Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Is there such a thing as joining 'too many' societies/clubs?
-
03-09-2010 11:30pm#1
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
kickoutthejams wrote: »If you're unsure of where to start, the larger societies like Literary and Debating/Law Society etc are good places to start.
Why would they be good places to start?
0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
kickoutthejams wrote: »Nah, they should realise beforehand that the internet doesn't transmit tone well and they need to choose their words more carefully.
Fair enough if you meant it as a joke, but you can hardly expect it to automatically be read in the intended way. Especially across the internet.
As I said to efb, I thought the ":p" emoticon was a dead give-away for a start...kickoutthejams wrote: »Would you not agree that Lit and Deb is one of the more high profile societies on campus (along with LawSoc) in terms of the speakers they get in? Everyone from US Senators to Archbishop Desmond Tutu have spoken for them.
Saying something is "debatable" without going into further detail just descends into weasel words.
I would say LnD is one of the more high profile societies - though that doesn't necessarily make it a good society to join. LawSoc, no - the Law Ball is pretty much the only thing I hear them mentioned for, and that's with a couple of friends heavily involved in LawSoc. I do heartily approve of FLAC though, so long as they remember that students have "responsibilities" as well as "rights", and 'twould do no harm to remind folk of those too - though I'll grant that people are less likely to counsel someone as to their responsibilities...
As to the "debatable" - I was just disagreeing with your flat assertion that they were more high profile societies.kickoutthejams wrote: »I'm not sure what you mean here; are you accusing people of joining societies to try and extract money out of them?
Accusing sounds a bit harsh, but aye - many people seem far more willing to try and get things out of the society stuff than contribute to it. I'm not referring to LnD or LawSoc specifically here, btw - it's just a personal side-gripe about societies.kickoutthejams wrote: »They organise a lot of class stuff for students too; things like Moot Courts, bringing in judges to speak on issues like the Irish Constitution, journalists to speak on crime in Ireland and so on. Interesting enough if you are into current affairs and the state of Ireland. Extremely useful if you're planning on going into law itself.
I'm fairly baffled as to how you can think they do "eff all else" aside from the Law Ball. They have big glossy posters for their events so they're fairly hard to miss
Some of that stuff does indeed sound interesting - but I've honestly never seen or heard about most of it - (I didn't join LawSoc, but I presume we're agreed that shouldn't be an issue in debating whether a society is "high profile"). I would most likely have attended the Moot courts - I've heard of similar jobbies from Kings' Inn heads, and it does sound quite interesting. But I have honestly never heard of them in NUIG - you'll have to take me at my word on that, I'm afraid - and given that I probably spent more time on campus last year than almost anyone else, I would certainly have expected to have seen these big glossy posters you speak of. Not that I'm saying they weren't there - simply that their presence may not have been as noticeable as you seem to think.
A lot probably depends on how we're defining high-profile, here. Whether it's mention in the local media/national media/posters on campus/talk on campus/advertised in socs email/famous speakers/size of attendance etc.kickoutthejams wrote: »Depends on what you mean by controversial... Noam Chomsky.. Archbiship Tutu.
God, no. They were great - certainly wouldn't contest those.
I was referring more to the Holocaust denier, and the pederast - both of which attracted a lot of attention, but you won't convince me that they weren't invited for their "controversialness".
Yeah, it's bigger than other societies - it's still not "massive".kickoutthejams wrote: »Compare that 30-50 to the typical size of an NUIG Society's active members and you'll see where I'm getting at.kickoutthejams wrote: »College Bar as a social setting for meeting new folk? Not much unless you're into meeting people and are good at it. It's a pretty typical bar setting apart from the special nights. People sit with their friends, aside from the occasional people sitting at the bar on their own. Feel free to try and strike up conversation but it's pretty much the same as any bar aside from you're usually students.
LEctures for meeting people? Possible, but I'm sure you'd agree that it's not exactly easy for a 1st year student to meet loads of new friends in a strange environment where you turn up, sit down for a few minutes, listen to the lecturer and then everyone leaves. Unless you arrive really early and just happen to meet other like minded people.
I think the whole "meeting new people in a bar" thing is awful, yes - but you were citing size as a factor - I was attempting to illustrate that size doesn't guarantee squat. (College bar or any other bar - I used the college bar because it was closest).
Your description of "lectures" above is exactly how I would describe attending LnD, actually. I wouldn't put either above the other in terms of ease of meeting new people. In all my years of popping into random LnD events, I've never spoken to or been spoken to by any of the other attendees, aside from greetings from prior acquaintances. Could be just me of course.
Actually - to the OP at this point - just sit in the socsbox comp suite - everybody talks to each other in there about pretty much everything society related.kickoutthejams wrote: »HAving the same interests as someone certainly does not equate to getting on with people.
Granted - but it certainly doesn't hinder things. That's largely the premise on which societies work.kickoutthejams wrote: »When I first moved to college I joined a score of random societies and clubs of hobbies/sports I was interested in. Grand when the activities were on but once the meeting ended, that was it. Ended up joining the larger societies in my 2nd year and made some of my closest friends in college.
<tongue in cheek>Yeah, but look at the type of people in the societies that you joined!</tongue in cheek>
I joined the smaller societies in college and made my friends there - so what?
For the record, I can of course see where you're coming from, and you may well be right, but for ****s and giggles:kickoutthejams wrote: »Nah, go for it. I'd be interested in hearing you defense.
Hmm.. k. So we're looking at it like this: I'm trying to disprove your hypothesis that joining a large society is the best way of meeting "pals", aye?
First assumption is that you're more likely to be pals with people whose interests you share - as mentioned above, it's one of the fundamental ideas behind a society (though I know you'll probably contest that) - assuming people aren't doing it just to wrangle money from the college for an activity they enjoy, as you seemed surprised at my suggestion of such.
Second assumption is that people you'll "get on with", ceteris paribus, are evenly distributed throughout all three populations on normalized bell curves.
Third assumption, the more interested someone is in something, the more likely they are to gravitate towards the society dealing with same. (This need not necessarily be true because there's no accounting for folk, but it's certainly not an obvious logical fallacy.)
So you have three normalized bell curves - see attached gimpy image. Not to scale.
The largest represents the population as a whole. The mean red line is how much you like the average person in that group, say, "meh". People to the right hand side of the mean you like more, people to the left you like less - I presume you've covered basic stats in the bacc.
In the middle graph, representing the large society, the mean is higher, following from assumptions 1 and 3. Assumption 2 gives that the shape of the graph is the same as the shape in the largest graph, only smaller. The area under the curve is of course less because there are less people.
The smallest then represents the small society - the area under the curve is smaller because there are less people. The mean is further along the "how much you like the person in question" horizontal axis following from assumptions 1 and 3.
Choosing a random person from each group then, the "expected likeability" of the person in the smallest graph is higher, following from our assumptions.
Of course, there are more people above that mean in the large society graph, but by the same logic there are more people again in the entire population graph who are above that mean, so a logic which suggests choosing the large society over the small one, leads one to choose the general population over the large society.
Granted, statistics are bull****, - that's why it bothers me when "probability" is thrown so haphazardly into a remark :P And don't even get me started on exponentials...kickoutthejams wrote: »Takes just as much effort to join a large society as it does to join a small one. Less people to fraternize with.
Sorta like you just *might* make loads of friends by moving to a tiny town. But the chances of meeting new people and compativle personalities are better if you move to a larger one.
I'll take it that you meant to reverse "large" and "small" in the first sentence. Fair point - but there are also more thugs and gob****es in a large town. Just saying. I would, personally, sooner join a small society, because one isn't lost in the crowd, so to speak - one can have more input etc.
Perhaps it's just me - getting old now, would prefer to retire to the safety of a small country village whilst you youngsters buzz about in the big city
kickoutthejams wrote: »When I started college, I joined a tiny society with only one member continuing on from the previous year. He left fairly fast and me and another 1st year had to start things from scratch. It's ticking over now (roughly)
Small societies are heavy going. The additional workload to keep a new society moving is tough (as there are less people to share the burden). I've been on a few societies over the past few years and the typical number of regular attendees has usually been 6-8.
Starting college is daunting enough without having to try and work out how to build a society from the bottom up.
Likewise joined a small society in first year - it's been steering my life ever since. There's no guarantee that's a good thing - but I'm fairly happy, so I won't complain about the way things have turned out. I will definitely grant that small societies are tough work (not that large ones aren't), but it can be terribly rewarding. I remember a lecturer once telling me that the society work I'd done would stand me in greater stead than whether I got a 2:1 or a 1:1 or whatever. I thought he was mad - he is - but he was absolutely right.kickoutthejams wrote: »LEt's be honest here; a broad, large society like LitnDeb, Filmsoc, FanSci Juggling, LawSoc etc (take your pick) will by nature of their size have a larger group of people.
You're absolutely right. I just can't argue with that tautology.0 -
As I said to efb, I thought the ":p" emoticon was a dead give-away for a start...[/quote[
Sticking a smiley face at the end of a sentence doesn't automatically change it's meaning. Like I said, fair enough if you didn't mean it seriously, but communication has a lot to do with tone, the internet doesn't have that.
Even if you're not on their mailing list/don't read the Socs Office calender for the week, they put up some of the largest and most glossy posters around campus. Extremely hard to miss.I would say LnD is one of the more high profile societies - though that doesn't necessarily make it a good society to join. LawSoc, no - the Law Ball is pretty much the only thing I hear them mentioned for, and that's with a couple of friends heavily involved in LawSoc. I do heartily approve of FLAC though, so long as they remember that students have "responsibilities" as well as "rights", and 'twould do no harm to remind folk of those too - though I'll grant that people are less likely to counsel someone as to their responsibilities...
Grand if it was just for last year though, as I was away, whereas you mightn't have been in NUIG for the 2 years previous to that.
I find it extremely hard to disagree with the notion that they are highest profile societies. They have a large number of regular attendees as well as attracting more famous speakers. They're also usually the ones with A3 colour posters, which certainly increases their visibility.As to the "debatable" - I was just disagreeing with your flat assertion that they were more high profile societies.
Well, most students can't get much cash out of societies. THey can subsidised stuff via the society which is a fair point but they usually don't amount to much. Unless I've been missing out on stuff (In which case; DAMMIT!)Accusing sounds a bit harsh, but aye - many people seem far more willing to try and get things out of the society stuff than contribute to it. I'm not referring to LnD or LawSoc specifically here, btw - it's just a personal side-gripe about societies.
That's very strange. I've had no truck with Lawsoc (aside from joining their mailing list but I'm an utter fiend for signing up for societies in case there's anything I'm interested in) Mostly see their antics on noticeboards or via word of mouth.Some of that stuff does indeed sound interesting - but I've honestly never seen or heard about most of it - (I didn't join LawSoc, but I presume we're agreed that shouldn't be an issue in debating whether a society is "high profile").
Well, I wasn't here at all last year (Erasmus) so I'd be speaking about the two years before this. Certainly can't comment on 2009-2010, so it's more than possible that they were in a slump or something last year, or that my usual hangouts are different to yours.I would most likely have attended the Moot courts - I've heard of similar jobbies from Kings' Inn heads, and it does sound quite interesting. But I have honestly never heard of them in NUIG - you'll have to take me at my word on that, I'm afraid - and given that I probably spent more time on campus last year than almost anyone else, I would certainly have expected to have seen these big glossy posters you speak of. Not that I'm saying they weren't there - simply that their presence may not have been as noticeable as you seem to think.
See, I'd say that in all of these things, groups like LawSoc and LnD are very applicable. Local newspapers were reporting on the debate between the Democrat/Republican on the American election, their posters tend to be large and glossy (more eyecatching than the usual A4 Greyscale), they get famous speakers and often have to use tickets to ensure everyone can get a seat in the hall.A lot probably depends on how we're defining high-profile, here. Whether it's mention in the local media/national media/posters on campus/talk on campus/advertised in socs email/famous speakers/size of attendance etc.
Irving I was very interested in seeing. I'm mad into history (especially World War II and the Third Reich) and I'd be interested in seeing how he would have put forward his ideas, wrong as they are.God, no. They were great - certainly wouldn't contest those.
I was referring more to the Holocaust denier, and the pederast - both of which attracted a lot of attention, but you won't convince me that they weren't invited for their "controversialness".
Completely agree with you on Ó Searcaigh. Given that it was put on so soon after Irving was cancelled over security concerns, I was annoyed at his being invited.
Given that we're speaking relatively (ie; NUIG societies) then, yes, it is massive. Even objectively, 30-50 people is a fairly large group for a society.Yeah, it's bigger than other societies - it's still not "massive".
Size in a social settingI think the whole "meeting new people in a bar" thing is awful, yes - but you were citing size as a factor - I was attempting to illustrate that size doesn't guarantee squat. (College bar or any other bar - I used the college bar because it was closest).
I'd say you'd have a better chance of making good friends in a small society than just randomly chatting to people in the college bar (I'd say we both agree that bar-friendships tend to be quite fleeting)
Depends what you were doing at them; in first year, I went into a few of their debates when there was a speaker I was interested in seeing. Didn't speak to anyone I didn't already know. However, when I went to a few of the events afterwards (such as heading to the pub after one debate) I got to know their members via a social setting. Made some excellent friends.Your description of "lectures" above is exactly how I would describe attending LnD, actually. I wouldn't put either above the other in terms of ease of meeting new people. In all my years of popping into random LnD events, I've never spoken to or been spoken to by any of the other attendees, aside from greetings from prior acquaintances. Could be just me of course.
It's sort of like comparing class lectures to a class party. You'll probably not make many lifelong friends from speaking to randomers in your class. I'd say you have a much better chance if you're speaking to them at a class party as it's easier to meet people in a social setting like that.
Couldn't agree more.Actually - to the OP at this point - just sit in the socsbox comp suite - everybody talks to each other in there about pretty much everything society related.
True but my original post was saying that if you're unsure as to what to join, go for a large one. Doesn't hinder things but chances are you'll meet more people in a large society anyway.Granted - but it certainly doesn't hinder things. That's largely the premise on which societies work.
I know, we're terrible people.<tongue in cheek>Yeah, but look at the type of people in the societies that you joined!</tongue in cheek>
I joined the smaller societies in college and made my friends there - so what?
Mainly that I found smaller societies to be more pedestrian. Still made some great friends in them but it was easier to meet ones in the larger ones.
1st assumption isn't exactly accurate. It's not exactly relevent for someone to have the same interests as you. More so that they have a compatible personality; you can both be mad into bottle rockets and stickers but if you're rowing the whole time, it won't matter much. Which is why I'm down for the idea of joining large societies; more people in a social setting which chances are you may got on with. Unless there's a society which attracts a certain personality type.For the record, I can of course see where you're coming from, and you may well be right, but for ****s and giggles:
Hmm.. k. So we're looking at it like this: I'm trying to disprove your hypothesis that joining a large society is the best way of meeting "pals", aye?
First assumption is that you're more likely to be pals with people whose interests you share - as mentioned above, it's one of the fundamental ideas behind a society (though I know you'll probably contest that) - assuming people aren't doing it just to wrangle money from the college for an activity they enjoy, as you seemed surprised at my suggestion of such.
Second assumption is that people you'll "get on with", ceteris paribus, are evenly distributed throughout all three populations on normalized bell curves.
Third assumption, the more interested someone is in something, the more likely they are to gravitate towards the society dealing with same. (This need not necessarily be true because there's no accounting for folk, but it's certainly not an obvious logical fallacy.)
So you have three normalized bell curves - see attached gimpy image. Not to scale.
The largest represents the population as a whole. The mean red line is how much you like the average person in that group, say, "meh". People to the right hand side of the mean you like more, people to the left you like less - I presume you've covered basic stats in the bacc.
In the middle graph, representing the large society, the mean is higher, following from assumptions 1 and 3. Assumption 2 gives that the shape of the graph is the same as the shape in the largest graph, only smaller. The area under the curve is of course less because there are less people.
The smallest then represents the small society - the area under the curve is smaller because there are less people. The mean is further along the "how much you like the person in question" horizontal axis following from assumptions 1 and 3.
Choosing a random person from each group then, the "expected likeability" of the person in the smallest graph is higher, following from our assumptions.
Of course, there are more people above that mean in the large society graph, but by the same logic there are more people again in the entire population graph who are above that mean, so a logic which suggests choosing the large society over the small one, leads one to choose the general population over the large society.
Granted, statistics are bull****, - that's why it bothers me when "probability" is thrown so haphazardly into a remark :P And don't even get me started on exponentials...
Overall, I'd say that getting on with people doesn't necessarily correlate with shared interests (certainly doesn't hurt though) whereas a random distribution of personality types can occur in any club or society. Sure a small one might have a large proportion of ones you get on with, but again, by probability it's smaller than the chances are of you meeting one through a large one.
Also; how'd you know I did the Bacc; I've mentioned it a few times on Boards and all but not exactly often. Do I know you already?
Well, most new students would be us youngstersI'll take it that you meant to reverse "large" and "small" in the first sentence. Fair point - but there are also more thugs and gob****es in a large town. Just saying. I would, personally, sooner join a small society, because one isn't lost in the crowd, so to speak - one can have more input etc.
Perhaps it's just me - getting old now, would prefer to retire to the safety of a small country village whilst you youngsters buzz about in the big city I'd say being in a small society when you're a 1st year is tougher than it is being a member in a large one, simply as you're probably still learning the ropes. You'll have more input but the responsibilities are greater and there's less time to enjoy the social side of societies.
Granted, some people thrive/love such hard work but that's not for everyone.
Very true but speaking from personal experience, students appear to prefer joining established societies. When you're starting out in college and hoping to make friends, it can be extremely daunting to have to try and get used to college, whileLikewise joined a small society in first year - it's been steering my life ever since. There's no guarantee that's a good thing - but I'm fairly happy, so I won't complain about the way things have turned out. I will definitely grant that small societies are tough work (not that large ones aren't), but it can be terribly rewarding. I remember a lecturer once telling me that the society work I'd done would stand me in greater stead than whether I got a 2:1 or a 1:1 or whatever. I thought he was mad - he is - but he was absolutely right.
However, this started out as a debate about what societies to join; where I said that if you're unsure of where to start, larger ones are a good place to start out; which you disagreed with.
There have been some societies that have been resurrected from obscurity (PDS come to mind) by older students, but being in a society with a couple of other first years people and having to simultaneously work out how societies go is tough stuff.
Sorry, I was editing it when the computer crashed.You're absolutely right. I just can't argue with that tautology.
What I meant to say was that large societies have so many people and areas various mandates. LitnDeb organises literary events like Tea on the Corrib and magazines, organising schools debates etc. Not my cup of tea but certainly a difference from the speakers they organise.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
CantStandMeNow wrote: »Dear God.
Isn't it great?
kotj - it's been fun, but I'm going to bow out of this one - otherwise I'm just going to start repeating myself.
In light of the "evidence" I shall even concede that LnD and LawSoc are amongst the higher profile societies - though I maintain the opinion that that doesn't necessarily guarantee they're better societies to join.
Some students are extremely adept at getting money out of societies, but that's off-topic here.
Also - sidenote: see how both examples you give for meeting people in a social setting happen to be pubs?
I'll not disagree with the point you're making, but it saddens me deeply that alcohol is necessary for people to socialise effectively.
Some smaller societies are more pedestrian, aye, but there's certainly a few that seem to do more than the more high profile societies - depends what the OP wants from a society, I suppose.
Aye, you know me - so if you want to have the stats argument some time when we've a whiteboard to hand and aren't trying to correspond through this imperfect medium, we can do that.
And there's nothing like taking charge of a society in first year to put hair on your chest.
OP - join them all. Read their emails, see what events they have on, and go to whatever sounds interesting.0
Advertisement