Debates elections - interest?

[Okocim]

I'm currently living in a flat where there is one person interested in the debates elections this Friday (me), one person who has a slight interest, and three who couldn't care less and never will.

Purely out of curiosity I have to ask, how representative is this of St Andrews as a whole?

[kensson]

It could be argued that although every student is a member of debates, it is irrelevant to, well, I'd say conservatively 90% of the students, on the basis that fewer than 80 people were at the keynote Parliamentary debate last week - just over 1% of the membership.

The argument that Debates provides an open forum to exercise freedom of speech is one I've always seen as comedy: it's simply not true. It's an open forum for people with plummy voices to show how clever they are. Oh, and I'm not allowed to slag off the Queen.

I reckon it's a good time to rethink the priviliged 'super-society' status afforded to debates. I'd sooner have it as a run-of-the-mill society with sign-up lists to determine its level of funding.

[hr]My policy towards the USA remains one of regime change

[Thackary]

The Sinner provides an open forum to exercise freedom of speech. Why shouldn't it become a Super Society? After all, everyone is welcome on the Sinner, and anyone can sign up!

[Prophet Tenebrae]

And if there is more than one candidate for convenor or whatever, then having the election on the last day of term is an act of immense stupidity.

[the weight of echoes]

what about a Deflating Society? I'd vote for that.

[kensson]

Could we have some kind of referendum about changing the name of debates to WindSoc? (Worldwide, Intramural and National Debating Society, perhaps.)

[hr]My policy towards the USA remains one of regime change

[Al]

"I reckon it's a good time to rethink the priviliged 'super-society' status afforded to debates."

There is NO such thing as a "super-society". That term came to be used because, when referring to Debates and Mermaids, it was easier to use that term rather than "those parts of the Students' Association functioning within the sphere of debating and the dramatic arts". The UDS and Mermaids do not operate under the scrutiny of the Societies Officer, they have their own Union official and they are made up of all members of the Students' Association and not just students.

[hr]"Life is a horizontal fall"

[immunodiffusion]

[s]Al wrote on 17:32, 10th Dec 2002:
The UDS and Mermaids do not operate under the scrutiny of the Societies Officer, they have their own Union official


Yes, that is officially the case. But in practice the debating society operates like any other society - holding events to which any member of the university is allowed to go to but which is only of interest to a small segment of the student population. You could equally say that "project animé is the part of the student population dealing in matters relating to Japanese animé", but they don't get a special representative in the Union to do that - what is special about debates that means that the union should have a representative for them?

Debates is not an open chamber for any student to go to - yes admission is open to all, but it doesn't appeal to all - it is a leisure activity for those who are interested in the formal procedure of debating, rather than just an open forum for discussion.

Mermaids is different, in that they do not operate like a society, they are purely a funding body, enabling other societies and groups of children to put on plays - in this way acting in a similar way to the Societies Committee does for other societies. However debates does not operate in this way.

What would be lost if Debates were changed to being a normal society that students could join in the same way as any other society? If it is really popular and everyone joins, then there will be lots of funding for it. If in fact only a select group of students join, then they will receive an appropriate and fair amount of money proportional to the interest in that society.

[Al]

While much of what you say is valid, you miss the point as to the nature of the Debating Society. At present, the Union Debating Society is an integral part of the Students' Association. It is not an affiliated part, or an adjunct to it. That is why it has a Union position attached to it. It is in no different a position to any other key aspect of the Students' Association's role. The Union puts on entertainments to which anyone can go. It has an official in charge of these. You would not say that the bop, or any other entertainment/event is a "super-society", would you?

[hr]"Life is a horizontal fall"

[Prophet Tenebrae]

Now you're just being difficult Al, I hardly think the SA would grind to a halt without a Debates member and I find myself agreeing with Immuodiffusion in that there is nothing special about Debates - and if it isn't special, why give it special treatment?

[Al]

I don't remember saying that the SA would grind to a halt without a Debates member. Of course it wouldn't. But it wouldn't grind to a halt without many of the various officers and convenors who sit on the SRC or SSC. Very few of them perform a "crucial" role. That is not the point. They perform a useful role. The Debating Society provides entertainment for many. You may not like debates, you may never go to a debate but that hardly gives you right to say that the Union shouldn't fund it. That is a form of cultural fascism. Finally, once and for all, the Union Debating Society is not a special case. It should not be treated specially. Which is handy, because it isn't. The presence of Mermaids proves that.

[hr]"Life is a horizontal fall"

[Prophet Tenebrae]

"The Debating Society provides entertainment for many"

Ah, so if any *other* society - let's say rocksoc - were to entertain similiar or great numbers it should also become a "useful" "integral part of the Students' Association"?

I don't recall saying that the Union shouldn't fund the Debates society or being any more right wing than normal.

"Finally, once and for all, the Union Debating Society is not a special case. It should not be treated specially"

So why should it be treated in a special way, if it's entertainment for great numbers of people then it shouldn't have any problem raising its funding in a normal way or not having posts in the SA.

[Al]

The main stumbling block to you understanding the point, Prophet (apart from your wilful and deliberate misunderstanding) is your failure to differentiate between the various meanings of the word "society". Within the Union structure there are affiliated societies and there is the Union Debating Society. The word society can either mean, as in the case of affiliated societies, a group of people with shared interests. It can equally mean everyone within a particular community e.g. you could speak of student society, The Sinner society, or "society". Granted, there is some overlap between the shades of meaning but there is also considerable distance. Everyone keeps saying that the UDS is treated as a "special case, but this is simply not true. Does not the President of Mermaids serve as the Theatre Officer in the Association? In what way is this different from the President of Debates serving as Debates Officer?


[hr]"Life is a horizontal fall"

[James Baster]

[s]Al wrote on 22:17, 10th Dec 2002:
Everyone keeps saying that the UDS is treated as a "special case, but this is simply not true.

Apart from the large sums of money the union gives the Debating Society, you mean?

You also seem to be spending a large amount of time arguing over the exact definition of "Society" which neatly side steps the argument.

You say Debates is an integral part of the union: thats the whole argument. Where looking at it and saying, why is it? should it be?

Quite frankly, I can clearly see why it shouldnt. Firstly, can people stop saying its an open forum for debate among the student population, no it fucking isnt. Its an very formal and restricted forum for debate on a certain motion which the committee choses. Thats all very well but if you want to discuss rent prices or the ptp then, no you cant. If a student has a problem they want to discuss, the first person they go to is never the debating chamber.

Now, all your pedantic arguing over terms aside, tell me one god damn reason why the debate should operate in the union sphere, and not be an affiliated society? Cos I aint seen one yet.



[hr]
[s]Its nice to be able to blaspheme. It takes a very special and strong-minded kind of atheist to jump up and down with their hand clasped under their other armpit and shout 'Oh, random-flucuations-in-the-space-time-continuum!' or 'Aaargh, primitive-and-out-moded-concept on a crutch!' - Terry Pratchet, Men at arms[/s]

[Sebastian]

A completely radical idea but has anyone ever thought of asking the student body whether they want the union to give extra money to debates and whether they want to automatically be a member. Perhaps a vote is in order. Or a debate.

[Bonnie]

That's what private members' time is for. Just raise you hand and say you would like to propose a motion about preventing landlords from raising the rent.

[James Baster]

[s]Bonnie wrote on 06:31, 11th Dec 2002:
That's what private members' time is for. Just raise you hand and say you would like to propose a motion about preventing landlords from raising the rent.

So all we need to know is the format and layout of debate, then we need to be brave enought to stand up, and we need to be able to make a clever and witty speech out of it just to get attention from everyone else. Has this ever been done? Has this ever been done by a non-debates regular? Was it ever seriously talked throught or did it just become a wit and brains competition as so many debates seem to? I've been to enought debates and never seen this.

[hr]
[s]Its nice to be able to blaspheme. It takes a very special and strong-minded kind of atheist to jump up and down with their hand clasped under their other armpit and shout 'Oh, random-flucuations-in-the-space-time-continuum!' or 'Aaargh, primitive-and-out-moded-concept on a crutch!' - Terry Pratchet, Men at arms[/s]

[splittter]

given that you're all technically members of the debates society, you can all decide what should happen to it.

i'm no expert, but I imagine you could vote to have it act like any other affiliated society ... if thats the right term ... there must be some way to table a motion to its members (ie everyone in the uni) ... and I would imagine given the number of people who actually support the frankly ludicrous debates society you'd have a good chance of winning ... all for a few signatures and posters ... the future is in your hands, or something

[John Stewart]

At the end of the day, if you want to raise such points, then private members time at debates is the time to do it.

After all, I hate to state the obvious, but that's the frigging POINT of private members time.

And if you're that worried about lacking the style or skill to actually DO that, then either:

1. Go to IV training and GET the skill to do it yourself.
2. Raise the motion anyway, and I'm sure an established debater like myself will pick up the baton and propose it to LPH FOR you, even if it would seem to go against the grain. As an IV debater, it's an established fact that I have no morals, and will argue anything.
3. Say "what the hell" and just do it ANYWAY, 'cos if you have a point, and popular consensus, then people will support you regardless of your speaking ability. If you feel you need to be a witty speaker to win things over, then surely that's simply an admission that people don't agree with you at present, and you need to be a damned good speaker to persuade them otherwise. (i.e. you're just another one of the minority who seem to be witch-hunting the society recently?)

[kensson]

Oh come on, it's the way forward.

Debates doesn't provide entertainment for large numbers of people; its keynote event, the parliamentary debate, attracted well under 100 people, of whom I'd be prepared to bet not all were entertained by incessant in-jokes and pointless formality.

The bop, although I rarely if ever go there, does provide entertainment for several hundred people. Mermaids too, will tend to entertain many hundreds of different people over a year.

Am I arguing that Debates should be cast aside because it's not popular enough? I think I probably am. It's certainly not popular enough to justify the level of funding it receives.

I would far rather hear George Galloway speaking about his opinions and have a questions slot at the end than have him try to defend the government for a few minutes and then listen to people fire cheap shots and jokes around.

This election could have a mighty low turn-out, and in such cases, RON has a good chance of winning. I have no particular grudge against any of the candidates, but I feel that a big RON vote would force the Union to consider the position of Debates in its structure.

[hr]My policy towards the USA remains one of regime change