E(&)Soc

TheChrisD

public_enemy wrote: »

Every story I've heard from Redbrick folk about this (and their Finland trip) was about drinking. Every single one. I really can't say what else they did in either country. And I've heard both described by more than one committee member as simply reasons to get funding for international pissups. When I was on that committee several odd years ago, we had more than one informal discussion about finding "an excuse" to get financing for a trip away.

This is true of plenty of other societies too, I've been told by Snowboarding every year that if I join I can be a part of a pissup in Andorra - "It doesn't matter if you don't like snowboarding". I'm not saying people aren't interested in the activities societies book for their trips, but it's a little naive to think 99% (did you go with 100 people?) of them are there to be educated.

That said, I agree totally with what lil_cain posted (and I'm especially curious now about the machinations behind the SPC -> SLC name change), but pretty much every society is guilty of some funding abuse here and there and it's unfair to villify E&S or their illegitimate offspring over it without context. The key issue for me isn't that they allowed a new society of the same ilk, it's that they may have ignored a vote by their members in doing so.

Except that those societies, when they do go away, actually do the thing that they applied for funding for. Any pissups that occur there are paid for out of the member's own pockets. The issue people had with E&S last year was that they applied for funding to attend some seminar, but didn't actually go and used the money that was supposed to be for entry to the seminar was instead spent on drink.

public_enemy

TheChrisD wrote: »

Except that those societies, when they do go away, actually do the thing that they applied for funding for. Any pissups that occur there are paid for out of the member's own pockets. The issue people had with E&S last year was that they applied for funding to attend some seminar, but didn't actually go and used the money that was supposed to be for entry to the seminar was instead spent on drink.

No... I'm aware of that issue completely and I'm not talking about that here. Also I think you have several of the facts wrong about what they did with the money.

Anyway... What I'm saying is that it's wrong for people to villify E&S/E-Soc for getting funding in general for seemingly trivial events that may involve parties or alcohol when every society does this to some extent. I'm criticising the sanctimonious attitude on show here by some posters.

TheChrisD

public_enemy wrote: »

What I'm saying is that it's wrong for people to villify E&S/E-Soc for getting funding in general for seemingly trivial events that may involve parties or alcohol when every society does this to some extent. I'm criticising the sanctimonious attitude on show here by some posters.

Then would you care to provide some examples? I'm not saying that other societies don't get funding for a party or something celebratory, but I certainly don't think that they get funded specifically for a pissup.

johnn

What if they started a society called "The Piss-up Society" then would they be able to get legit funding as their piss-ups would be fulfilling their mandate?

public_enemy

TheChrisD wrote: »

Then would you care to provide some examples? I'm not saying that other societies don't get funding for a party or something celebratory, but I certainly don't think that they get funded specifically for a pissup.

There are several at the top of the page if you'd care to read them. The Snowboarding rep who tried to get me to join and come on their trip even if I don't like Snowboarding? The members of Redbrick's own committee who described their own trips as excuses for drinking? Every society commits infractions, whether it be exaggerating on the Grant App or creating an excuse to get funding for a trip abroad. Different levels, certainly, but you can't claim all societies but one are perfect.

Look I'm not trying to condemn Redbrick here, I'm certain some of the people who went got a great deal of non-alcoholic value out of it. But in most cases, society trips arise out of a desire just to have a trip, and then finding a reason to justify it, rather than (as some would apparently have you believe) a society's members feeling a desperate inner urge to seek out knowledge and embark on a scholarly venture, only then realsing that perhaps they might need the funding of a higher body to afford it.

No-one ever gets "funded specifically for a pissup", it's cloaked with noble aims. If you can find me an instance where E&S were "funded specifically for a pissup" I'll be very bloody impressed. Even in their scandalous episode, they were funded by the SPC for a seminar, and the committee abused that funding. They weren't "funded specifically for a pissup". No-one is, ever.

Attol

The original topic was about ESoc and people asking about them. This has gone completely off topic so I am locking it.

Daysha

Right, given the nature of the topic and the effect it could have on other clubs and socs, I'm reopening this thread for discussion..with some points worth mentioning:

The usual forum rules apply here - they're all in the forum charter. Myself and Attol will be coming down hard on people that drag the discussion off-topic and other charter breaks. Obviously people are going to disagree with each other with time to time but if it gets to a stage where we have to keep on deleting posts that add nothing to the thread then we're locking it up for good.

This is about the newly formed ESoc and nothing else. What's been going on at Redbrick or Snowboarding trips away doesn't interest me, but some clarification on the new society would be helpful. For example was the differences between ESoc and E&S ever mentioned at the meeting? Did the E&S disbandment affect the decision in any way? Had the new ESoc committee told the SLC what their plans are for the first few months?

These are the kind of points worth discussing and hopefully some light can be shed on it.

Green Hand Guy

As far as I can see the problem here lies with the SLC's definition of a new society. None of them have been able to tell me any differences in the aims and activities between ESoc and E&S but all seem really eager to push the idea that "they're new people."

The problem is, we didn't vote to give E&S a new committee last year. We voted to disband the society and by having the same core aims, ESoc is the same society. The members are barely even hiding this fact (having a near identical logo and running the exact same events with "Enterprise" tagged onto the name).

Every society gets a new committee each year, so how exactly has this been any sort of punishment for E&S?

tomar-re

Green Hand Guy wrote: »

As far as I can see the problem here lies with the SLC's definition of a new society. None of them have been able to tell me any differences in the aims and activities between ESoc and E&S but all seem really eager to push the idea that "they're new people."

They are new people since this is a new committee/society and even if they were the same society you can't hold them responsible for the actions of previous committees. In that case the SPC would have made Strange Things pay money back to them for the playstation and other stuff that went missing back round 2000 when the society collapsed for the first time. Sins of the father lol.

Green Hand Guy wrote: »

Every society gets a new committee each year, so how exactly has this been any sort of punishment for E&S?

Well the old committee had lost their society, they were disbanded and have to deal with the fact that E&S will be tarred with the brush of thieves, I can't think of a worse thing for a society.

Now cast your minds back to the old business soc that was the forerunner to AF soc; their committee stole money, paid for whores with SPC money, their treasurer was brought before the college and the society disbanded. We have AF soc now started the year after by people who liked the old soc, if you have such a big axe to grind with E&S why not go down AF's throat too? SPC is run on precidence mostly from what I have seen over the years, now the SPC has in recent years forgotten this for friends etc, but in general they go by previous rulings on issues, so this is completely in line with their actions.

Cid-Highwind

Green Hand Guy wrote: »

As far as I can see the problem here lies with the SLC's definition of a new society. None of them have been able to tell me any differences in the aims and activities between ESoc and E&S but all seem really eager to push the idea that "they're new people."

That's because the fact that these are new people is important. The actions of E&S in the past aren't being excused in any way, but that doesn't mean that for all time 'enterprise' societies should be rejected at the first step.

Assuming of course that these guys have presented an appropriate plan of activities and a genuine intention to actually do them then the SPC executive committee have done the right thing in letting this get started as a provisional society.

Green Hand Guy wrote: »

Every society gets a new committee each year, so how exactly has this been any sort of punishment for E&S?

Because, apart from all the other issues raised, they will still have to be approved at an SPC general meeting. If the other treasurers think that it's just more of the same of last year then the society will not/should not be approved.

myk

tomar-re wrote: »

Now cast your minds back to the old business soc that was the forerunner to AF soc; their committee stole money, paid for whores with SPC money, their treasurer was brought before the college and the society disbanded. We have AF soc now started the year after by people who liked the old soc, if you have such a big axe to grind with E&S why not go down AF's throat too? SPC is run on precidence mostly from what I have seen over the years, now the SPC has in recent years forgotten this for friends etc, but in general they go by previous rulings on issues, so this is completely in line with their actions.

You are referring to DBES; the Dublin Business Enterprise Society that went through controversy in the 1990s. I think it is fair to say that DBES is more like a precursor of E&S Soc (and E Soc) than of AF Soc. Though in fairness none of the DBES students would have been around when E&S was set up. The same is not true of E&S Soc and E Soc.

Incidentally AF Soc have also had their fair share of controversies. I wonder is it something to do with students from the business school and societies...

tomar-re

myk wrote: »

You are referring to DBES; the Dublin Business Enterprise Society that went through controversy in the 1990s.

I am sorry to misrepresent the myths of DCU, I was under the impression that AF soc filled the market space left by DBES. My point is that one society that acted irresponsibly with money and got punished does not preclude another society following with similar aims, objectives and events. If you had a problem with E&S then blame the committee of that year the society of that year not someone else.

I also remember controversies with many societies and their funds:
drama being overdrawn by around 5k,
style having the charity money sitting in their account,
dance being in the hole for something like 20 C&S ball tickets,
allegations of improper accounting in Debate,
the Michael McHugh incident;
I don't remember anyone asking for the dissassociation of these societies(maybe stocs called for drama), the punishment of the society committee, no people just called them a bunch of tards and got on with things.
Now E&S may have warranted the punishment they got but that isn't a debate for here or now but anyone setting up a similar enterprise in DCU should be sat down told what they have to do, what they get money for and what will happen if they **** about, then they should be allowed the opportunity that every new society got.

Green hand guy why do you think everyone who wants to run a society which is on the surface similar to E&S as being a bunch of money stealing thieves waiting for clearance to get into the SPC budget and rob it blind. If the SPC had checked the price of the conference that they were supposed to be going to they would have known long in advance.E&S were DCU's biggest and most out there society they filled a gap that nobody this year has stepped into, so long live ESoc and let them have a chance.

myk wrote: »

Incidentally AF Soc have also had their fair share of controversies. I wonder is it something to do with students from the business school and societies...

Weren't you in the business school?

myk

tomar-re wrote: »

Weren't you in the business school?

Indeed

lithiumoxide

I think they just robbed the logo idea from the Rocky bar logo tbh.

http://www.rockybiscuit.co.uk/images/content/rugged-chocolate-biscuit-bar.png

Tiroskan

...AF soc?

tomar-re

Accounting and finance.

KenHy

tomar-re wrote: »

allegations of improper accounting in Debate

As a member of the debate soc committee for the past number of years, and treasurer for most of those I'd be interested to here more details on these "allegations" as this is the first I've heard.

tomar-re

Ken Griffin

lithiumoxide

So apparently ESoc are getting people in DCU to eat and drink a load of gross stuff, resulting in people vomiting.

How classy. And... enterprising.

myk

tomar-re wrote: »

Ken Griffin

He made the allegations or the allegations were made against him? In either case, I doubt there is anything to them.

public_enemy

Given that people have been asking the SPC/SLC to clarify their decision making process in approving E-Soc, it might help if we could read the minutes from the meeting where this happened.

Could one of the SPC/SLC folks posting in this thread make them available online somewhere? I'm pretty sure they're all meant to be publicly viewable anyhow.

Hauk

So I hear ESoc had their first entrepreneurial event today.

Wait for it..

WAIT....

WAIT!!!

Make people eat lots of random disgusting **** and see how much they can eat to win a prize. LOTS of puking I hear.

CLASSY.

ironictoaster

Hauk wrote: »

So I hear ESoc had their first entrepreneurial event today.

Wait for it..

WAIT....

WAIT!!!

Make people eat lots of random disgusting **** and see how much they can eat to win a prize. LOTS of puking I hear.

CLASSY.

Haha, true. My mate won the thing. Dirty bastard!

Muffins with catfood, mmm...

Green Hand Guy

Hauk wrote: »

So I hear ESoc had their first entrepreneurial event today.

Wait for it..

WAIT....

WAIT!!!

Make people eat lots of random disgusting **** and see how much they can eat to win a prize. LOTS of puking I hear.

CLASSY.

Yeah, but it definitely wasn't the E&S Iron Stomach contest very thinly disguised by people who are no doubt laughing their arses of at the naivety of the SLC. No, this was proper serious business stuff :rolleyes:

Hauk

Green Hand Guy wrote: »

Yeah, but it definitely wasn't the E&S Iron Stomach contest very thinly disguised by people who are no doubt laughing their arses of at the naivety of the SLC. No, this was proper serious business stuff :rolleyes:

SRS BSNS

phantom_lord

Why do people on boards have such a problem with the society? I mean, I know have no interest in an Iron Stomach competition, but equally I have no interest in a fashion show, going to a musical or playing Rugby but I don't really have much of a problem with those societies?

dregin

phantom_lord wrote: »

Why do people on boards have such a problem with the society? I mean, I know have no interest in an Iron Stomach competition, but equally I have no interest in a fashion show, going to a musical or playing Rugby but I don't really have much of a problem with those societies?

Those aren't a danger to your health.... well maybe rugby, but all the healthy training totally makes up for taking a battering on the pitch

Garseys

phantom_lord wrote: »

Why do people on boards have such a problem with the society? I mean, I know have no interest in an Iron Stomach competition, but equally I have no interest in a fashion show, going to a musical or playing Rugby but I don't really have much of a problem with those societies?

Well all of those Clubs and Societies base those events around their core activity, There was nothing "enterprising" about that event, Also it did seem very E&S-esque. (from the red bull fridge in the corner and heavily bannered logo everywhere)

E&S (Who wanted their original name to be "The Soc") had the potential to really up society life on campus, instead all they did was Iron Stomach & tag their name onto DCU Business school events, and guest lectures and go to a club night afterwards, not even running the social aspect on campus!

(The Invent dragons den event looked great though, i'll give credit where credit is due)

Mark my words, unless something happens between now and C&S days, ESoc will be the largest society on campus.....

phantom_lord

Garseys wrote: »

ESoc will be the largest society on campus.....

hmmm, so what's the problem then?

haus

Garseys wrote: »

Mark my words, unless something happens between now and C&S days, ESoc will be the largest society on campus.....

You're assuming they get approved at the general meeting. You're probably right though, DCU doesn't seem to learn from it's past mistakes.