it. Catch 22 I know.

I think the best way to deal with alcohol/parties on campus is common sense. Gates and strong security presence arent the answer. Smart security who know when to let things slide and when to break up a party are.

Leitrim-Mick

I'm sorry but does anyone really believe that three or four gates across campus res is going to be the answer to the problem of crime on Campus Accomodation? For one thing, the entrances the gates are covering are easily avoidable if you are fit, healthy, and lively enough to jump over a wall or a fence. If you see the fence at Merville it's a joke, you could talk it in to coming down. If sum1 is determined enough to get into campus then they will, whether by jumping fences or swapping cards or making a run for it past security guards when they're distracted, it's completely unrealistic. It's also completely ridicolous with the current economic climate that this policy is being implemented now by college authorities. It's costing approx. 220,000 Euro to implement it, taking into account extra security measures for big events like the UCD Ball. The main reason the college authorities are bringing in these gates is because of a fear of the repeats of scenes last year at the end of term when there was damage done on Campus, specifically in Glenomena and Belgrove. The answer to that problem is not gates and Draconian Rule, it's smart security and extra numbers of security out on the day as well. The UCD Ball kept people in the Pit area from when they entered till they left with no chance of re entry. I understand completely that this was the only way to run such an event (what with the fear of people sneaking in drink) but the college authorities should have been more prepared to deal with the situation which arose after the event. This new policy being pursued by the university is reactionary, cowardly, and above all unfair to ordinary UCD Students, both on and off campus. I'm fully behind anyone who supports direct action to reverse this policy and to send a message to the UCD Authorities that the college can't treat students like boarding school dormers. I say No to Gates, No to Reactionary Security, and No to Brady, Butler, and Brierly taking away the rights of UCD Students.

passive

Leitrim-Mick wrote: »

I'm sorry but does anyone really believe that three or four gates across campus res is going to be the answer to the problem of crime on Campus Accomodation? For one thing, the entrances the gates are covering are easily avoidable if you are fit, healthy, and lively enough to jump over a wall or a fence. If you see the fence at Merville it's a joke, you could talk it in to coming down. If sum1 is determined enough to get into campus then they will, whether by jumping fences or swapping cards or making a run for it past security guards when they're distracted, it's completely unrealistic. It's also completely ridicolous with the current economic climate that this policy is being implemented now by college authorities. It's costing approx. 220,000 Euro to implement it, taking into account extra security measures for big events like the UCD Ball. The main reason the college authorities are bringing in these gates is because of a fear of the repeats of scenes last year at the end of term when there was damage done on Campus, specifically in Glenomena and Belgrove. The answer to that problem is not gates and Draconian Rule, it's smart security and extra numbers of security out on the day as well. The UCD Ball kept people in the Pit area from when they entered till they left with no chance of re entry. I understand completely that this was the only way to run such an event (what with the fear of people sneaking in drink) but the college authorities should have been more prepared to deal with the situation which arose after the event. This new policy being pursued by the university is reactionary, cowardly, and above all unfair to ordinary UCD Students, both on and off campus. I'm fully behind anyone who supports direct action to reverse this policy and to send a message to the UCD Authorities that the college can't treat students like boarding school dormers. I say No to Gates, No to Reactionary Security, and No to Brady, Butler, and Brierly taking away the rights of UCD Students.

I'msorrywhat?

"It's costing approx. 220,000 Euro to implement it, taking into account extra security measures for big events like the UCD Ball"

ha.. he... hold on, please tell me I'm misunderstanding. Do you mean "including" when you say "taking into account?" And does that mean your statement is actually "it costs 220,000 euro for these gates if you include a lot of other unrelated things as being the cost of these gates?

rainbow kirby

Kaptain Redeye wrote: »

However, UCD isnt the real world. I've seen a very steady move over the past 5 years (Im told by older siblings that they didnt really see much change up until 6 or so years ago) to quieten UCD. Stricter controls on alcohol, restrictions on society activity and advertising, a larger and more rigid security force, the elimination of craic soc.

I dont see this as a positive thing. University is a place of study, but its also about the craic.
I think UCD will lose a lot of appeal and will see a drop off in number, which is something the current admin cares a lot about judging by league tables and advertising.
I also think students are getting less out of the college experience.

Just want to agree wholeheartedly with this. While I may not be getting involved with anything on campus really now (through a mixture of no money, not particularly wanting to spend my nights with drunken 18 year olds and having so much work to do), it's very, very plain to see that in the last few years things have been a lot quieter. I've been in UCD since 2002, there was a lot more on when I was in my early days there. The craic, the society activities and the nights out are all a large part of the college experience, and without them, part of the experience is lost.

Leitrim-Mick

Yes I have it on good authority that with everything factored in including security wages (approx 168,000 Euro) , extra security for big events, the cost of putting up the gates, and allowing for times when the gates will not be manned (i.e times during the night when there will be less security around Campus) the total projected cost of the new Security Project will be in and around 220,000 Euro. This is at a time when the college were refusing to put up around 30,000 for the continuation of a decent Library Service in the college.

scop

I'm in UCD since 2002 as well rainbow and I agree. The place has undergone a quite blatant shut-down the buzz affair. Not that UCD was ever wild, but these days the students act like lambs, and I sometimes feel I'm walking around a 24-hour outdoor concert with all those neon-jackets.

Not that students seem to care. In fact I suspect many folk these days will actively side with the admin side of things because nobody really wants to do anything anymore.

I'll give kudos to Dutch Soc for their attempts though. Bring back craic soc, unofficial djs by the lake, and crowds big enough to keep the security away (and that is how it can be done with some effort).

Tayto2000

scop wrote: »

I'll give kudos to Dutch Soc for their attempts though. Bring back craic soc, unofficial djs by the lake, and crowds big enough to keep the security away (and that is how it can be done with some effort).

So you wouldn't see any link between craicsoc's activities and the apparent decision to up security in recent years then?
Ironic really considering all the news articles at the time (And indeed up until recently when Pulse took over) were bemoaning the chronic shortage of security for campus.

rainbow kirby

scop wrote: »

I'm in UCD since 2002 as well rainbow and I agree. The place has undergone a quite blatant shut-down the buzz affair. Not that UCD was ever wild, but these days the students act like lambs, and I sometimes feel I'm walking around a 24-hour outdoor concert with all those neon-jackets.

Not that students seem to care. In fact I suspect many folk these days will actively side with the admin side of things because nobody really wants to do anything anymore.

Full semesterisation has kinda killed some of the buzz too, an awful lot of events used to happen in the first semester (because most courses didn't have exams at Christmas), but now when there's a round of exams after 12 weeks there's a very limited window to have anything on before it's time for the end of term crunch period and exam study time.

I'm not complaining about the semesterised structure, sometimes I think I'd be screwed without it, and CS had it before it was mandatory anyway, but realistically now the windows for societies to organise anything interesting are a lot smaller than they were before.

Basically - UCD is not what it used to be, and the college experience you will get here does lose something compared to how it used to be.

princess-sprkle

what way are they enforcing the no visitors rule? they stopped a friend of mine coming over at 4 in the afternoon the other day. surely the license to reside only says no over night guests? is it basically lock down at 2?

that said though, not a sign of security as i was coming in tonight, big wide open gates at merville anyway.

Stabshauptmann

Tayto2000 wrote: »

So you wouldn't see any link between craicsoc's activities and the apparent decision to up security in recent years then?
Ironic really considering all the news articles at the time (And indeed up until recently when Pulse took over) were bemoaning the chronic shortage of security for campus.

Every single perspective SU welfare officer promised more security and more lighting on campus.

Perhaps Connor Fingelton is to blame

Personally I thought craic soc was a reaction to the college becoming dull

Tayto2000

Kaptain Redeye wrote: »

Every single perspective SU welfare officer promised more security and more lighting on campus.

Perhaps Connor Fingelton is to blame

Personally I thought craic soc was a reaction to the college becoming dull

I think that was part of it alright, but Craicsoc were also about the 'reclaim the campus(Streets)' bit which I think annoyed some people who were there for the craic, not the politics. Some of the events they organised were essentially a direct challenge to the college authorities and were alway likely to generate a big security response... And personally I think the fact that they essentially won some of those confrontations has influenced the thinking on campus security since i.e. it's a lot stricter and there's more of it.

DutchSoc seem to have got it right, all the craic, none of the hassle...

Stabshauptmann

Tayto2000 wrote: »

Craicsoc were also about the 'reclaim the campus(Streets)' bit which I think annoyed some people who were there for the craic, not the politics.

Thats me in a nutshell.

DutchSoc seem to have got it right, all the craic, none of the hassle...

Well I'd like to think so

ratucdm

Tayto2000 wrote: »

I suspect the gates idea probably came in after the unbelievable amount of destruction in Belgrove on the last day of exams in Summer this year. And of course rather than suggest that it might have been Belgrove residents, the finger of blame was pointed at non-residents who had come in for parties, so what's the obvious solution...?

I don't think the gates per se are a bad idea, what probably needs changing is the rules for guests etc. Plus no-one seems to know if it's going to be a manned entry point like a porters hut, swipe entry or what on the finished articles.

In all fairness, it wasn't just Belgrove Students who wrecked Belgrove, and I don't think Brierley approved of the crowds in Glenomena and Merville, not to mention the broken windows and stuff throughout res!! I think gates are kinda a good idea tho

Tayto2000

princess-sprkle wrote: »

what way are they enforcing the no visitors rule? they stopped a friend of mine coming over at 4 in the afternoon the other day. surely the license to reside only says no over night guests? is it basically lock down at 2?

that said though, not a sign of security as i was coming in tonight, big wide open gates at merville anyway.

Maybe it was just for end of term..? Any sign of them being manned since then?

antSionnach

scop wrote: »

I'm in UCD since 2002 as well rainbow and I agree. The place has undergone a quite blatant shut-down the buzz affair. Not that UCD was ever wild, but these days the students act like lambs, and I sometimes feel I'm walking around a 24-hour outdoor concert with all those neon-jackets.

Agree absolutely with this. I've been here since 2004 and the atmosphere on campus has revolved enormously in that time.

I remember in first year, after a few too many pints in the Sports Bar as it was, sitting on top of the shelter along the main promenade with some mates smoking cigarettes and stargazing, some security guys happening along and telling us to come down, not in an aggressive way but very amicably. They often intercepted us taking home street furniture, alcohol, and doing other silly things with a sort of amused admonition - including cutting a clamp from a mates car with an anatomy saw- nobody got hurt or in trouble because security had the common sense to differentiate between harmless fun and the misdemeanours that inevitably go on in institutions like this and on the other hand the harmful security or health and safety incidents. I think they've lost the run of themselves now.

So many of my memories of the social aspect of ucd including parties in my old apartment in Belgrove and later in Merville, and all the harmless mischief that often ensued, is something that unfortunately a lot of first years in 2008 are missing out on.

People who lost a few hours sleep because of us and our corrupt relationship with a friendly RA back in 2004 are no longer regretting some random tired morning those few years ago, but for people like me, those crazy nights will form an important part of my growing up, and my overall college experience.

jojoucd

Came back early for a couple of days. No changes. Any update on the gates?