SU bashing and complaints

Ms. Education

SU bashing is quite common so I thought it might be useful if I started this thread. So I'm asking what's wrong with what I've done/what I'm doing this year? I can't answer for other officers, but I can respond to any criticisms of me or answer any questions related to my job. So let's have it..

(P.S. - In case my name didn't give it away, I'm the Education Officer )

Dante on Fire

Ms. Education wrote: »

SU bashing is quite common so I thought it might be useful if I started this thread. So I'm asking what's wrong with what I've done/what I'm doing this year? I can't answer for other officers, but I can respond to any criticisms of me or answer any questions related to my job. So let's have it..

(P.S. - In case my name didn't give it away, I'm the Education Officer )

oh i may have started something here - look i want to get something clear there is no way i want to bash the union in any way

as a matter of fact i'm quite happy (and albeit proud) of the work your doing this year and i'll be the first to say it cudos to you

I dont want you to think i'm on a campaign to say the union is terrible - far from it. i think the work being done ther particuarly by yourself is great and many dont know about it.

Ms. Education

I wasn't so much referring to you, as a number of threads that seemed to come back to the same thing. Thanks for the post, but I honestly started this thread to see if anyone had any problems with my work or lack thereof. If I don't know what I'm doing wrong, I can't fix it or at least explain why I'm doing it the way I am.

TEMPLAR KNIGHT

Ms. Education wrote: »

SU bashing is quite common so I thought it might be useful if I started this thread. So I'm asking what's wrong with what I've done/what I'm doing this year? I can't answer for other officers, but I can respond to any criticisms of me or answer any questions related to my job. So let's have it..

(P.S. - In case my name didn't give it away, I'm the Education Officer )

well you helped me quite a bit this year and i thank you for that! forget about the rest of them!

Dante on Fire

Ms. Education wrote: »

I wasn't so much referring to you, as a number of threads that seemed to come back to the same thing. Thanks for the post, but I honestly started this thread to see if anyone had any problems with my work or lack thereof. If I don't know what I'm doing wrong, I can't fix it or at least explain why I'm doing it the way I am.

best thing i can say is well done your doing a great job but from now on i want to be able to write on your white board without it being attacked by a certain bettie boop fanatic with a knack for awkward turtles

cryptic? damn roysh it is!

cson

Law & Euro tbh

On a serious note, fair play for coming onto boards and trying to help/improve your office. It's very commendable.

Mossin

cson wrote: »

On a serious note, fair play for coming onto boards and trying to help/improve your office. It's very commendable.

I agree to an extent...there are 2 other sabbat officers on boards already...do they not communicate and perhaps inform each other that this forum exists and is a haven for questions and problems that need addressing from UL students, most of whom dont have an affiliation with class reps and the SU?

Seriously like...its week 11, and you are only here now?

There have been lots of education related queries here which most of us havent the specific knowledge to answer...

This is not a rant at Aoife, I'm just wondering as to why it has taken so long since being elected to be on this forum?

A quick google search of "ULSU elections 2009" and the 1st link shows a thread from here talking about this topic: http://www.google.ie/#hl=en&safe=off&q=ULSU+elections+2009&meta=&aq=f&oq=ULSU+elections+2009&fp=a4997684ba9eb996

cson

Very fair point Mossin, there have been a lot of instances where people asking education specific questions have been told to talk to the education officer - which would have been solved easily now your on boards.

ergonomics

Mossin wrote: »

I agree to an extent...there are 2 other sabbat officers on boards already...do they not communicate and perhaps inform each other that this forum exists and is a haven for questions and problems that need addressing from UL students, most of whom dont have an affiliation with class reps and the SU?

Just in case anyone doesn't know, I am one of the other 2 officers that Mossin refers to. Fair play to Aoife for making this thread but there is one very simple reason why I haven't made a similar thread.

I have posted on Boards throughout my entire 4 years in UL. I enjoy coming here and reading the threads. If I'm having a bad day I love having a rant or reading other rants in the bitch thread. There are many reasons why I come here. If I had to see a thread every single day telling me how sh!t I am at my job then it would take all the fun out of. Boards is one of my guilty pleasures. I don't want work to start taking away from it.

Another big thing is that I would now count a lot of the regular posters on here as my friends. If I were to see them bitching and bashing the work I am doing I would honestly be very very hurt. I have an open door policy. Anyone is welcome to come and give out to me or give me criticism, and if my "friends" were to resort to an online, very public forum, rather than coming to me in person I'd be heartbroken.

If people do want to bitch about me or my work they can work away. I'm not going to stop them and I will take heed of anything that is said. I read every thread on here, and I have gone back and read old threads to see what sort of criticisms were made before. Like I said earlier, the reason I didn't ask for criticism before is because I would like to have one or two places that I can go where I don't have to talk about work/read about work/hear about work.

Ms. Education

Mossin wrote: »

Seriously like...its week 11, and you are only here now?

There have been lots of education related queries here which most of us havent the specific knowledge to answer...

This is not a rant at Aoife, I'm just wondering as to why it has taken so long since being elected to be on this forum?

The other Sabbats on boards joined years ago, as students for whatever reason. Genuinely no offence to people who like boards, but I had no interest in it as a student, so I didn't join. I see it as another way to contact students, so I joined yesterday. However, considering that most of the people who have commented on this thread have been in contact with/had loads of opportunities to contact me during the year, I'm not really reaching many new people unfortunately.

If you felt very strongly about me being on boards, then you should have said it to me. I'm not being aggressive or sarcastic when I say this, it's genuinely how I work. Tell me something and I can do it, expect me to read your mind, you'll be waiting a while. I've been taking suggestions and comments on board all year from people so if you'd said it to me then I would have been on sooner, rather than knocking me because I didn't join before now. The same argument of "why didn't you do this (sooner)?" could be used for every forum, event, night out, talk, lecture, envelope opening, etc. because boards isn't the only place that students give feedback and it isn't the place where most students give feedback.

Aside from that it's up to individuals whether or not they want to join boards. I chose to in an attempt to improve my office. It isn't part of the job, it's beyond the job.

Finally I've been looking for feedback since I started here from lots of different places; Class Reps, random students (through other students and just by approaching them inside and outside the Union building), other officers. I started this thread to get criticisms of the way I do my job and ways that I could improve. I can't affect the speed at which I did something in the past.

bluedolphin

In fairness to ergonomics and ninty9er (the two sabbats who post here), I have to echo what Aoife (ergnomics) said earlier. There is a line. Being a sabbat becomes so much a part of your life that sometimes you just need a break. And while going on the UL forum is hardly going to be much of one, it is a circle of people discussing not specifically union issues and those not necessarily in and out of the union building every day. Believe it or not, sabbats are real people too with their own personal lives and aspirations. Their registration on boards is as board users first and foremost (as in the case of ninty9er and ergonomics) rather than as SU Sabbatical Officers (as in the case of Ms Education).

That goes beyond just answering practical questions (such as "how do I change my modules?" or "how do I submit an article to An Focal?") but when it comes to actual discussion, it's not fair to treat, as example (sorry Aoife!) Ergonomics' answer as the official SU Communications Officer reply. She may have different opinions on a topic than the official SU line. I know that I refrained from participating in some discussions last year on those grounds that my "Bluedolphin" (aka me) opinion differed from that I should have if I was replying as "SU Communications Officer".

I don't know if the policy forbidding dual accounts applies in this instance as technically it is "two" different people. Why should someone use their personal account to answer professionally? Also, in this instance, it just so happens that we know that Ergonomics is Aoife Ní and ninty9er is Derek; what about anonymity?

Just my tuppence worth!

mrmanire

Oh God...

A whole lot of SU self importance here...

NickDrake

The SU has been censoring threads and posts on this forum for years. Anything that was said against the SU was either deleted or the thread locked.

Search for it if you don't believe me.
Most of the users on here over the years were in the SU or involved in it in some way or another. In other words part of the clique.

So I am doubting that the SU will be allowed a good roasting on here as it has been censored for years by them.

I actually find it a bit ironic to be honest that this thread was started, considering what has happened over the years here with censorship.

mrmanire

NickDrake wrote: »

The SU has been censoring threads and posts on this forum for years. Anything that was said against the SU was either deleted or the thread locked.

Search for it if you don't believe me.
Most of the users on here over the years were in the SU or involved in it in some way or another. In other words part of the clique.

So I am doubting that the SU will be allowed a good roasting on here as it has been censored for years by them.

I actually find it a bit ironic to be honest that this thread was started, considering what has happened over the years here with censorship.

To be honest; I think you are exaggerating a bit there but there definitely seems to be a link between the mods and the SU and definite censorship.

NickDrake

I don't think I am! Just wait for it now. This thread will be locked

rmacm

Moderators of this forum since it started:

Nukem - no SU connection.
kaimera - no SU connection.
440Hz - no SU connection.
Peteee - no SU connection.
Sceptre - former communications officer.

That's 4 moderators who've never served in the SU in any capacity that I know of. They may know people in the SU but it certainly doesn't mean they are biased.

Censored by the SU.....lol.

NickDrake

rmacm wrote: »

Moderators of this forum since it started:

Nukem - no SU connection.
kaimera - no SU connection.
440Hz - no SU connection.
Peteee - no SU connection.
Sceptre - former communications officer.

That's 4 moderators who've never served in the SU in any capacity that I know of. They may know people in the SU but it certainly doesn't mean they are biased.

Censored by the SU.....lol.

U serious? No censorship? The above have connections with the SU and thats enough. As I said they were not all in the SU but are connected to it as they will be part of the clique.

If you don't believe the censorship just look at the threads on An Focal over the years for example.

mrmanire

rmacm wrote: »

Moderators of this forum since it started:

Nukem - no SU connection.
kaimera - no SU connection.
440Hz - no SU connection.
Peteee - no SU connection.
Sceptre - former communications officer.

That's 4 moderators who've never served in the SU in any capacity that I know of. They may know people in the SU but it certainly doesn't mean they are biased.

Censored by the SU.....lol.

Apologies. My only problem is with Sceptre so. Definitely has been most prolific in stifling SU related discussion over the years. We all have a right to complain and exhibit our opinions don't we?

NickDrake

mrmanire wrote: »

Apologies. My only problem is with Sceptre so. Definitely has been most prolific in stifling SU related discussion over the years. We all have a right to complain and exhibit our opinions don't we?

Spot on!

rmacm

mrmanire wrote: »

Apologies. My only problem is with Sceptre so. Definitely has been most prolific in stifling SU related discussion over the years. We all have a right to complain and exhibit our opinions don't we?

I don't think anyone ever questioned your right to complain and exhibit/express opinions. Sceptre is also an Admin and formerly an Smod on boards so he also has to make sure that the forum operates within the forums charter and the site wide rules.

Perhaps you should consider what his duties as a Mod, Smod and Admin are/were before you go claiming censorship.

Is it time for the match and a pint soon?

mrmanire

rmacm wrote: »

Is it time for the match and a pint soon?

Ditto

Peteee

NickDrake wrote: »

The SU has been censoring threads and posts on this forum for years. Anything that was said against the SU was either deleted or the thread locked.

Search for it if you don't believe me.
Most of the users on here over the years were in the SU or involved in it in some way or another. In other words part of the clique.

So I am doubting that the SU will be allowed a good roasting on here as it has been censored for years by them.

I actually find it a bit ironic to be honest that this thread was started, considering what has happened over the years here with censorship.

This is massively untrue as Rmacm has pointed out. Most of the mods have had nothing to do with the SU.

There are a few SU people on here to be sure. The same type of people who are interested in UL, by reading an UL message board are going to be the type of people who are interested in the union.

AFAIK there used to be (Or maybe still is) an official ULSU message board. The UL board on here is completely unofficial and has nothing to do with either UL or the ULSU.

I'll be watching this thread, but to suggest a massive SU conspiracy to lock down negative threads about UL and the ULSU is madness.

mrmanire

Interesting how the HPSS thread was closed down when it started mentioning the SU...

Dante on Fire

Peteee wrote: »

This is massively untrue as Rmacm has pointed out. Most of the mods have had nothing to do with the SU.

There are a few SU people on here to be sure. The same type of people who are interested in UL, by reading an UL message board are going to be the type of people who are interested in the union.

AFAIK there used to be (Or maybe still is) an official ULSU message board. The UL board on here is completely unofficial and has nothing to do with either UL or the ULSU.

I'll be watching this thread, but to suggest a massive SU conspiracy to lock down negative threads about UL and the ULSU is madness.

i must say i think i agree here - as quick as i am to point out a fault something like this is a bit mental and as far as i know the s.u are not going to get rid of a thread which in essence was put up to try and improve an officers quality of service.

but what with me being new to boards i have never seen a thread removed on the basis that it was anti union - i definatly agree with mrmanire when he said 'We all have a right to complain and exhibit our opinions don't we? This is why i think that the ulsu forum removal from the old website was detremental - how are you going to improve a service if you have no opportunity to hear a concern or problem

but bringing it back -i've never heard of the union locking a thread. but i'm new to all this lark

NickDrake

Ok fair enough but there has been reports by members of the SU t have a thread canceled or deleted and these have been met by the Mods.

I dont know which Mod does what but censorship has been evident. Perhaps one who is a censor is immune to what they are doing?

This thread should stay open as it was created by an SU member for people to complain.

Already an a former SU sabat ( Bluedolphin) had a go at the thread. I am sure she reported it too.

NickDrake

mrmanire wrote: »

Interesting how the HPSS thread was closed down when it started mentioning the SU...

Not that is a perfect example. Only closed when it mentioned the SU

Dante on Fire

NickDrake wrote: »

Not that is a perfect example. Only closed when it mentioned the SU

anyone remember what it said?

NickDrake

Dante on Fire wrote: »

i must say i think i agree here - as quick as i am to point out a fault something like this is a bit mental and as far as i know the s.u are not going to get rid of a thread which in essence was put up to try and improve an officers quality of service.

but what with me being new to boards i have never seen a thread removed on the basis that it was anti union - i definatly agree with mrmanire when he said 'We all have a right to complain and exhibit our opinions don't we? This is why i think that the ulsu forum removal from the old website was detremental - how are you going to improve a service if you have no opportunity to hear a concern or problem

but bringing it back -i've never heard of the union locking a thread. but i'm new to all this lark

Do a simple search. An focal threads. There were loads last year and the year before. I suggest you do. And a recent one is the HPSS thread.

Thats why I find this thread ironic considering all they have done in the past to stop complaints and so on.

Its good to see Ms Education creating this thread. A revolt in the SU perhaps??

NickDrake

Dante on Fire wrote: »

anyone remember what it said?

Just find it there on the forum. It was last week

Dante on Fire

that thread seemed to go around athe same roundabout but i dunno from reading it it seemed sceptre stepped in when it went to name calling and off the topic.

i think that this thread is a essentially move from the education office but maybe this thread should'nt have been called what it was.

its purpose in her report was to try and help her improve her service.

it was supposed to specific queries and problems....but it is labelled su bashing and complaints...i feel this thread will reap what it sows..

its a pity...it will be a s.u bashing thread....and wont be what it was intended

NickDrake

Dante on Fire wrote: »

that thread seemed to go around athe same roundabout but i dunno from reading it it seemed sceptre stepped in when it went to name calling and off the topic.

i think that this thread is a essentially move from the education office but maybe this thread should'nt have been called what it was.

its purpose in her report was to try and help her improve her service.

it was supposed to specific queries and problems....but it is labelled su bashing and complaints...i feel this thread will reap what it sows..

its a pity...it will be a s.u bashing thread....and wont be what it was intended

She called it that??

mrmanire

People wouldn't be knocking the SU if there wasn't something there to knock. I don't think people just do it for the craic....

Dante on Fire

NickDrake wrote: »

She called it that??

well look at her opening post clearly something has reached the union about dissatisfaction - probably from something i said no doub as it came a day after a post that i put up and deleted -as it was a response to who i wanted they got the message.

its just a pity i can see that the point is for her to want to try and improve the office -which is commendable and i have great respect for it

but like i said this is tangentville and we are on the main road in

NickDrake

Dante on Fire wrote: »

well look at her opening post clearly something has reached the union about dissatisfaction - probably from something i said no doub as it came a day after a post that i put up and deleted -as it was a response to who i wanted they got the message.

its just a pity i can see that the point is for her to want to try and improve the office -which is commendable and i have great respect for it

but like i said this is tangentville and we are on the main road in

Ah you are not getting my point. I am getting at the fact that it is ironic that such a thread should be started by the SU after all the censorship on here over the years.

I am not going off on a tangent.

Dante on Fire

NickDrake wrote: »

Ah you are not getting my point. I am getting at the fact that it is ironic that such a thread should be started by the SU after all the censorship on here over the years.

I am not going off on a tangent.

oh i do get your point of course - but i think that this is an individual sabbats attempt at improving her own office -this is why it should have been called something else.

i dunno bout censorship on here but if it is started by the union as a whole -as stated by mis education - she cant answer for anyone else so it deals solely with her which shows no official line bar her office and she wants to hear about those relating to complaints education -wise

but if there has been censorship on the unions part then it points that its not about tackling the problem but covering it up

and if im honest i have not seen that on this... but respect any correction - with substancial evidence

NickDrake

Dante on Fire wrote: »

oh i do get your point of course - but i think that this is an individual sabbats attempt at improving her own office -this is why it should have been called something else.

i dunno bout censorship on here but if it is started by the union as a whole -as stated by mis education - she cant answer for anyone else so it deals solely with her which shows no official line bar her office and she wants to hear about those relating to complaints education -wise

but if there has been censorship on the unions part then it points that its not about tackling the problem but covering it up

and if im honest i have not seen that on this... but respect any correction - with substancial evidence

Easy - search for the An Focal threads as I said. There is also a thread somewhere where a person running for election had their post removed. They also had their posters removed on campus. Think it was 2 years ago now. I will find the thread if I can. If not I will try and get him on here himself to prove the censorship issue a few years back.

Ya I respect ms education for starting this thread as it is certainly against what the SU has done on here before.

Dante on Fire

NickDrake wrote: »

Easy - search for the An Focal threads as I said. There is also a thread somewhere where a person running for election had their post removed. They also had their posters removed on campus. Think it was 2 years ago now. I will find the thread if I can. If not I will try and get him on here himself to prove the censorship issue a few years back.

Ya I respect ms education for starting this thread as it is certainly against what the SU has done on here before.

As a future candidate i would be very interested in seeing those...bit hard to believe tbh - removing posters i can only say that were they defamatory in any way? not that i'm sticking up for the union its just a very serious thing- i'd be very interested in those. that thread would be a very good read!:D

bluedolphin

NickDrake wrote: »

Already an a former SU sabat ( Bluedolphin) had a go at the thread. I am sure she reported it too.

I didn't have a go at the thread. By all means have a SU bashing thread.

If you re-read my post I was merely saying that I don't think it's fair to expect current officers who happen to have Boards.ie accounts (namely, ninty9er and ergonomics) to answer professionally under these personal accounts. They are entitled to have lives outside of the SU too. By all means if they wish to answer in a professional capacity, then they can do should but it shouldn't be expected of them on here under their personal accounts which they set up long before they were even thinking of running for office. That's what I was getting at.

Tbqh, I couldn't give a flying rat's arse about the SU anymore or what anyone says about it. I'm living in London in a different university with a different union which I actively chose not to get involved with so I couldn't tell you one thing or another about it or what they do (or even how many 'they' are). So to say that I'm having a "go" at the thread (on the grounds that it's bashing the establishment I'm so ardently in favour of defending, allegedly) is quite bonkers.

Re: "SU censorship" of threads here: IMHO, sometimes expressions of grievances with the SU cross the fine line between attacking the office/establishment and the actual person which makes things sticky from a legal point of view and therefore more liable to be closed than a thread on "where is the best hot chicken roll in UL?" or "how do I connect my laptop to the wireless network?", for example.

Re: the HPSS thread - again, general boards.ie rules states that once a thread has served its function it will be locked. What part of "HPSS is shít" (or whatever the title was) demonstrates to serve the discussion of "I think the SU is a HPSS conspiracy". My own memory of 13 years gearing up to the Leaving Cert has the mantra, "Answer the question you're asked" flashing to the fore of my mind right now.

And to point out right now, this thread too is going off-topic, and may well be closed because it's no longer serving its title's purpose. But of course then there'll be accusations of another SU conspiracy. *shrug*

Edit: Oh, and for the record, I didn't "report" it. Like I stated above, I couldn't give a fiddler's what people think about the SU (on the grounds that I know what the lads are going through and it's up to them to make the mistakes or make the breaks) so I really doubt that this thread is the most pressing thing on my agenda right now. In fact, I've an essay due on Friday and I'm just using it as a method of procrastination! :pac:

Edit II:
And just one final thing - is the notion of 'active citizenship' unheard of in this modern society? How can it be expected of five (six, including PSA) sabbats to individually contact each student by every possible means? Fair play to the education officer for actively seeking out boards and setting up a professional account to deal with issues relating to her job, but what about all the students that don't have boards.ie accounts to access her this way? Yes, sabbats have a responsibility to actively seek feedback from their constituents but constituents have an equal responsibility to make the effort to tell sabbats. There are too many modes of communication for a group of five people to individually communicate with 10,000+ students... It was easier 10 years ago; easier again 20 years ago. To give them credit, there is a website, facebook, bebo, twitter, skype as well as standard email, phone and face-to-face office hours (maybe more? I'm not sure). What efforts are those with complaints doing to make their complaints heard? Sitting back on your laurels waiting for sabbats to come to you is naive and selfish. With rights comes responsibility.

NickDrake

bluedolphin wrote: »

Re: "SU censorship" of threads here: IMHO, sometimes expressions of grievances with the SU cross the fine line between attacking the office/establishment and the actual person which makes things sticky from a legal point of view and therefore more liable to be closed than a thread on "where is the best hot chicken roll in UL?" or "how do I connect my laptop to the wireless network?", for example.

Legal? I don't think anything said on these UL boards would be deemed defamatory. If that is the legal point you are referring to.

To be honest, saying it might be a sticky legal situation is bonkers. You made need to read up on the defamation bill there.

cson

I'd definitely like to echo what bluedolphin said, excellent post.

Perhpas the thread title Ms.Education chose is a touch misleading. I'd imagine she's actually looking for ways to improve her office and make it a successful term for herself and the SU. As I have said it's a commendable step and should she help even only one student here then it's a successful endeavour.

Its a fair point to make that SU officers are people too and as such they may have different opinions as to what the SU official line is. I think we should respect them as firstly posters and then if they choose to act on behalf of the union then well and good. I know both ergonomics and Ninty9er have contributed hugely to this forum and have given great advice to people who have asked for it here.

I also feel that people unhappy with the SU or how it is run should do more than complain about it on a message board if they truly feel aggreived. It's much like the numerous people who blame Fianna Fail and the current Government for the current crisis the country is in - they talk to Joe and complain to the high heavens yet never do anything about it. If you do feel conspiracies or aggrievance at the SU, contact them or organise a protest.

As regards locking threads, moderators are here to serve boards.ie and to hold in interest the site itself and its posters. Every thread that has been locked has been done so with the interests of boards.ie itself and I challenge anyone to find an unjustifiably locked thread on the UL forum. Bear in mind that there is no free speech here - boards.ie is a limited company and can be subject to legal action if you make unfounded claims or allegations. I apologise to Sceptre or Petee if I've overstepped the mark in stating this as you guys are the mods at the end of the day.

Lastly; I personally have no issue with the SU. Granted in my 2.5 years here, I've felt previous SU's have done a better job but I'd imagine you're working on a restricted budget so that's understandable. As bd alluded to above, there is an element of being proactive about the SU - I'm sure all the officers' doors are always open and you'll find someone to listen and advise you if that's what you're looking for or take note of any suggestions you may have. At the end of the day, the SU is for the students and elected by the students to serve students interests.

Ms. Education

Ms. Education wrote: »

SU bashing is quite common so I thought it might be useful if I started this thread. So I'm asking what's wrong with what I've done/what I'm doing this year? I can't answer for other officers, but I can respond to any criticisms of me or answer any questions related to my job. So let's have it..

The purpose and subject of this thread

sceptre

I'll pop in a longer post later when I have a few minutes to spare but I lock threads when they get abusive or are veering towards belonging on the short bus. I follow the same policy in Politics and Literature. If anyone thinks I've any interest in stifling conversation on the topic of the SU or criticism of it, then you've never met me and can't read.

Incidentally, complaints about moderation go on the Help Desk. In the same way that I issued an open invite when closing that HPSS thread (which had strongly veered into idiotland), you have an open invite to go there and complain about the moderation, as people have from any forum on boards.ie. As an admin on the site and a local moderator of this board, I'm perfectly down with people raising issues about moderation in any way. The general procedure is to PM the mod first, then take it to the Category Mod and then to Help Desk if nothing's been resolved to reasonable satisfaction. That's all in the welcome email and the site FAQ, which are useful to read. I'd suggest that you take the opportunity in this thread to discuss the SU or the specific aspects of it which the education officer invited but hey, it's your quarter and everyone has the option of criticising with a point or warbling along without one. That's a call everyone can make by themselves. irish people have a habit of complaining without a point. Complain with a point. it works so much better - X is wrong, Y is wrong and Z should be done better. That's what you probably should do or at least what I'd suggest.

Seriously, anyone who thinks that any mod here has stifled debate is a bit of a card - I love a bit of discussion and controversy as long as it isn't in shortbus land. Things always get better with a bit of reasonable criticism and discussion.

Paddy, if you want to go looking for the threads as a future candidate or not it's quite easy to search for An Focal or anything else. There's an excellent google search on the front page here. Anything to do with any past discussion is really easy to find - all you have to do is type in the words that are longer than three letters. It's really easy, you just have to make 20 seconds of effort.

Sifling debate, you've got to be kidding. Stifling idiocy and abuse yes.

cson wrote: »

As regards locking threads, moderators are here to serve boards.ie and to hold in interest the site itself and its posters. Every thread that has been locked has been done so with the interests of boards.ie itself and I challenge anyone to find an unjustifiably locked thread on the UL forum. Bear in mind that there is no free speech here - boards.ie is a limited company and can be subject to legal action if you make unfounded claims or allegations. I apologise to Sceptre or Petee if I've overstepped the mark in stating this as you guys are the mods at the end of the day.

No apology necessary. And also, you're bang on the money there. And unfortunately so few people bother theie asses to read the forum charter or the site rules and I say that to you as someone whom I'm pretty sure has.

Ms. Education wrote:

Ms. Education wrote: »

SU bashing is quite common so I thought it might be useful if I started this thread. So I'm asking what's wrong with what I've done/what I'm doing this year? I can't answer for other officers, but I can respond to any criticisms of me or answer any questions related to my job. So let's have it..

The purpose and subject of this thread

/me nods

If no-one pays attention to that and hence fails to take the opportunity to engage with an SU officer as opposed to complaining in the corner like Irish people often do, you're wasting your time. That's my view but I come bearing sense. Lots of sense. You don't have to say nice things; in fact there's an explicit invitation not to where appropriate.

Dante on Fire

sceptre wrote: »

I'll pop in a longer post later when I have a few minutes to spare but I lock threads when they get abusive or are veering towards belonging on the short bus. I follow the same policy in Politics and Literature. If anyone thinks I've any interest in stifling conversation on the topic of the SU or criticism of it, then you've never met me and can't read.

Incidentally, complaints about moderation go on the Help Desk. In the same way that I issued an open invite when closing that HPSS thread (which had strongly veered into idiotland), you have an open invite to go there and complain about the moderation, as people have from any forum on boards.ie. As an admin on the site and a local moderator of this board, I'm perfectly down with people raising issues about moderation in any way. The general procedure is to PM the mod first, then take it to the Category Mod and then to Help Desk if nothing's been resolved to reasonable satisfaction. That's all in the welcome email and the site FAQ, which are useful to read. I'd suggest that you take the opportunity in this thread to discuss the SU or the specific aspects of it which the education officer invited but hey, it's your quarter and everyone has the option of criticising with a point or warbling along without one. That's a call everyone can make by themselves. irish people have a habit of complaining without a point. Complain with a point. it works so much better - X is wrong, Y is wrong and Z should be done better. That's what you probably should do or at least what I'd suggest.

Seriously, anyone who thinks that any mod here has stifled debate is a bit of a card - I love a bit of discussion and controversy as long as it isn't in shortbus land. Things always get better with a bit of reasonable criticism and discussion.

Paddy, if you want to go looking for the threads as a future candidate or not it's quite easy to search for An Focal or anything else. There's an excellent google search on the front page here. Anything to do with any past discussion is really easy to find - all you have to do is type in the words that are longer than three letters. It's really easy, you just have to make 20 seconds of effort.

Sifling debate, you've got to be kidding. Stifling idiocy and abuse yes.


No apology necessary. And also, you're bang on the money there. And unfortunately so few people bother theie asses to read the forum charter or the site rules and I say that to you as someone whom I'm pretty sure has.


/me nods

If no-one pays attention to that and hence fails to take the opportunity to engage with an SU officer as opposed to complaining in the corner like Irish people often do, you're wasting your time. That's my view but I come bearing sense. Lots of sense. You don't have to say nice things; in fact there's an explicit invitation not to where appropriate.

With all due respect I think you may have misjudged my posts. i have had an opportunity to look at these (an focal etc.) - with a little help if truth be told - i originally doubted the accusation particuarly with you in mind (with regard to censorship )and defended the creation of such a thread.
i'm highlighting the change of direction of this thread and its purpose and like aoife has stated the purpose and point - I see it but you cant blame someone for going on a rant in a form thats named' s.u bashing and complaints' - most people see that and would bypass what aoife originally posted and just gone to rant - i want to challenge the person with regard to censorship because i have'nt seen any. (And i was looking for evidence from the poster of such i know what to look through for my campaign)

thats my 2 cents - like i said b4 this is ment to improve the quality of the service but is being used as a complaints department!

:(:confused:

And if any complaints exist with regard to the union i will deal with them face to face as you can see from last week and the removal of my post - there are officers that can deal with that. so can we get the thread back to what it is supposed to be? EveryOne!

Dante on Fire

Sifling debate, you've got to be kidding. Stifling idiocy and abuse yes.

I do hope this does not relate to my posts, seamus mine is not based on abuse as i think you'll find i have great respect for aoife and am not abusing her or her position at any stage in this thread

kaimera

NickDrake wrote: »

U serious? No censorship? The above have connections with the SU and thats enough. As I said they were not all in the SU but are connected to it as they will be part of the clique.

If you don't believe the censorship just look at the threads on An Focal over the years for example.

Awful lot of bleating going on tbqh.

This UL forum has no and I mean zero official affiliation with UL and/or the ULSU.

It doesn't matter a tap who is/may have been involved in the SU, boards.ie rules over-ride everything else.

Anything locked/deleted was done so as a breach of site rules.

NickDrake

Dante on Fire wrote: »

With all due respect I think you may have misjudged my posts. i have had an opportunity to look at these (an focal etc.) - with a little help if truth be told - i originally doubted the accusation particuarly with you in mind (with regard to censorship )and defended the creation of such a thread.
i'm highlighting the change of direction of this thread and its purpose and like aoife has stated the purpose and point - I see it but you cant blame someone for going on a rant in a form thats named' s.u bashing and complaints' - most people see that and would bypass what aoife originally posted and just gone to rant - i want to challenge the person with regard to censorship because i have'nt seen any. (And i was looking for evidence from the poster of such i know what to look through for my campaign)

thats my 2 cents - like i said b4 this is ment to improve the quality of the service but is being used as a complaints department!

:(:confused:

And if any complaints exist with regard to the union i will deal with them face to face as you can see from last week and the removal of my post - there are officers that can deal with that. so can we get the thread back to what it is supposed to be? EveryOne!

Ok here are the examples of the censorship:

As we know the HPSS thread last week that was closed by a former SU sabat once the SU was mentioned. no need to link this.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055250093&page=6

This thread is an example. Last week it was reopened by a poster and quickly locked as it mention the censorship of a candidates posts and posters on campus. the candidate has informed me that he will come on this thread today to confirm this

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055254423

this thread wasnt closed but poster were reported and sent PMs for bringing up their issues with An Focal and bascially threatened to stop posting. Again an SU sabat at the time was involved in the censorship.

Plain to see. The SU does not liked to be critised on this forum or indeed other forums. The get up on their high horse when people have a go at them and complain etc.

Keep this thread open. As I have said censorship is often blissful ignorance.

NickDrake

kaimera wrote: »

You, are an idiot.

Awful lot of bleating going on tbqh.

This UL forum has no and I mean zero official affiliation with UL and/or the ULSU.

It doesn't matter a tap who is/may have been involved in the SU, boards.ie rules over-ride everything else.

Anything locked/deleted was done so as a breach of site rules.

Less of the personal insults.

kaimera

NickDrake wrote: »

Less of the personal insults.

Less of the stupid comments like every mod has some affiliation to an organisation and the ZOMG censoring.

Deal?

The Don

NickDrake wrote: »

Search for it if you don't believe me.
Most of the users on here over the years were in the SU or involved in it in some way or another. In other words part of the clique.

We're back to the old 'clique' thing. A lot of posters know each other having met outside or through this forum. Most of which have not been involved in the SU. There have been plenty of threads with meetups for beers, soccer, gaeilge, etc. You have noone else to blame if you don't want to get to know posters better and become part of the 'clique'.

kaimera wrote: »

You, are an idiot.

Awful lot of bleating going on tbqh.

This UL forum has no and I mean zero official affiliation with UL and/or the ULSU.

It doesn't matter a tap who is/may have been involved in the SU, boards.ie rules over-ride everything else.

Anything locked/deleted was done so as a breach of site rules.

We're starting to go off in that tangent now. Kai there's no need for personal abuse and you should know better. This thread is going to be closed soon if we're not careful.

There should be 2 threads created. An Offical SU bashing thread where all the rants go (most of this thread can go there). And an Official SU Help thread where you post if you want things changed or something done to help you.

sceptre

Dante on Fire wrote: »

I do hope this does not relate to my posts,

Not at all. Purely at whatever post it was that was pretty sure that debate is being stifled around here.

Kaimera, pease don't call other users idiots. That goes equally for everyone else. Note that this is the precise line I took last time there was personal abuse on this forum, where the current "victim" was then the "perp". Complaints to me by PM or by following the complaints procedure which I outlined back up the page.

NickDrake, you're not a moderator so stop playing one.

Now, if you could all get back on topic that'd be plain peachy. That's how you avoid being censored and having your views stifled around here (something that most of the site's 200,000 members understand). Playground this is not.

NickDrake

The Don wrote: »

We're back to the old 'clique' thing. A lot of posters know each other having met outside or through this forum. Most of which have not been involved in the SU. There have been plenty of threads with meetups for beers, soccer, gaeilge, etc. You have noone else to blame if you don't want to get to know posters better and become part of the 'clique'

I am referring to the SU clique