Rainbow Flag at the Quad

[777]

LGBT sounds like the soc to join for the best fun.

[Haunted]

Yes, the contestants had alcohol.

Doesn't sound like you have too much to complain about if you deliberately broke the rules then does it?

And Haunted: where did you get the idea that "boozing and buggery" were going on? Or do you mistakenly think that's all gay people ever do? (because in that case, you clearly don't understand lesbians at all!)

Quite

[jollytiddlywink]

Yes, the contestants had alcohol.

Doesn't sound like you have too much to complain about if you deliberately broke the rules then does it?

"The Mansefield Building Policies and Guidelines; Behaviour: Excessive drinking of alcohol is not permitted, nor any form of pornography or nudity, nor gambling or games of chance."
As I pointed out already, drinking alcohol is not against the rules. 'Excessive' is the operative word, so it's less a matter of breaking the rules than how they were interpreted.

And who was complaining? My main observation was largely on the poor article in the Saint about the events, which seemed to me to have been largely unsubstantiated innuendo, given a veil of respectability with phrases like 'It is rumoured that' and 'there are stories that...'

[Haunted]

Excessive drinking of alcohol is not permitted, nor any form of pornography or nudity, nor gambling or games of chance."

You're right, that is a badly worded rule. Was LGBT found to be in violation of the rules?

And who was complaining? My main observation was largely on the poor article in the Saint about the events, which seemed to me to have been largely unsubstantiated innuendo, given a veil of respectability with phrases like 'It is rumoured that' and 'there are stories that...'

I was to understand there was some conflict about whether LGBT violated rules with you contending that they didn't and Saint et al claiming they did?

[Midget]

other stimulants and nudity.' I'm not sure where the 'stimulants' part came from. Certainly there were no drugs involved, otherwise it would have been a legitimate fuss, police involved, and so on.

Well it could be poppers (amyl nitrates), which are legal. I'm not saying they were used, I wasn't there, but if they were it would be no reason to involve the police and I doubt if it explicitly violates Chaplaincy rules either.

Otherwise totally agree with your points about the article. Mr St Andrews heats can make Raisin Sunday look tame.

[Hennessy]

I blame Protestants. Everyone else does.

Surely hanging the flag off of a Church is a bit much, I can't imagine that happening during my (Catholic) education, but the Church of England, tottering along, constantly on the brink of complete dislocation, or even dissolution, seems to be comparably hazy about the line to take with homosexuality, as it is hazy about most issues today.

[jollytiddlywink]

Excessive drinking of alcohol is not permitted, nor any form of pornography or nudity, nor gambling or games of chance."

You're right, that is a badly worded rule. Was LGBT found to be in violation of the rules?

And who was complaining? My main observation was largely on the poor article in the Saint about the events, which seemed to me to have been largely unsubstantiated innuendo, given a veil of respectability with phrases like 'It is rumoured that' and 'there are stories that...'

I was to understand there was some conflict about whether LGBT violated rules with you contending that they didn't and Saint et al claiming they did?

I believe that the Chaplaincy deemed that some people present, if not everyone, had drunk to excess. Alright, not a shining beacon of civility, but not outwith anything any other society or group would do for Mr St Andrews. That said, of course the Chaplaincy were within their rights to make that decision--no doubt or complaint there.
My complaint is with the Saint, which seized on this and blew it out of all proportion, and added as much innuendo and gossip as they felt they could get away with. To horribly mutilate the famous quotation: "Never in the field of journalistic endeavor has so much been attributed to so many by so few. It was not their finest hour." The Saint did correctly report that LGBT was deemed to have broken the drinking rule, but turning that into the laundry list of all the gossip they could get their hands on was, to my mind, what caused all the fuss.
Hennessey: The Church of England are Protestants. But they have nothing at all to do with Sally's Chapel. Until quite recently it would have been Church of Scotland (Presbyterian) but it is now non-denominational, albeit broadly Christian.

[Guest]

The Saint's coverage of the affair is actually fairly typical of the standards of journalism present in the paper. Too much opinion, rumour, and sensational puff-piece; Not enough investigation or factual reporting ! The article, which I believe spanned two pages, told us precisely nothing about the events leading up to the desicion. Having filled paragraph after paragraph of nothing but rumour, it ended by lambasting the member for having the temerity to complain to the association.

I agree with LGBT's stance: What unofficial events go on outside of the society are no business of the Union, or the University. That said, if a club or society associates itself (however tacitly) with activities which could be detrimental to their aims(as the initial complaint alleged), then that society must be prepared for the equally unofficial condemnation. I've heard a number of influential individuals express the opinion that LGBT's credibility as a pastoral society has been damaged by this affair. Food for thought I suppose.

[Haunted]

My complaint is with the Saint, which seized on this and blew it out of all proportion, and added as much innuendo and gossip as they felt they could get away with. To horribly mutilate the famous quotation: "Never in the field of journalistic endeavor has so much been attributed to so many by so few. It was not their finest hour." The Saint did correctly report that LGBT was deemed to have broken the drinking rule, but turning that into the laundry list of all the gossip they could get their hands on was, to my mind, what caused all the fuss

Thanks for clearing that up, let it never be said that I defended the saint over their journalistic integrity.