A frustrating day

[Laura]

I am going to refrain from stepping in on too many of these, and have only scanned this thread, but I want to say that if people want to be permitted to use university property for things like drinks or serving food, and they want the university to respect the debating society, they have to earn that respect and build a relationship of trust.

It really annoys me when people prattle on about how we should get recognition simply for being the UDS- for many years we have put on poor debates and given a poor service to students as well as gaining a reputation for behaving very badly. As I said at the beginning of last year when all sorts of doors were being shut in my face, we pay for our drunken and disruptive behaviour, and for putting on deliberately controversial or comnpletely shitty debates.

Shortly before the election I had a meeting with Brian Lang about the situation where he made no bones about saying to me for years and years we have stolen things, destroyed things, left rooms given to us for free in good faith a mess and gained the university a lot of bad press. He acknowledged that in the last twelve months much had been done to improve the situation and that problematic behaviour had been at a minimum and promised me that he would approach psychology one more time for us although it was doubtful that they would help after we were so disrespectful. They have said no again, and he offered to help find somewhere else- but that was conditional on our conduct. At my solatium debate property was damaged and there was disgusting drunken behaviour where the heckling did get out of hand and members of the house completely fucked up the documentary on Ethical Investment that was being filmed.

It has all got back to collegegate, and its the fucking fault of many of the members who chose to act like complete twats and taint the society as they do to the point where the university is ashamed of us instead of being proud. The new board is finding out what an awful situation the society is in as regards a relationship with the university, and should put pressure on the many idiots who turn up to debates drunk because they think it is the done thing, drink openly in the chamber, break windows, steal things and shout sexual or personal comments in fron of two Rectors of Ancient universities and on the soundtrack of a documentary that is being made about the universiy's efforts in a particular area of policy where we were trying to prove our worth as a forum for discussion.

I'm washing my hands of it largely because there is always a group of people who will never learn and I'm sick of putting myself out talking to people in the university I'm trying to foster working relationships with and being made to look a twat when I promise things about conduct and a way forward that members of this society destroy.

[hr]

"What I hanker for, of course, is to be put at the beck and call of some very important hush-hush sort of man who needs to be driven very fast in a long-nosed powerful car to mysterious destinations...But either this type of man is dying out- which I should deplore- or else, which is more likely, he does his own driving."

[TC]

I absolutly aggree with Laura on this one. We have a lot of work to do. The UDS should be one of the crown jewls of this univeristy. I think that it is, but we need to make the rest of the university think that to.

[hr]

Per Ardua ad Astra

[tintin]

It is hardly surprising that this situation exists now. I only left less than 2 years ago and even then this sort of thing was going on. The reason, I feel, is that those on the Board of Ten were the ones originally starting it e.g. swilling ostentatiously from hipflasks in the chamber and promoting this drinking culture. The BoT are supposed to be looked up to; they are supposed to set an example to the rest of the people there. If they are the ones behaving badly in the first place - and it's not just the drinking - then of course everyone else will follow on: why shouldn't they?

And in terms of the dinners - there is always far too much alcohol provided, and I've said it in previous posts a while back. Of course the Society is not going to appeal to many people if very right-wing nationalistic songs and after-dinner debates along the lines of "The Sun will never set on the British Empire" happen at each event. The alcohol simply exacerbates it. If people are going to drink a lot, then learn to handle it like gentlemen rather than causing damage and mayhem - a previous poster on this thread says she's just washing her hands of it all and I can see why. Again in one of my posts about this I've said how I was actually embarrassed to be associated with St Andrews at one of the dinners I attended, as I sat next to one of the VIP's - with some of the ocmments and singing coming out it was no surprise he and his wife left early.

If Debates is going to be taken at all seriously by the University and others then it had better put an end to this behaviour. By all means let it go on - that's what being young and foolish is all about - just don't have it and condone it in the name of Debates or St Andrews. Simple. Otherwise those people causing the damage and problems are simply shooting themselves in the foot time and again.

[hr]

http://www.livejournal.com/users/mat_salleh

[exnihilo]

Of course, there was a time when the Sun Will Never Set was not nationalistic, it was a springboard for clever and/or funny after dinner speeches with nothing whatever to do with the Empire. Not flag waving rah-Empire bullshit. Many of you will remember Eliot's famous "you wake up one morning and Puschmann's in your kitchen - but that's ok, he's protecting his legitimate interests..." speech. I dislike the right-wing tendencies, but it's dangerous to tar everything that mentions Britain as right wing.

[Eliot Wilson]

Indeed so. I wish I myself could remember more of that speech, as I'm told it was very funny. Of course, one should note that the traditional after-dinner debate was introduced by (now Dr) Gavin Bowd, who lectures in the French department, when he was a Convenor; he is a man who, shall we say, is not especially right-wing. Exnihilo has it exactly right - the Sun Will Never Set debate should be an amusing and whimsical thing where the Society's funniest speakers can stretch their legs in a relatively relaxed setting. That it may not be so now - and I haven't been to a debates dinner in a while - may not be the fault of the debate, but the speakers.

[hr]

Bill and Ted beat the Grim Reaper at Twister

Bill: "You played very well, Death, especially with your totally heavy Death robes."

Death: "Don't patronise me."

[exnihilo]

Quoting Eliot Wilson from 19:20, 19th Apr 2006Exnihilo has it exactly right.

How often those words go together.

[Dave the Explosive Newt]

I've said it before, but I think there is a clique who see a debate as the old boys club outing. Dress up, stand up, sit down, stand up, sing a song. Punctuate with alcohol and traditions. Attracting a wider number of people to interesting debates so it's not the same old clique week after week is the way forward.

But I've said all this before. And so have a lot of people on this thread.

Quoting exnihilo from 20:01, 19th Apr 2006

Quoting Eliot Wilson from 19:20, 19th Apr 2006Exnihilo has it exactly right.

How often those words go together.

Curiously, seldom in that order.

[hr]

Mmmm, cake.
http://standrews.facebook.com/profile.php?id=37102114

[exnihilo]

Really? Am I more often wrong, then, in your opinion?

[exnihilo]

I'm sorry, but althought I agree that we should attract as many people as possible to debates I cannot for one second accept that we should try to prevent it being "the same old clique". Those people, of whom so many on this board are contemptuous, are your core membership. For all the talk of it really being a subcommittee, the UDS is a society first and foremost and every society has a core of people who turn up all the time. There have been so many debates over the years that would have been totally empty if not for those stalwarts. It makes me slightly angry that so many people attack them, attack bad behaviour by all means, but this notion that we need to have fresh faces every week and stamp out the loyal deabtes goers must stop.

[Eliot Wilson]

Indeed so. One man's clique is another man's loyal stalwarts. During my time in St Andrews, I went to debates that were embarrassingly poorly attended (40 people including Board and speakers, anyone?) and shamefully tedious, but I went because I thought it was important to do so.

[hr]

Bill and Ted beat the Grim Reaper at Twister

Bill: "You played very well, Death, especially with your totally heavy Death robes."

Death: "Don't patronise me."

[Dave the Explosive Newt]

Unfortunately, I seem to have become part of the clique myself, so I wouldn't want to advocate my own removal from the society. My point is that it shouldn't only be these people - everyone at this university is a member of the UDS so it seems only right that it should cater to as wide an audience as possible. It's sad to say, but it is my hunch that a lot of these outsiders would probably be much better behaved than some stalwarts, and by attracting more people we'll achieve a dilution of some of the worse antics and a better reputation all round.

[hr]

Mmmm, cake.
http://standrews.facebook.com/profile.php?id=37102114

[Steveo]

I've only missed two debates in a year and a half, and have been called a stalweart by others, and I keep saying, to keep attendance up there needs to be a debate every week in LPH. Same time. Same place.

People like routine, not guessing where to go, becaise like it or not, people don't always read the linkup, and many people might have no interest whatsoever drinking with the Board, myself, Dickie, Royce and the few others that attend pub type nights, despite us all being great people.

Debates need to be serious, and debates also need to be lighthearted, it stops people taking things too seriously to have a lighthearted and funny debate from time to time.

[hr]

Set your goals way too high so I can laugh when you fail.

[exnihilo]

It most certainly does.

And the atmosphere in the House can be maintained with "outsiders" if those in the know behave appropriately - bowing to the chair, addressing the speaker correctly, etc, etc.

Newbies learn from what the old guard do - I did.

[Alex Jennings]

I indeed find it frightening that I am the only person on the BoT that remembers debates Pre-Peter. God, I'm one of the only currently matriculated students that remembers the Weigler, um, incident.

At any rate, this is what I'd like to say. I have sat through incredibly painful debates in my time at St Andrews - some the fault of the speakers in them, some the motion, some the audience - and the need to drink has been high. However, in all my time here, I have never shown up to the Chamber so drunk that I have been falling over and making an ass of myself. I have never heckled from the audience in an inappropriate way. I also daresay that all of these things have not been epidemic in the recent years (at least in my memory).

No, the biggest problem with the UDS is not that it ever actually was an Old Boys' Club, a Drinking Society and a Safe Haven for those somewhere to the right of Ghengis Khan, the biggest problem is that some silly people within the society believe it used to be and do all they can to "emulate the old ways."

All you have to do is look at this thread. There are people who have been involved in the society longer than any of us currently at this university have and they agree that the behaviour and decorum that we are describing is unacceptable. It has always been unacceptable. The people that we have had problems with in the past few years have been relatively few in number - but they have been vocal. They are the ones who shout, "Gown" over and over again and intimidate people not to speak. They are the ones that bring bottles of wine into the chamber and drink them ostentatiously during the debate. These are the people who are rude and nonsensical during floor speeches.

The problem isn't so much drunkenness. The problem is much deeper than that. The debating society is not an old boys' club. It's not a drinking club. Moreover, it has not been traditionally a club to maintain incredibly right-wing beliefs. I wonder if some of these people have ever spoken to or met our predecessors. Sexist and prejudiced behaviour needs to be ruled out of order. If you do not understand the difference between good-natured jokes amongst speakers at the table and making comments that are offensive and petty, you shouldn't be saying them at all.

[hr]

"Look, I told you when we met that I was not a leprechaun, that I was from Rhode Island, and that I was half Korean, but you said it didn't matter."

[exnihilo]

Quoting Alex Jennings from 11:44, 20th Apr 2006No, the biggest problem with the UDS is not that it ever actually was an Old Boys' Club, a Drinking Society and a Safe Haven for those somewhere to the right of Ghengis Khan, the biggest problem is that some silly people within the society believe it used to be and do all they can to "emulate the old ways."

A direct hit on the nail's head, Miss jennings.

[Alex Jennings]

Despite being American, I do sometimes have flashes of insight and brilliance.

[hr]

"Look, I told you when we met that I was not a leprechaun, that I was from Rhode Island, and that I was half Korean, but you said it didn't matter."

[Henry Evans]

Quoting Stuart from 21:06, 18th Apr 2006
I fully agree, I don't think it's appropriate. The only time I have made an announcement in LPH was after Laura allowed the LibDem President to advertise one of their events, and it was clear to all present that I was only doing this in retaliation with my tongue firmly in cheek. I honestly can't think of any other occasion, unless it was a common occurrence during my time in Germany.

To the best of my recollection I never announced any Tory events in LPH nor asked anyone to while I was president. Perhaps Exnihillo could provide examples?

[Henry Evans]

I think that people perhaps need to put things in perspective a little.

The UDS is actually less 'right-wing' (if such term can be measured) than it has been in the past - consider what the UDS was like in the 1980's.

Undergraduate Club meals very often involve singing and drinking. This has been the case since there have been undergradutes. This is not'old-boy-club' behaviour, it is common to most if not all sports clubs at the university and very many other societies. The UDS in comparison to clubs like shinty, rugby, OTC etc (which all, I believe, have larger numbers of regular members) does not have any like a similar sort of drinking culture.

Some people do drink to much in the chamber. If they are incapable of speaking, then they should be thrown out, but this is matter of judgement for the speaker, who must live with their decision.

I would like to know why senior members of the society, who write on this thread about vandalism, have not done anything about it. Has any been reported to the university or even repremanded?

[Henry Evans]

Double post...

[Alex Jennings]

To clarify...

It is not a policy of the UDS (or for that matter, the recent presidents of the society) to allow Political Societies to make announcements in the chamber. Mr. Cahn (in the only instance this has ever happened in the last four years) asked to make a quick announcement without the knowledge of Laura that this would be about the LibDems and in the interest of fairness she invited Stuart to make an announcement as he was in the chamber. Tom was a little first year and didn't realise that this policy existed and I hazard to guess that this will never happen again.

As for the vandalism, that which happened at the solatium is being taken care of by the person broke the windows. From what I gather about our difficulties in finding a room for the reception is particularly related to the Balaka competition. Special cleaning teams were needed to be brought in to get the curry out of the carpet after we held the reception in the Psychology Foyer (I believe this was also a problem in using the Senate Room...that and the stealing of the carriage clock). Perhaps it would be beneficial to insist that Mr. Rouf agrees for any cleaning costs associated with pakora-ridden carpets in the future in order to get nicey-nice with the university?

[hr]

"Look, I told you when we met that I was not a leprechaun, that I was from Rhode Island, and that I was half Korean, but you said it didn't matter."