SU bashing and complaints

Ms. Education wrote: »

SU bashing is quite common so I thought it might be useful if I started this thread. So I'm asking what's wrong with what I've done/what I'm doing this year? I can't answer for other officers, but I can respond to any criticisms of me or answer any questions related to my job. So let's have it..

(P.S. - In case my name didn't give it away, I'm the Education Officer )

oh i may have started something here - look i want to get something clear there is no way i want to bash the union in any way

as a matter of fact i'm quite happy (and albeit proud) of the work your doing this year and i'll be the first to say it cudos to you

I dont want you to think i'm on a campaign to say the union is terrible - far from it. i think the work being done ther particuarly by yourself is great and many dont know about it.

Ms. Education

I wasn't so much referring to you, as a number of threads that seemed to come back to the same thing. Thanks for the post, but I honestly started this thread to see if anyone had any problems with my work or lack thereof. If I don't know what I'm doing wrong, I can't fix it or at least explain why I'm doing it the way I am.

TEMPLAR KNIGHT

Ms. Education wrote: »

SU bashing is quite common so I thought it might be useful if I started this thread. So I'm asking what's wrong with what I've done/what I'm doing this year? I can't answer for other officers, but I can respond to any criticisms of me or answer any questions related to my job. So let's have it..

(P.S. - In case my name didn't give it away, I'm the Education Officer )

well you helped me quite a bit this year and i thank you for that! forget about the rest of them!

Ms. Education wrote: »

I wasn't so much referring to you, as a number of threads that seemed to come back to the same thing. Thanks for the post, but I honestly started this thread to see if anyone had any problems with my work or lack thereof. If I don't know what I'm doing wrong, I can't fix it or at least explain why I'm doing it the way I am.

best thing i can say is well done your doing a great job but from now on i want to be able to write on your white board without it being attacked by a certain bettie boop fanatic with a knack for awkward turtles

cryptic? damn roysh it is!

cson

Law & Euro tbh

On a serious note, fair play for coming onto boards and trying to help/improve your office. It's very commendable.

Mossin

cson wrote: »

On a serious note, fair play for coming onto boards and trying to help/improve your office. It's very commendable.

I agree to an extent...there are 2 other sabbat officers on boards already...do they not communicate and perhaps inform each other that this forum exists and is a haven for questions and problems that need addressing from UL students, most of whom dont have an affiliation with class reps and the SU?

Seriously like...its week 11, and you are only here now?

There have been lots of education related queries here which most of us havent the specific knowledge to answer...

This is not a rant at Aoife, I'm just wondering as to why it has taken so long since being elected to be on this forum?

A quick google search of "ULSU elections 2009" and the 1st link shows a thread from here talking about this topic: http://www.google.ie/#hl=en&safe=off&q=ULSU+elections+2009&meta=&aq=f&oq=ULSU+elections+2009&fp=a4997684ba9eb996

cson

Very fair point Mossin, there have been a lot of instances where people asking education specific questions have been told to talk to the education officer - which would have been solved easily now your on boards.

ergonomics

Mossin wrote: »

I agree to an extent...there are 2 other sabbat officers on boards already...do they not communicate and perhaps inform each other that this forum exists and is a haven for questions and problems that need addressing from UL students, most of whom dont have an affiliation with class reps and the SU?

Just in case anyone doesn't know, I am one of the other 2 officers that Mossin refers to. Fair play to Aoife for making this thread but there is one very simple reason why I haven't made a similar thread.

I have posted on Boards throughout my entire 4 years in UL. I enjoy coming here and reading the threads. If I'm having a bad day I love having a rant or reading other rants in the bitch thread. There are many reasons why I come here. If I had to see a thread every single day telling me how sh!t I am at my job then it would take all the fun out of. Boards is one of my guilty pleasures. I don't want work to start taking away from it.

Another big thing is that I would now count a lot of the regular posters on here as my friends. If I were to see them bitching and bashing the work I am doing I would honestly be very very hurt. I have an open door policy. Anyone is welcome to come and give out to me or give me criticism, and if my "friends" were to resort to an online, very public forum, rather than coming to me in person I'd be heartbroken.

If people do want to bitch about me or my work they can work away. I'm not going to stop them and I will take heed of anything that is said. I read every thread on here, and I have gone back and read old threads to see what sort of criticisms were made before. Like I said earlier, the reason I didn't ask for criticism before is because I would like to have one or two places that I can go where I don't have to talk about work/read about work/hear about work.

Ms. Education

Mossin wrote: »

Seriously like...its week 11, and you are only here now?

There have been lots of education related queries here which most of us havent the specific knowledge to answer...

This is not a rant at Aoife, I'm just wondering as to why it has taken so long since being elected to be on this forum?

The other Sabbats on boards joined years ago, as students for whatever reason. Genuinely no offence to people who like boards, but I had no interest in it as a student, so I didn't join. I see it as another way to contact students, so I joined yesterday. However, considering that most of the people who have commented on this thread have been in contact with/had loads of opportunities to contact me during the year, I'm not really reaching many new people unfortunately.

If you felt very strongly about me being on boards, then you should have said it to me. I'm not being aggressive or sarcastic when I say this, it's genuinely how I work. Tell me something and I can do it, expect me to read your mind, you'll be waiting a while. I've been taking suggestions and comments on board all year from people so if you'd said it to me then I would have been on sooner, rather than knocking me because I didn't join before now. The same argument of "why didn't you do this (sooner)?" could be used for every forum, event, night out, talk, lecture, envelope opening, etc. because boards isn't the only place that students give feedback and it isn't the place where most students give feedback.

Aside from that it's up to individuals whether or not they want to join boards. I chose to in an attempt to improve my office. It isn't part of the job, it's beyond the job.

Finally I've been looking for feedback since I started here from lots of different places; Class Reps, random students (through other students and just by approaching them inside and outside the Union building), other officers. I started this thread to get criticisms of the way I do my job and ways that I could improve. I can't affect the speed at which I did something in the past.

bluedolphin

In fairness to ergonomics and ninty9er (the two sabbats who post here), I have to echo what Aoife (ergnomics) said earlier. There is a line. Being a sabbat becomes so much a part of your life that sometimes you just need a break. And while going on the UL forum is hardly going to be much of one, it is a circle of people discussing not specifically union issues and those not necessarily in and out of the union building every day. Believe it or not, sabbats are real people too with their own personal lives and aspirations. Their registration on boards is as board users first and foremost (as in the case of ninty9er and ergonomics) rather than as SU Sabbatical Officers (as in the case of Ms Education).

That goes beyond just answering practical questions (such as "how do I change my modules?" or "how do I submit an article to An Focal?") but when it comes to actual discussion, it's not fair to treat, as example (sorry Aoife!) Ergonomics' answer as the official SU Communications Officer reply. She may have different opinions on a topic than the official SU line. I know that I refrained from participating in some discussions last year on those grounds that my "Bluedolphin" (aka me) opinion differed from that I should have if I was replying as "SU Communications Officer".

I don't know if the policy forbidding dual accounts applies in this instance as technically it is "two" different people. Why should someone use their personal account to answer professionally? Also, in this instance, it just so happens that we know that Ergonomics is Aoife Ní and ninty9er is Derek; what about anonymity?

Just my tuppence worth!

Oh God...

A whole lot of SU self importance here...

The SU has been censoring threads and posts on this forum for years. Anything that was said against the SU was either deleted or the thread locked.

Search for it if you don't believe me.
Most of the users on here over the years were in the SU or involved in it in some way or another. In other words part of the clique.

So I am doubting that the SU will be allowed a good roasting on here as it has been censored for years by them.

I actually find it a bit ironic to be honest that this thread was started, considering what has happened over the years here with censorship.

NickDrake wrote: »

The SU has been censoring threads and posts on this forum for years. Anything that was said against the SU was either deleted or the thread locked.

Search for it if you don't believe me.
Most of the users on here over the years were in the SU or involved in it in some way or another. In other words part of the clique.

So I am doubting that the SU will be allowed a good roasting on here as it has been censored for years by them.

I actually find it a bit ironic to be honest that this thread was started, considering what has happened over the years here with censorship.

To be honest; I think you are exaggerating a bit there but there definitely seems to be a link between the mods and the SU and definite censorship.

I don't think I am! Just wait for it now. This thread will be locked

rmacm

Moderators of this forum since it started:

Nukem - no SU connection.
kaimera - no SU connection.
440Hz - no SU connection.
Peteee - no SU connection.
Sceptre - former communications officer.

That's 4 moderators who've never served in the SU in any capacity that I know of. They may know people in the SU but it certainly doesn't mean they are biased.

Censored by the SU.....lol.

rmacm wrote: »

Moderators of this forum since it started:

Nukem - no SU connection.
kaimera - no SU connection.
440Hz - no SU connection.
Peteee - no SU connection.
Sceptre - former communications officer.

That's 4 moderators who've never served in the SU in any capacity that I know of. They may know people in the SU but it certainly doesn't mean they are biased.

Censored by the SU.....lol.

U serious? No censorship? The above have connections with the SU and thats enough. As I said they were not all in the SU but are connected to it as they will be part of the clique.

If you don't believe the censorship just look at the threads on An Focal over the years for example.

rmacm wrote: »

Moderators of this forum since it started:

Nukem - no SU connection.
kaimera - no SU connection.
440Hz - no SU connection.
Peteee - no SU connection.
Sceptre - former communications officer.

That's 4 moderators who've never served in the SU in any capacity that I know of. They may know people in the SU but it certainly doesn't mean they are biased.

Censored by the SU.....lol.

Apologies. My only problem is with Sceptre so. Definitely has been most prolific in stifling SU related discussion over the years. We all have a right to complain and exhibit our opinions don't we?

mrmanire wrote: »

Apologies. My only problem is with Sceptre so. Definitely has been most prolific in stifling SU related discussion over the years. We all have a right to complain and exhibit our opinions don't we?

Spot on!

rmacm

mrmanire wrote: »

Apologies. My only problem is with Sceptre so. Definitely has been most prolific in stifling SU related discussion over the years. We all have a right to complain and exhibit our opinions don't we?

I don't think anyone ever questioned your right to complain and exhibit/express opinions. Sceptre is also an Admin and formerly an Smod on boards so he also has to make sure that the forum operates within the forums charter and the site wide rules.

Perhaps you should consider what his duties as a Mod, Smod and Admin are/were before you go claiming censorship.

Is it time for the match and a pint soon?

rmacm wrote: »

Is it time for the match and a pint soon?

Ditto

Peteee

NickDrake wrote: »

The SU has been censoring threads and posts on this forum for years. Anything that was said against the SU was either deleted or the thread locked.

Search for it if you don't believe me.
Most of the users on here over the years were in the SU or involved in it in some way or another. In other words part of the clique.

So I am doubting that the SU will be allowed a good roasting on here as it has been censored for years by them.

I actually find it a bit ironic to be honest that this thread was started, considering what has happened over the years here with censorship.

This is massively untrue as Rmacm has pointed out. Most of the mods have had nothing to do with the SU.

There are a few SU people on here to be sure. The same type of people who are interested in UL, by reading an UL message board are going to be the type of people who are interested in the union.

AFAIK there used to be (Or maybe still is) an official ULSU message board. The UL board on here is completely unofficial and has nothing to do with either UL or the ULSU.

I'll be watching this thread, but to suggest a massive SU conspiracy to lock down negative threads about UL and the ULSU is madness.

Interesting how the HPSS thread was closed down when it started mentioning the SU...

Peteee wrote: »

This is massively untrue as Rmacm has pointed out. Most of the mods have had nothing to do with the SU.

There are a few SU people on here to be sure. The same type of people who are interested in UL, by reading an UL message board are going to be the type of people who are interested in the union.

AFAIK there used to be (Or maybe still is) an official ULSU message board. The UL board on here is completely unofficial and has nothing to do with either UL or the ULSU.

I'll be watching this thread, but to suggest a massive SU conspiracy to lock down negative threads about UL and the ULSU is madness.

i must say i think i agree here - as quick as i am to point out a fault something like this is a bit mental and as far as i know the s.u are not going to get rid of a thread which in essence was put up to try and improve an officers quality of service.

but what with me being new to boards i have never seen a thread removed on the basis that it was anti union - i definatly agree with mrmanire when he said 'We all have a right to complain and exhibit our opinions don't we? This is why i think that the ulsu forum removal from the old website was detremental - how are you going to improve a service if you have no opportunity to hear a concern or problem

but bringing it back -i've never heard of the union locking a thread. but i'm new to all this lark

Ok fair enough but there has been reports by members of the SU t have a thread canceled or deleted and these have been met by the Mods.

I dont know which Mod does what but censorship has been evident. Perhaps one who is a censor is immune to what they are doing?

This thread should stay open as it was created by an SU member for people to complain.

Already an a former SU sabat ( Bluedolphin) had a go at the thread. I am sure she reported it too.

mrmanire wrote: »

Interesting how the HPSS thread was closed down when it started mentioning the SU...

Not that is a perfect example. Only closed when it mentioned the SU

NickDrake wrote: »

Not that is a perfect example. Only closed when it mentioned the SU

anyone remember what it said?

Dante on Fire wrote: »

i must say i think i agree here - as quick as i am to point out a fault something like this is a bit mental and as far as i know the s.u are not going to get rid of a thread which in essence was put up to try and improve an officers quality of service.

but what with me being new to boards i have never seen a thread removed on the basis that it was anti union - i definatly agree with mrmanire when he said 'We all have a right to complain and exhibit our opinions don't we? This is why i think that the ulsu forum removal from the old website was detremental - how are you going to improve a service if you have no opportunity to hear a concern or problem

but bringing it back -i've never heard of the union locking a thread. but i'm new to all this lark

Do a simple search. An focal threads. There were loads last year and the year before. I suggest you do. And a recent one is the HPSS thread.

Thats why I find this thread ironic considering all they have done in the past to stop complaints and so on.

Its good to see Ms Education creating this thread. A revolt in the SU perhaps??

Dante on Fire wrote: »

anyone remember what it said?

Just find it there on the forum. It was last week

that thread seemed to go around athe same roundabout but i dunno from reading it it seemed sceptre stepped in when it went to name calling and off the topic.

i think that this thread is a essentially move from the education office but maybe this thread should'nt have been called what it was.

its purpose in her report was to try and help her improve her service.

it was supposed to specific queries and problems....but it is labelled su bashing and complaints...i feel this thread will reap what it sows..

its a pity...it will be a s.u bashing thread....and wont be what it was intended