ULSU UGM 2012 (rescheduled for Tuesday, Week 10 at 7pm, location TBC)

Jester252

34 ouch
Class reps dont have to be there. They should but you can't blame them.
Well the union is in trouble now. The only way to fix it will require the problem not to be there.
Maybe free drinks,strippers and everyone there gets a year in college for free. That might help

SarahBeep!

Jester252 wrote: »

34 ouch
Class reps dont have to be there. They should but you can't blame them.
Well the union is in trouble now. The only way to fix it will require the problem not to be there.
Maybe free drinks,strippers and everyone there gets a year in college for free. That might help

But it was straight after class reps council.

wnolan1992

SarahBeep! wrote: »

But it was straight after class reps council.

I'd imagine a lot of class reps are in it solely for CV boosting as opposed to actually giving a f*ck about their class, so why would they stay around for something that doesn't relate to getting hoodies or organising some free drinks vouchers for a class party?

34... So even if the quorum were 100 (as a motion up for discussion suggests), we still wouldn't have made quorum in the previous two meetings. (I believe the figure for the one in The Stables was 78?)

I really thought holding it after CRC would work. Really sad to see how fast they all streamed out of there at 6:55.

J_E

deise go deo wrote: »

Quorum sucks!

What do people think of an online UGM format?

Use the existing online voting system and add a discussion forum.

The problem with reaching quorum in the existing format is not going to go away, going online should solve that problem and it offers some advantages over the existing format.

I think this was covered before and the problem was that if you take it online then you need considerably more than 200 people for it to be valid, and judging from the election results, this is easier said than done.

What also made the UGM today such a small turnout is also the fact that a considerable amount of people were at the Stables this evening for the Battle of the Bands.

deise go deo

Cydoniac wrote: »

I think this was covered before and the problem was that if you take it online then you need considerably more than 200 people for it to be valid, and judging from the election results, this is easier said than done.

What also made the UGM today such a small turnout is also the fact that a considerable amount of people were at the Stables this evening for the Battle of the Bands.

I'm not talking about a referendum, I'm talking about an online UGM, I don't think there is anything that says that the UGM can't have an online format, or that if it does go online it has to have a higher quorum.

You would need at least a quorate UGM or maybe even a referendum to make a change like that, but I think it would be worthwhile to do it if it means that the problem of failing to meet quorum again and again is dealt with.

Kevin.Lally

I think we should be able to vote via facebook, I could reach quorum on my own!