My 8 Point Plan to Reform Student Politics

Denerick

In the interests of reducing the prevalence of hacks in our fine institution:

1) Disband the SU.

2) Replace it with a voluntary body. Students can choose to pay out of their own pocket -voluntarily- for their own institution. No longer will we be coerced into paying an annual fee for an institution none of us were given a choice for. Students who pay for the institution will have a franchise in which to vote for their new, reformed body. Students who don't pay for membership will miss out on... those cool emails. We'll soon see just how many individuals are willing to pay for this hack infested pit of idiocy.

3) Appoint two Law PHD students to act as 'legal rights officers'. The university will pay a small monthy stipend for their legal advice for students, funded by the savings from the dissolution of the SU. Nuisance complaints will in future be dealt with by faculty convenors.

4) Faculty convenors will be nominated by elected student reps. Faculty convenors will act as the mediator between faculty and staff. Students with legal complaints will go first to the faculty convenor, who will in turn pass it on to the legal rights officer's. (If necessary)

5) Cut society funding by 50%. Force members to raise funds for themselves.

6) Merge both College newspapers into one. Eliminate both the Piranha and the Miscellany, as their writing is cringe inducing. Plough savings into the production of higher quality student publications, such as Icarus, or the Social/Political Review. Cut opinion pieces by half.

7) Charge a 'hack tax' on all student politics paraphenalia. For example, political tee shirts, posters etc. will be forced to pay a small, arbitrary fee to the university.

8) Sell the SU shop. The shop in the front square is un-necessary as the Arts block students can go to Nasseau St. and the Hamiltonians to Pearse St.

I believe that if these reforms are introduced, hack levels would be reduced by 45-55%

Boston

Denerick wrote: »

In the interests of reducing the prevalence of hacks in our fine institution:

1) Disband the SU.

2) Replace it with a voluntary body. Students can choose to pay out of their own pocket -voluntarily- for their own institution. No longer will we be coerced into paying an annual fee for an institution none of us were given a choice for. Students who pay for the institution will have a franchise in which to vote for their new, reformed body. Students who don't pay for membership will miss out on... those cool emails. We'll soon see just how many individuals are willing to pay for this hack infested pit of idiocy.

3) Appoint two Law PHD students to act as 'legal rights officers'. The university will pay a small monthy stipend for their legal advice for students, funded by the savings from the dissolution of the SU. Nuisance complaints will in future be dealt with by faculty convenors.

4) Faculty convenors will be nominated by elected student reps. Faculty convenors will act as the mediator between faculty and staff. Students with legal complaints will go first to the faculty convenor, who will in turn pass it on to the legal rights officer's. (If necessary)

5) Cut society funding by 50%. Force members to raise funds for themselves.

6) Merge both College newspapers into one. Eliminate both the Piranha and the Miscellany, as their writing is cringe inducing. Plough savings into the production of higher quality student publications, such as Icarus, or the Social/Political Review. Cut opinion pieces by half.

7) Charge a 'hack tax' on all student politics paraphenalia. For example, political tee shirts, posters etc. will be forced to pay a small, arbitrary fee to the university.

8) Sell the SU shop. The shop in the front square is un-necessary as the Arts block students can go to Nasseau St. and the Hamiltonians to Pearse St.

I believe that if these reforms are introduced, hack levels would be reduced by 45-55%

Facism.

1) PhD Law students cannot give out legal advice in the manor your describe, you need to be a member of the bar association.

2) Most of the publication you've mentioned have nothing to do with the SU or any other capitated body, they are self funded.

3) Political T-Shirts are not paid for by trinity, students pay for them, and a tax to stop them wearing what they want would infringe they're human rights. Next you'll be saying arts students can't dress like orange whores.

timmywex

Denerick wrote: »

In the interests of reducing the prevalence of hacks in our fine institution:

1) Disband the SU.

2) Replace it with a voluntary body. Students can choose to pay out of their own pocket -voluntarily- for their own institution. No longer will we be coerced into paying an annual fee for an institution none of us were given a choice for. Students who pay for the institution will have a franchise in which to vote for their new, reformed body. Students who don't pay for membership will miss out on... those cool emails. We'll soon see just how many individuals are willing to pay for this hack infested pit of idiocy.

3) Appoint two Law PHD students to act as 'legal rights officers'. The university will pay a small monthy stipend for their legal advice for students, funded by the savings from the dissolution of the SU. Nuisance complaints will in future be dealt with by faculty convenors.

4) Faculty convenors will be nominated by elected student reps. Faculty convenors will act as the mediator between faculty and staff. Students with legal complaints will go first to the faculty convenor, who will in turn pass it on to the legal rights officer's. (If necessary)

5) Cut society funding by 50%. Force members to raise funds for themselves.

6) Merge both College newspapers into one. Eliminate both the Piranha and the Miscellany, as their writing is cringe inducing. Plough savings into the production of higher quality student publications, such as Icarus, or the Social/Political Review. Cut opinion pieces by half.

7) Charge a 'hack tax' on all student politics paraphenalia. For example, political tee shirts, posters etc. will be forced to pay a small, arbitrary fee to the university.

8) Sell the SU shop. The shop in the front square is un-necessary as the Arts block students can go to Nasseau St. and the Hamiltonians to Pearse St.

I believe that if these reforms are introduced, hack levels would be reduced by 45-55%

1) People might not like it but its pretty essential to be fair!
2) No, handful of people will pay in, could only afford part time officers, would be a disastor, the whole college would benifit/or otherwise from the handful of people funding it
3) Has some merit to be fair!
4) Pretty much happens already
5) No. Youve clearly never been involved alot, if you were youd know sociieties beg borrow and steal over the summer for freshers week!!
6)Bit of competition cant be bad, different view on things, piranha is a satrical, its funny, leave it as
7) Some merit here i suppose, for the election stuff!
8) Yet the queue tends to be out the door...!? And while they make money may aswell leave them

Denerick

Boston wrote: »

Facism.

No. Its libertarian. The present system is authoritarian as it 'presumes' I consent to membership of the SU before I even join the university. The reform proposals 'presume' you to be an individual, and hence hold the burden of responsibility to make an informed individual choice.

1) PhD Law students cannot give out legal advice in the manor your describe, you need to be a member of the bar association.

You overinterpret, sir. I envisage that the Rights Officers would offer the same 'legal' protection that the SU allegedly offers students. They would assume all the protective roles the SU supposedly takes for our welfare. I'm not expecting them to give a speech from the dock.

2) Most of the publication you've mentioned have nothing to do with the SU or any other capitated body, they are self funded.

I'm aware of that. I'm talking about their funding which comes from MY registration fee. They are still acoloytes of student politics.

3) Political T-Shirts are not paid for by trinity, students pay for them, and a tax to stop them wearing what they want would infringe they're human rights. Next you'll be saying arts students can't dress like orange whores.

Government is allowed to discriminate on specific taxable items (Milk, condoms, clothes etc.) Universities are allowed to charge on any item in which their logo is invoked.

Boston

Denerick wrote: »

Government is allowed to discriminate on specific taxable items (Milk, condoms, clothes etc.) Universities are allowed to charge on any item in which their logo is invoked.

Not a government, trinity would have to charge for every use of their logo by Clubs and Societies, equally.

Denerick

timmywex wrote: »

1) People might not like it but its pretty essential to be fair!

Do you understand the difference between tyranny and liberty?

2) No, handful of people will pay in, could only afford part time officers, would be a disastor, the whole college would benifit/or otherwise from the handful of people funding it

The whole college retards by SU participation, hence the whole college would benefit if it took a lesser role in our daily lives.

5) No. Youve clearly never been involved alot, if you were youd know sociieties beg borrow and steal over the summer for freshers week!!

Ah, typical society hack. In the future, you'll be expected to beg even more to provide the services you do.

6)Bit of competition cant be bad, different view on things, piranha is a satrical, its funny, leave it as

If they establish themselves free from university money, they're more than welcome to. Otherwise, they should be abolished. Piranha is not a funny publication, its the manifestation of typically crap Irish student humour, which shames us all.

8) Yet the queue tends to be out the door...!? And while they make money may aswell leave them

The shop cannot exist if the SU does not exist.

Denerick

Boston wrote: »

Not a government, trinity would have to charge for every use of their logo by Clubs and Societies, equally.

Yep.

Fo Real

Bloody excellent post Denerick. Post of the year in my humble opinion.

If these steps are taken to remove the "hack" element from the university it will make daily life in Trinity much more tolerable. There will be more money to fund important things like the buying of books.

I imagine that Trinity will also attract a better breed of student. No more idiots clogging our corridors, wearing their hoodies with hilarious slogans on them (the hack uniform), defacing our college with hideous semi-pornographic posters. Hopefully it will also bring an end to the weekly themes that are forced upon us. What's it this week - Shag week? Ughh. I'm embarassed that this is the image we give off to tourists. How vulgar.

just-joe

1) Pirhanha is indeed crap.

(2)

Oh no wait thats everything.

just-joe

Oh wait I do have another small bit to add:

(1) From what I can see, a cut in societies budgets would be grand... Wine receptions every week, and money to go out to a restaurant at the end of the year, wtf?! Or at least a rethink on how they're allowed to spend their budget.

andrew

1)TL;DR
2)TL;DR
3)TL;DR
4)TL;DR
5)TL;DR
6)TL;DR
7)TL;DR
8)TL;DR

Denerick

andrew wrote: »

1)TL;DR
2)TL;DR
3)TL;DR
4)TL;DR
5)TL;DR
6)TL;DR
7)TL;DR
8)TL;DR

Is this an abstract criticism?

Mark200

Denerick wrote: »

In the interests of reducing the prevalence of hacks in our fine institution:

1) Disband the SU.

2) Replace it with a voluntary body. Students can choose to pay out of their own pocket -voluntarily- for their own institution. No longer will we be coerced into paying an annual fee for an institution none of us were given a choice for. Students who pay for the institution will have a franchise in which to vote for their new, reformed body. Students who don't pay for membership will miss out on... those cool emails. We'll soon see just how many individuals are willing to pay for this hack infested pit of idiocy.

3) Appoint two Law PHD students to act as 'legal rights officers'. The university will pay a small monthy stipend for their legal advice for students, funded by the savings from the dissolution of the SU. Nuisance complaints will in future be dealt with by faculty convenors.

4) Faculty convenors will be nominated by elected student reps. Faculty convenors will act as the mediator between faculty and staff. Students with legal complaints will go first to the faculty convenor, who will in turn pass it on to the legal rights officer's. (If necessary)

5) Cut society funding by 50%. Force members to raise funds for themselves.

6) Merge both College newspapers into one. Eliminate both the Piranha and the Miscellany, as their writing is cringe inducing. Plough savings into the production of higher quality student publications, such as Icarus, or the Social/Political Review. Cut opinion pieces by half.

7) Charge a 'hack tax' on all student politics paraphenalia. For example, political tee shirts, posters etc. will be forced to pay a small, arbitrary fee to the university.

8) Sell the SU shop. The shop in the front square is un-necessary as the Arts block students can go to Nasseau St. and the Hamiltonians to Pearse St.

I believe that if these reforms are introduced, hack levels would be reduced by 45-55%

The same crap that you've said before, except you just numbered it.

Denerick

Mark200 wrote: »

The same crap that you've said before, except you just numbered it.

I don't expect my plan to appeal to hacks.

Agent Smith

Denerick wrote: »

In the interests of reducing the prevalence of hacks in our fine institution:


6) Merge both College newspapers into one. Eliminate both the Piranha and the Miscellany, as their writing is cringe inducing. Plough savings into the production of higher quality student publications, such as Icarus, or the Social/Political Review. Cut opinion pieces by half.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGHzOJlC6eo

Denerick

Mark200

Denerick wrote: »

I don't expect my plan to appeal to hacks.

If you're calling me a "hack", I'd love to know how you came to that conclusion.

Is it because I disagree with you?

Denerick

Mark200 wrote: »

If you're calling me a "hack", I'd love to know how you came to that conclusion.

Is it because I disagree with you?

Are you involved in any societies/SU/Sports Clubs/Students publications etc.?

cantankerous

Denerick wrote: »

In the interests of reducing the prevalence of hacks in our fine institution:

1) Disband the SU.

2) Replace it with a voluntary body. Students can choose to pay out of their own pocket -voluntarily- for their own institution. No longer will we be coerced into paying an annual fee for an institution none of us were given a choice for. Students who pay for the institution will have a franchise in which to vote for their new, reformed body. Students who don't pay for membership will miss out on... those cool emails. We'll soon see just how many individuals are willing to pay for this hack infested pit of idiocy.

3) Appoint two Law PHD students to act as 'legal rights officers'. The university will pay a small monthy stipend for their legal advice for students, funded by the savings from the dissolution of the SU. Nuisance complaints will in future be dealt with by faculty convenors.

4) Faculty convenors will be nominated by elected student reps. Faculty convenors will act as the mediator between faculty and staff. Students with legal complaints will go first to the faculty convenor, who will in turn pass it on to the legal rights officer's. (If necessary)

5) Cut society funding by 50%. Force members to raise funds for themselves.

6) Merge both College newspapers into one. Eliminate both the Piranha and the Miscellany, as their writing is cringe inducing. Plough savings into the production of higher quality student publications, such as Icarus, or the Social/Political Review. Cut opinion pieces by half.

7) Charge a 'hack tax' on all student politics paraphenalia. For example, political tee shirts, posters etc. will be forced to pay a small, arbitrary fee to the university.

8) Sell the SU shop. The shop in the front square is un-necessary as the Arts block students can go to Nasseau St. and the Hamiltonians to Pearse St.

I believe that if these reforms are introduced, hack levels would be reduced by 45-55%

I would agree with all except 7 and 8. I like the idea of there being shops on campus where students can buy essentials without having to pay through the nose. Students shouldn't have to leave campus to get a snack or an A4 pad etc.

As for the hack tax, hacks do not charge anything for their paraphenalia, i don't think it's a workable system. They're hardly going to go around asking everyone wearing a ceratin t-shirt to show a tax receipt are they?

I believe students are allowed wear pretty much whatever they want provided it's legal. The only way to get around this is if gowns were made mandatory. I for one would be all for this move,for one thing it would help keep the idiot brigade out of trinity as they'd want to go somewhere more "fun".

Mark200

Denerick wrote: »

Are you involved in any societies/SU/Sports Clubs/Students publications etc.?

No. Although I do occasionally buy a sandwich in the SU shop at the Hamilton....

Denerick

cantankerous wrote: »

I would agree with all except 7 and 8. I like the idea of there being shops on campus where students can buy essentials without having to pay through the nose. Students shouldn't have to leave campus to get a snack or an A4 pad etc.

Think about it logically. The shop on front square is further away than Reads or the Spar on Nasseau st. for Arts students and further away than the Westland Row shops for Hamiltonians. Its completely un-necessary.

As for the hack tax, hacks do not charge anything for their paraphenalia, i don't think it's a workable system. They're hardly going to go around asking everyone wearing a ceratin t-shirt to show a tax receipt are they?

Political tee shirts are either

A) Bought in bulk and distributed for free
Sold by the leadership to the minions.

If a batch of 50 tee shirts can be raised in price by 25 or 30 euro, do you not think people will be less willing to buy the same stuff?

I believe students are allowed wear pretty much whatever they want provided it's legal. The only way to get around this is if gowns were made mandatory. I for one would be all for this move,for one thing it would help keep the idiot brigade out of trinity as they'd want to go somewhere more "fun".

I'm not preventing them wearing whatever they want. I'm suggesting that they pay a price for making a parody of our institution.

Denerick

Mark200 wrote: »

No. Although I do occasionally buy a sandwich in the SU shop at the Hamilton....

So you're a crypto-hack then?

Mark200

Denerick wrote: »

Think about it logically. The shop on front square is further away than Reads or the Spar on Nasseau st. for Arts students and further away than the Westland Row shops for Hamiltonians. Its completely un-necessary.

Yeah, but the "Hamiltonians" go to the Hamilton SU shop...

Mark200

Denerick wrote: »

So you're a crypto-hack then?

I don't understand why you have the need to label anyone who doesn't agree with you as some sort of "hack". I'm not a crypto-hack, I'm a trinity student.

The Walsho

Can't we just make Denerick provost and be done with it?

Denerick

Mark200 wrote: »

I don't understand why you have the need to label anyone who doesn't agree with you as some sort of "hack". I'm not a crypto-hack, I'm a trinity student.

You support the present hack infested system, so at the very least you're a hack enablor.

Mark200

Denerick wrote: »

You support the present hack infested system, so at the very least you're a hack enablor.

I don't particularly "support" it, I just think your "plan to reform student politics" is idiotic at best.

Denerick

Mark200 wrote: »

I don't particularly "support" it, I just think your "plan to reform student politics" is idiotic at best.

It is the first draft of an election manifesto. I plan to run as SU President next year and will pledge to disband the institution.

cantankerous

Denerick wrote: »

Think about it logically. The shop on front square is further away than Reads or the Spar on Nasseau st. for Arts students and further away than the Westland Row shops for Hamiltonians. Its completely un-necessary.

But the hamilton SU shop is much closer than westland row, aswell you have the fact that the centra there is notorious as being one of the few shops that still charge rip-off celtic tiger prices due to the traffic it recieves from commuters getting off at pearse st. station.

Political tee shirts are either

A) Bought in bulk and distributed for free
Sold by the leadership to the minions.

Unenforceable, each candidate would just claim to have ordered less t shirts than they did. What are you going to do, send around someone to count the number of people wearing each candidate's tshirt? Besides, I'm not even sure if what you're proposing is legal :eek:.

RexMundi

Denerick wrote: »

It is the first draft of an election manifesto. I plan to run as SU President next year and will pledge to disband the institution.

So you're a hack then?

Denerick

RexMundi wrote: »

So you're a hack then?

One cannot be a hack if he proposes to enter office in order to abolish it.