Another USI referendum?

caldera85

i read in the recent College View that someone is trying to collect signatures to hold another referendum on whether to rejoin USI. Why is this an issue again? we had a vote not 2 years ago and we said no then. what has changed since? the only thing is see is that the (majority) of the student body is changed.

Isaac702

Not again.

Honestly I couldn't see any major benefit of being a member of the USI when it was put to a vote the last time around.
There is no need to put it to a vote again when relatively little has changed.

Garseys

wouldn't be surprised to see this come up as an issue again. Seems to come up once every two years at this stage....

GRMA

I wonder what is with the secrecy? Why are the people involved reluctant to have their name's printed?

One of the individuals involved is Sean Cassidy, he was elected to the OSL last year.

The only thing that has changed with the USI since the last time DCU voted is that the president of the USI, Gary Redmond, has been replaced by John Logue. He seems to be in the same mold, another product of Fianna Fáil's Kevin Barry Cumann in UCD, another hanger on of their super successful, extremely well run SU. He's also in favour of a graduate tax rather than the USI's mandated position.

If one voted No last time, why should they vote yes this time?

Garseys

GRMA wrote: »

If one voted No last time, why should they vote yes this time?

the wonders of referenda, Could this be DCU's lisbon II? :pac:

Joking aside, its up to CRC at the end of the day to decide and there is already/should be a referendum looming on the fee's question (from last year which was deferred)

Personally, I don't see a problem with another referendum but I'm sure the SU Executive/CRC/Student body would prefer other issues to be tackled.

phantom_lord

Isaac702 wrote: »

Not again.

Honestly I couldn't see any major benefit of being a member of the USI

Main benefit is for the members of the SU, gives them access to more positions and influence. It's the reason why the issue keeps being pushed despite the student body making it clear they're not interested.

Urizen

It's ludicrous. Bringing this up yet again, especially so soon after the last referendum, will only serve to detract from time the SU could actually be doing things. It's basically another two weeks wasted with bullsh*t.

There was actually some decent reasoning behind it. It had been quite some time since the last referendum, and feelings of the student body may well have changed in the interim (can't remember the specific timeframe). However, a simple change in President does not equate to a total change in policy, and the arguments against re-affiliating remain as valid as ever. At least, I see no other differences in USI. If I'm wrong, please enlighten me.

Phantom Lord, I'm inclined to agree with you this time around. I miss the days when careerists used to be subtle..

Deckof52

Lisbon II is a bit of a rich comparison. Two new streams of students have come into DCU its time for them to decide on the merits or demerits of USI, untainted by the playschool politics that is pandered by DCU SUs political classes.

There are two questions people should ask themselves about such a referenda:

1.) Do you want/believe in having a national students' union?

2.) What are the areas of reform needed in the USI or is there a legitimate alternative to USI?

If a debate on this issue consists of discussion of the ambitions of USI Officers, personal experience with Officers or actions taken by USI then the fundamental argument is skewed away from being about the two questions into discussing petty politics surrounded by egotism and huberus!

Urizen

Deckof52 wrote: »

If a debate on this issue consists of discussion of the ambitions of USI Officers, personal experience with Officers or actions taken by USI then the fundamental argument is skewed away from being about the two questions into discussing petty politics surrounded by egotism and hubris!

All three of those points are central to the discussion. The first two are like saying "Sure it doesn't matter who's elected in to government, it's the only government around."
Also, and this might just be me, but I would have thought that actions taken by USI in the past, as well as those likely to be taken in the future, would play a pretty significant role in the discussion, since it's them we'd be joining.
While I understand that you don't want to focus on these kinds of shenanigans, you can't argue that they're irrelevant. Track records mean something.

Also, I do not think that two years is long enough to consider another referendum. Realistically, I don't see how anyone could.

On a personal note, I really don't like the idea of consolidating into USI. I have found that the kind of people drawn to working within such an organisation (and I target no particular individuals with this) are inherently self serving and, as a consequence, untrustworthy. A substantial proportion of those getting involved are doing so not out of altruism or the wish to help students (although I'm sure they like to think that's why), but to pave the way for future political careers. They may have good intentions but I, personally, think this is entirely counter to what representation should be, and would not want to associate with them. This could, of course, be argued of anyone involved in anything. Doesn't mean I have to like it.

Garseys

Deckof52 wrote: »

Lisbon II is a bit of a rich comparison. Two new streams of students have come into DCU its time for them to decide on the merits or demerits of USI, untainted by the playschool politics that is pandered by DCU SUs political classes.

There are two questions people should ask themselves about such a referenda:

1.) Do you want/believe in having a national students' union?

2.) What are the areas of reform needed in the USI or is there a legitimate alternative to USI?

If a debate on this issue consists of discussion of the ambitions of USI Officers, personal experience with Officers or actions taken by USI then the fundamental argument is skewed away from being about the two questions into discussing petty politics surrounded by egotism and huberus!

My Lisbon II was in jest :pac:

And I agree with your points, those questions should be asked of the student body but I believe that more pressing issues will overtake this that are more relevant to students. (The increasing reg fee, cutbacks in departments).

And Urizen has a very good point in terms of peoples opinions of USI. USI have had a bad track record recently with Gary Redmond at the helm to some people, it's those people who regardless of the questions in debates being asked will target that in their campaigning.

On the flipside, I do see benefits in USI, but not in it's current form and my main concern is if DCUSU were to rejoin our voice on it would soon be silenced and things return to their status quo.

I must try make an appearance in person if a USI debate goes ahead (of course on permission of the CRC Chair :pac: )

polkabunny

Garseys wrote: »

Joking aside, its up to CRC at the end of the day to decide and there is already/should be a referendum looming on the fee's question (from last year which was deferred)

As far as I know, if they get the number of signatures required then the referendum goes ahead... Could be wrong though, I can't remember the ins and outs.

Garseys wrote: »

I must try make an appearance in person if a USI debate goes ahead (of course on permission of the CRC Chair :pac: )

Anyone is allowed to attend CRC and state their opinion, as was used by a representative of FEE DCU regularly last year :rolleyes:
They can chuck you out if you're being bauld though!

If the petition gets the required signatures I have to wonder about who signed it... DCU is much better off with being affiliated to USI. I love that DCU is basically an independent college

Urizen

polkabunny wrote: »

Anyone is allowed to attend CRC and state their opinion, as was used by a representative of FEE DCU regularly last year :rolleyes:

Graduated students have to ask nicely :P

polkabunny wrote: »

If the petition gets the required signatures I have to wonder about who signed it...

Hand a student something, it's pretty likely they'll sign it just so you leave them alone. At this rate, I'm pretty sure that if I started a petition to get the Labyrinth instated as President for Life, I'd get the signatures...

GRMA

Sean Cassidy has the number of signatures required, but afaik he hasn't presented the petition to the SU yet. Once he does present it the referendum must be held withing a month. So says the College View anyway.

NDA2

Just to clear up this matter, during the announcement of the results from the last USI referendum at CRC (or Union Council as it was then) it was agreed that the matter would be revisited in two years time.
This is why the USI debate has come up again.

Also the list of signatures has not been handed in yet as the referendum would have to be within a month of the Exec receiving them, as we have no electoral committee as of yet, it would be hard to do.
Also with the announcement of a fees referendum to be held this semester, as per the college view, there really is no point submitting them until next semester. As per the SU constitution, there is to be only one referendum topic per semester.

XPS

Incorrect. There can only be one referendum on the same topic each semester. But all the rest is logical.

NDA2

Apologies, you are correct, it must have just been an unwritten understanding over the past few years.

Transition Metal

I think a referendum on the topic would be a good idea. Two years on, more then half the undergraduates that voted last time have graduated, and been replaced by new students. In light of the push this year to increase involvement in the SU by the CRC, I think that more opportunities to allow the student body their say in SU matters is a logical step in the right direction. If the motion fails again, so be it. It'll offer a good reflection of the views of the current student populace of DCU.

face1990

If DCU were a USI member, would we be having referendums on it every 2 years? Or do we just have endless referendums until a yes vote is passed?

Green Diesel

This vote is on today and tomorrow.

OctavarIan

face1990 wrote: »

Or do we just have endless referendums until a yes vote is passed?

That's generally the way it works yeah.

Sierra Oscar

Looks like DCU has voted to re-join the USI.

Urizen

Yay, time for endless referendums to disaffiliate!

p1akuw47h5r3it

Pissed this passed. The USI is a useless, joke of an organisation. Noone takes them seriously.

I'd rather the money go towards DCUSU than USI. Be more beneficial for all.

Gunslinger92

^ I know for a fact some of my friends voted yes just because a guy we know was a yes campaigner. urgh.

p1akuw47h5r3it

Gunslinger92 wrote: »

^ I know for a fact some of my friends voted yes just because a guy we know was a yes campaigner. urgh.

Is there anyway to refuse to give your money?!

ldxo15wus6fpgm

Don't think so.
I imagine this is because the second individuals started opting not join USI, their numbers would probably decrease by about 80% when others start doing the same.

I'd love if membership of USI was an individual option for students themselves to decide on. It'd give an accurate figure of their actual supporters. I think it'd save a lot of hassle for colleges too.

p1akuw47h5r3it

Liberty Sparse Elbow wrote: »

Don't think so.
I imagine this is because the second individuals started opting not join USI, their numbers would probably decrease by about 80% when others start doing the same.

I'd love if membership of USI was an individual option for students themselves to decide on. It'd give an accurate figure of their actual supporters. I think it'd save a lot of hassle for colleges too.

Ye that would be great and the fairest option imo.

The USI have almost zero support. The majority of students don't care about it and student politics in general. Those who do a majority or large minority don't care for it. The numbers who do would be very small.

SO for these reasons there is not a hope that this will ever happen!

When did we vote to allow outside organisations in to the campus to campaign?

myk

It looks like this referendum was completely botched by;

The yes campaign by not putting forward a motion which explicitly stated how the DCU student body would be affiliated and how fees would be deducted in compliance with the University regulations

The SU Executive by not running an information campaign as they are mandated to

The Returning Officer and Electoral Committee by failing to understand referendum rules and ensure that the referendum was run in line with the SU constitution

More info here

http://www.thejournal.ie/dcu-usi-affiliation-referendum-students-849938-Mar2013/

http://thecollegeview.com/2013/03/29/usi-affiliation-referendum-timeline-of-events/

By the way this is as far as I know the 3rd botched election or referendum by DCUSU in the last 10 years. How many **** ups does it take to learn from the mistakes of your predecessors.

p1akuw47h5r3it

myk wrote: »

It looks like this referendum was completely botched by;

The yes campaign by not putting forward a motion which explicitly stated how the DCU student body would be affiliated and how fees would be deducted in compliance with the University regulations

The SU Executive by not running an information campaign as they are mandated to

The Returning Officer and Electoral Committee by failing to understand referendum rules and ensure that the referendum was run in line with the SU constitution

More info here

http://www.thejournal.ie/dcu-usi-affiliation-referendum-students-849938-Mar2013/

http://thecollegeview.com/2013/03/29/usi-affiliation-referendum-timeline-of-events/

By the way this is as far as I know the 3rd botched election or referendum by DCUSU in the last 10 years. How many **** ups does it take to learn from the mistakes of your predecessors.

I'm delighted. If they decide to have yet another referendum I'm sure to get involved on the no side this time.

andyman

Yep. USI really haven't taken this one nicely. Slamming students and the SU of this university is just feeding ammo for the No side next time around. I'm delighted in a way, the student body will finally see the true colours of USI and what they stand for.

I heard that USI delegates (including John Logue) were interrupting lectures during their campaigns? What an absolute disgrace that is if it's true. They shouldn't have been allowed on campus in the first place and I doubt they'll be allowed on again.

Green Diesel

Comical stuff from all sides. I did find it unusual to be approached by students from Sligo and Galway colleges asking me to vote yes.

mrkiscool2

I actually don't understand how any of ye can honestly defend the actions of your SU Sabats? Like, they made such a massive fcuk up ye should be calling for their heads. Fair enough if you don't agree with the result of the referendum, but this sets an extremely dangerous precedent for any future referendum in the University.

For example, lets say you have one on the SU's stance on abortion. One side wins, but since the SU already fears this will happen, they don't hold an information session and hence the referendum falls. Kind of ridiculous no? If I was a class rep in DCU, I would be calling for the impeachment of each person on elections committee and the SU President.

p1akuw47h5r3it

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

I actually don't understand how any of ye can honestly defend the actions of your SU Sabats? Like, they made such a massive fcuk up ye should be calling for their heads. Fair enough if you don't agree with the result of the referendum, but this sets an extremely dangerous precedent for any future referendum in the University.

For example, lets say you have one on the SU's stance on abortion. One side wins, but since the SU already fears this will happen, they don't hold an information session and hence the referendum falls. Kind of ridiculous no? If I was a class rep in DCU, I would be calling for the impeachment of each person on elections committee and the SU President.

But see thing is most people couldn't give the biggest flying **** about student politics. Call for their heads? I barely have time to sleep! I couldn't care less what DCUSU's stance on abortion is tbh. They're irrelevant. A bit like the USI.

The reason I'm so against affiliation is that it's a HUGE waste of time and a bigger waste of money. I'd rather spend my 5 quid on a pint, or at least give it to the DCUSU so they can put on more events on campus or something. The USI is a farce.

mrkiscool2

DanDan6592 wrote: »

But see thing is most people couldn't give the biggest flying **** about student politics. Call for their heads? I barely have time to sleep! I couldn't care less what DCUSU's stance on abortion is tbh. They're irrelevant. A bit like the USI.

The reason I'm so against affiliation is that it's a HUGE waste of time and a bigger waste of money. I'd rather spend my 5 quid on a pint, or at least give it to the DCUSU so they can put on more events on campus or something. The USI is a farce.

Again, thats what you believe. And to be fair, we boardsies are a cynical bunch at the best of times. But what about all those students who have/will vote in referenda? Do you think its fair for 3 people to decide the stance on every single issue for an entire union? That is just wrong, no matter what way you look at it.

p1akuw47h5r3it

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Again, thats what you believe. And to be fair, we boardsies are a cynical bunch at the best of times. But what about all those students who have/will vote in referenda? Do you think its fair for 3 people to decide the stance on every single issue for an entire union? That is just wrong, no matter what way you look at it.

You say all those as if loads vote though. These things only ever barely reach the quorum. And if you see were the boots are there are always people offering free stuff like lollipops, entry into a night for cheap in order to get people to vote a certain way (this time it was for a yes vote). Hardly democratic itself. And yes two wrongs don't make a right. My point is though that the whole thing is undemocratic and nonsense from the start.

Urizen

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

I actually don't understand how any of ye can honestly defend the actions of your SU Sabats? Like, they made such a massive fcuk up ye should be calling for their heads. Fair enough if you don't agree with the result of the referendum, but this sets an extremely dangerous precedent for any future referendum in the University.

Yes, admitting mistakes and going by constitutional procedure. How DARE we accept such individuals? Society will surely crumble.

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

For example, lets say you have one on the SU's stance on abortion. One side wins, but since the SU already fears this will happen, they don't hold an information session and hence the referendum falls. Kind of ridiculous no?

Implying that the current DCUSU didn't hold a neutral campaign for the sole reason of having a backdoor in case of a Yes vote is disgraceful and without grounds. Seriously.

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

If I was a class rep in DCU, I would be calling for the impeachment of each person on elections committee and the SU President.

This is a massive overreaction. It's like cutting off someone's hand for dropping a pencil. The SU made an error, yes. They admitted to it and it is being rectified, as it should be. Screaming for blood is not a valid response.

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Do you think its fair for 3 people to decide the stance on every single issue for an entire union? That is just wrong, no matter what way you look at it.

There are 3 sabbaticals on the SU Executive, yes. And 9 other, non-sabbatical officers. They do things too. Few decisions are made by the sabbatical officers alone. Furthermore, referenda are held to decide stances on major issues, such as the last one. And when they are run improperly, they are rerun. This is fairly integral to being fair and democratic.

It comes down to this; are you really saying that you'd overlook a constitutional error just to get your own way? Because that's what USI are saying; they would rather have a Yes by unconstitutional means than face the possibility of an informed No. And that is just not on.

mrkiscool2

Urizen wrote: »

Implying that the current DCUSU didn't hold a neutral campaign for the sole reason of having a backdoor in case of a Yes vote is disgraceful and without grounds. Seriously.

It is no secret that the DCUSU president clearly opposed USI. If they didn't want the vote, then all they have to do is refuse to do an information evening. If you don't believe that certain people won't stoop so low to ensure that their viewpoint is upheld is a massive mistake, seeing as in the last few years we have seen how petty SU sabbats, delegations to congress and SU's as a whole can be

Urizen wrote: »

This is a massive overreaction. It's like cutting off someone's hand for dropping a pencil. The SU made an error, yes. They admitted to it and it is being rectified, as it should be. Screaming for blood is not a valid response.

Yet it has happened 3 times in 10 years, and we (as part of a delegation at USI congress) were told that DCUSU was trying to find a way out of the result of the constitution. That means they are automatically trying to subvert the will of the students. Again, whether or not you agree with the result that is going against what the students voted, regardless if one student over quoram or the whole student body voted, it doesn't matter.

Urizen wrote: »

There are 3 sabbaticals on the SU Executive, yes. And 9 other, non-sabbatical officers. They do things too. Few decisions are made by the sabbatical officers alone. Furthermore, referenda are held to decide stances on major issues, such as the last one. And when they are run improperly, they are rerun. This is fairly integral to being fair and democratic.

You clearly don't understand the role of elections committee. The committee is made up of the sabbatical officers, and it its their responsibility to uphold the constitution as a whole i.e. run the information evening, ensure that everything necessary for the referendum is there. So part-timers actually have no say in elections committee. I know this as I am a part-timer in an SU.

Urizen wrote: »

It comes down to this; are you really saying that you'd overlook a constitutional error just to get your own way? Because that's what USI are saying; they would rather have a Yes by unconstitutional means than face the possibility of an informed No. And that is just not on.

Of course not, I would just be demanding an explanation (at the very least) as to how it happened in the first place.

Urizen

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

It is no secret that the DCUSU president clearly opposed USI. If they didn't want the vote, then all they have to do is refuse to do an information evening. If you don't believe that certain people won't stoop so low to ensure that their viewpoint is upheld is a massive mistake, seeing as in the last few years we have seen how petty SU sabbats, delegations to congress and SU's as a whole can be

I personally know the members of the SU Executive so no, I don't think they're petty enough to declare a referendum void just because they didn't like the outcome, nor that they would contrive a complex escape clause instead of actually running a campaign. I will not point out the irony of a pro-USI individual calling others petty, in the wake of their very public temper tantrum :P

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Yet it has happened 3 times in 10 years, and we (as part of a delegation at USI congress) were told that DCUSU was trying to find a way out of the result of the constitution. That means they are automatically trying to subvert the will of the students. Again, whether or not you agree with the result that is going against what the students voted, regardless if one student over quoram or the whole student body voted, it doesn't matter.

To dust off an old chestnut, pics or it didn't happen. Who told you this? Are they willing to be named and quoted on this? Was it, dare I say, someone who supported USI? Or an infiltrator in that 'small cohort' of rebellious rapscallions we've heard so much about? Reptilians?

Now I love talking conspiracy theories, but usually a shred of proof adds flavour to wild, unfounded claims of cover-ups and mysterious informants.

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

You clearly don't understand the role of elections committee. The committee is made up of the sabbatical officers, and it its their responsibility to uphold the constitution as a whole i.e. run the information evening, ensure that everything necessary for the referendum is there. So part-timers actually have no say in elections committee. I know this as I am a part-timer in an SU.

And I was a DCUSU Executive member at the time of the last USI referendum, so I have a surprisingly strong grasp on how these things work. Regardless, I wasn't talking about the elections. You said "Do you think its fair for 3 people to decide the stance on every single issue for an entire union?" I was merely pointing out that they, quite simply, don't. Please try to read what I say in context, look at the messes that can be caused by such simple errors.

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Of course not, I would just be demanding an explanation (at the very least) as to how it happened in the first place.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see. But if we could keep the wild accusations to a minimum, for the moment, that'd be super.

mrkiscool2

Urizen wrote: »

I personally know the members of the SU Executive so no, I don't think they're petty enough to declare a referendum void just because they didn't like the outcome, nor that they would contrive a complex escape clause instead of actually running a campaign. I will not point out the irony of a pro-USI individual calling others petty, in the wake of their very public temper tantrum :P

Now, I don't want this to descend into one of those spates were people go at each other for stupid reasons, but can you justify defending the current full-timers "because you know them" and then discredit me because i am "pro-USI?" Not really, that is irony.

However, onto the real point. Yes, I am pro-USI, but that doesn't mean I don't think student shouldn't have a say and if a majority wants to leave more power to them! Also, I'm pissed off at USI's reaction, it was very childish. However, even if the referendum isn't legitimate due to issues on all sides, should the Election Committee and the SU have done more? Your darn tooting they should have, and until they have a legitimate reason as to why they didn't do all this crap in the first place a lot of people won't be satisfied.

Urizen wrote: »

To dust off an old chestnut, pics or it didn't happen. Who told you this? Are they willing to be named and quoted on this? Was it, dare I say, someone who supported USI? Or an infiltrator in that 'small cohort' of rebellious rapscallions we've heard so much about? Reptilians?

Now I love talking conspiracy theories, but usually a shred of proof adds flavour to wild, unfounded claims of cover-ups and mysterious informants.

Right, ok I can confirm a member of Officerboard and 2 of our sabbats told me this (all of whom I trust). If you want the names, PM, but I won't leak sources here publicly. I am sure you can appreciate that as a former Exec member.

Urizen wrote: »

And I was a DCUSU Executive member at the time of the last USI referendum, so I have a surprisingly strong grasp on how these things work. Regardless, I wasn't talking about the elections. You said "Do you think its fair for 3 people to decide the stance on every single issue for an entire union?" I was merely pointing out that they, quite simply, don't. Please try to read what I say in context, look at the messes that can be caused by such simple errors.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see. But if we could keep the wild accusations to a minimum, for the moment, that'd be super.

Definitely could have worded what I said better to be fair. And the original post was quite reactionary, so for that I do apologise. However, until this is cleared up (and I should hope it would be done early tomorrow) I will remain skeptical.

Garseys

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Yet it has happened 3 times in 10 years, and we (as part of a delegation at USI congress) were told that DCUSU was trying to find a way out of the result of the constitution. That means they are automatically trying to subvert the will of the students. Again, whether or not you agree with the result that is going against what the students voted, regardless if one student over quoram or the whole student body voted, it doesn't matter.

Could you elaborate the 3 times in 10 years comment? do you mean 3 USI referenda or 3 referenda that there were issues with DCUSU and things being declared null and void.

mrkiscool2

Garseys wrote: »

Could you elaborate the 3 times in 10 years comment? do you mean 3 USI referenda or 3 referenda that there were issues with DCUSU and things being declared null and void.

The latter. It's the President's and Elections Committee responsibility to consult the constitution regularly, especially before elections and referenda. It shouldn't even happen once.

Urizen

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Now, I don't want this to descend into one of those spates were people go at each other for stupid reasons, but can you justify defending the current full-timers "because you know them" and then discredit me because i am "pro-USI?" Not really, that is irony.

I can justify this, yes. I trust that they wouldn't behave like petulant children because they didn't get their way. This is not because of their positions, but because I know them. And I didn't mean it to come off as attempting to discredit you personally, just saying that USI are acting like spoiled toddlers right now (which you see too), and to call another organisation petty at the moment is very pot-kettle.

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

However, onto the real point. Yes, I am pro-USI, but that doesn't mean I don't think student shouldn't have a say and if a majority wants to leave more power to them! Also, I'm pissed off at USI's reaction, it was very childish. However, even if the referendum isn't legitimate due to issues on all sides, should the Election Committee and the SU have done more? Your darn tooting they should have, and until they have a legitimate reason as to why they didn't do all this crap in the first place a lot of people won't be satisfied.

Which is why I said we'll wait to hear the full story, and not jump to wild conclusions. And also wait to see the results of a proper, constitutional referendum.

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Right, ok I can confirm a member of Officerboard and 2 of our sabbats told me this (all of whom I trust). If you want the names, PM, but I won't leak sources here publicly. I am sure you can appreciate that as a former Exec member.

But where did they hear it? I honestly don't care myself about the names, I meant that to be rhetorical. I'm just permanently sceptical of 'anonymous sources' revealing things like this, in any form (politics, journalism, etc). And I certainly don't believe it for a second. So if that kind of accusation is going to be made, a concrete, public source is required, not some shadowy figure of questionable reliance and goals (who may or may not exist).

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Definitely could have worded what I said better to be fair. And the original post was quite reactionary, so for that I do apologise. However, until this is cleared up (and I should hope it would be done early tomorrow) I will remain skeptical.

Accepted and understandable, in that order

ldxo15wus6fpgm

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

how any of ye can honestly defend the actions of your SU Sabats... ye should be calling for their heads... this sets an extremely dangerous precedent for any future referendum... I would be calling for the impeachment of each person on elections committee and the SU President.

The 'setting a dangerous precedent' part I loved most, it's been ripped straight out of an article from the indo.
Classic fearmongering and sh*t stirring.

To be honest I'm not surprised at the mistakes that were made. Most of DCU pays the USI and anything to do with it very little attention and I wouldn't be shocked if the SU don't pay it much attention anymore either. Most class reps didn't give it too much thought either (I am one of those - my main reason being we are a final year class).

Interesting how USI didn't make any noise over it until it was working against them.

Kavrocks

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

I actually don't understand how any of ye can honestly defend the actions of your SU Sabats? Like, they made such a massive fcuk up ye should be calling for their heads. Fair enough if you don't agree with the result of the referendum, but this sets an extremely dangerous precedent for any future referendum in the University.

For example, lets say you have one on the SU's stance on abortion. One side wins, but since the SU already fears this will happen, they don't hold an information session and hence the referendum falls. Kind of ridiculous no? If I was a class rep in DCU, I would be calling for the impeachment of each person on elections committee and the SU President.

Do you mind me asking if you are a DCU student or a member of USI?

ldxo15wus6fpgm

I think the answer is fairly obvious to both of those questions!

mrkiscool2

Liberty Sparse Elbow wrote: »

I think the answer is fairly obvious to both of those questions!

And what would they be? I love when people tell me about my own life :rolleyes:

Green Diesel

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

And what would they be? I love when people tell me about my own life :rolleyes:

DCU student? - From looking at your post history, I'm pretty sure you're in NUIG.

USI member - Assuming only members can be part of a delegation, yes, according to post #38.

You coud clarify if I'm incorrect.

mrkiscool2

Green Diesel wrote: »

DCU student? - From looking at your post history, I'm pretty sure you're in NUIG.

USI member - Assuming only members can be part of a delegation, yes, according to post #38.

You coud clarify if I'm incorrect.

Currently in NUIG, transferred from DCU in 1st year, was having problems in the area and was removed from both my family and girlfriend. Obviously a part of USI, but I will never say it hasn't got any problems. It has, pretty gaping ones aswell. But once more I will say this isn't about USI. It's about your election committee and SU not upholding their own constitution and when they fail to do so they call the result null and void. What I want to know is why?

ldxo15wus6fpgm

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

And what would they be? I love when people tell me about my own life :rolleyes:

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Currently in NUIG, transferred from DCU in 1st year, was having problems in the area and was removed from both my family and girlfriend. Obviously a part of USI, but I will never say it hasn't got any problems. It has, pretty gaping ones aswell. But once more I will say this isn't about USI. It's about your election committee and SU not upholding their own constitution and when they fail to do so they call the result null and void. What I want to know is why?

So yes then, the obvious answers were the right ones...

p1akuw47h5r3it

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Currently in NUIG, transferred from DCU in 1st year, was having problems in the area and was removed from both my family and girlfriend. Obviously a part of USI, but I will never say it hasn't got any problems. It has, pretty gaping ones aswell. But once more I will say this isn't about USI. It's about your election committee and SU not upholding their own constitution and when they fail to do so they call the result null and void. What I want to know is why?

What I want to know is why would anyone care. Irrelevant organisation is irrelevant...