Mace Final

[kdc4]

The Mace Semis are over. Teams in the final are:

Glasgow (Adams and Brown)
Edinburgh (Evans and Casey)
St. Andrews (Hawkins and Whitbread)
St. Andrews (Murphy and Vit)

Congratulations to our finalists!

The Mace Final will be held in the Senate Room of the University of Glasgow on saturday 24th march. Tea and coffee will be served from 2 with the debate starting at halfpast. The final will be followed by a drinks reception and light buffet.

Anyone interested in attending please contact Connie (connie.grieve@gmail.com).

Cheers,
-Doug

[ChrisH]

The final motion obviously wasn't sponsored by the Economist or anything, given that it's been in every issue without fail for about the last 3 years!

[kdc4]

Rumour has it that, due to unavoidable absence, the Edinburgh team is withdrawing, thus making the lineup:

1st Prop: Aberdeen (Reid and Saleem)
1st Opp: St Andrews (Vit and Murphy)
2nd Prop: St Andrews (Hawkins and Whitbread)
2nd Opp: Glasgow (Adams and Brown)

With a motion about something remotely related to tying foreign aid to microfinance.

Cheers,
-Doug

[John Stewart]

Well, it is sponsored by Baillie Gifford if I remember rightly, and as they do my job I would not be surprised if the motion was chosen with that in mind. In fact,I look forward to seeing their representative there to find out why the hell they turned down my job application last year...

[Mr Comedy]

They probably found your application disappointing John.


[hr]

"I am in no way interested in immortality, but only in the taste of tea. " -Lu Tung

[Dickie]

Quoting kdc4 from 12:15, 15th Mar 2007
1st Opp: St Andrews (Vit and Murphy)

How many times has Vit been in the final? I hope he can help us to win this time.

[hr]

http://facebook.com/p.php?id=37106107&l=217e435e0a

[RC Marrs]

Yes you are correct. Doug. The final line-up is:

1st Propositon – Aberdeen (Reid & Saleem)
1O – St. Andrews F (Vit &Murphy)
2P – St. Andrews C (Whitbread & Hawkins)
2O – GUU (Brown & Adams)

The motion before the house is: This House Would Tie Development Aid To The Establishment Of Microcredit Programmes.

Edinburgh had to pull out.

Quoting kdc4 from 12:15, 15th Mar 2007
Rumour has it that, due to unavoidable absence, the Edinburgh team is withdrawing, thus making the lineup:

1st Prop: Aberdeen (Reid and Saleem)
1st Opp: St Andrews (Vit and Murphy)
2nd Prop: St Andrews (Hawkins and Whitbread)
2nd Opp: Glasgow (Adams and Brown)

With a motion about something remotely related to tying foreign aid to microfinance.

Cheers,
-Doug

[Jason]

This will be my third final Dickie and I will do my best however if we do get lucky the line-up for the international mace is about as scary as it can get.

[kdc4]

The Mace final was won by Glasgow (arrgh!!), with Jason and Tony taking a narrow second place on a 5-2 split.

Commisserations to our teams, and best of luck to all for next year!

Congratulations, though, are due to Rach, who has been elected SSDC President!

Cheers,
-Doug

[Jessica]

Congrats Rach!!

Also, well done to the St Andrews teams in the Mace final. I heard you gave them a good run for their money (split decision, oooooh baby!)

[David Bean]

Gosh, well done to you guys for coming second, anyway. Any cnahce of a short precis of the debate? Sounds like quite an interesting motion, so it would be good to hear what lines it fell along.

[hr]

Psalm 91:7

[ChrisH]

Interesting? No. There were moments of humour, although sadly being in second prop we didn't get to share in them.

An overview:

Aberdeen: We think Britain should run these micro credit schemes. And help women, because women suffer.

St Andrews: Umm British Empire? Women don't really benefit from micro credit so well. Macroeconomic development good, China etc.

St Andrews (2): *Ignoring 1st Prop* This is why we should tie aid together. Bridging loans good, infrastrucure good etc.

Glasgow: NO! *Anger, fuming general wailing and gnashing of teeth* We are lawyers, we recite studies, we win!

Or something like that, both St Andrews teams got good feedback. The debate was a little crazy but there you go.

[David Bean]

You should have stood for Clerk, Chris!

[hr]

Psalm 91:7

[Dickie]

Quoting David Bean from 20:51, 27th Mar 2007
You should have stood for Clerk, Chris!

He is over qualified, he writes minutes and makes them available; and from what I can see that has not been a job that has been done by this or other Clerks for some time.

(If this causes offence it is not meant to...)

[hr]

http://facebook.com/p.php?id=37106107&l=217e435e0a

[ChrisH]

In my defense that pretty much could have been written before the debate occured...

And at 116 words it is rather shorter than anything I would have to write as clerk. In my opionion there is no harder job, including convenor, and I certainly would never run for it. The equivilant of 2 undergrad essays a week plus board minutes is quite a burden.

We did all after all fail to get into Oxbridge, that may be what they demand there, but I for one enjoy the odd bit of spare time

[David Bean]

Speak for yourself on Oxbridge! Clerk's a great job. I suppose you juust have to enjoy writing, and that's all there is to it, really.

[hr]

Psalm 91:7

[exnihilo]

Writing minutes is not quite the same as writing essays though, more a question of taking dictation than anything else.

[David Bean]

Ay, but you want to try and do it with a certain flair!

[hr]

Psalm 91:7

[Dickie]

Quoting David Bean from 21:38, 30th Mar 2007
Ay, but you want to try and do it with a certain flair!

I would rather it was just done!

[hr]

http://facebook.com/p.php?id=37106107&l=217e435e0a

[exnihilo]

David, I minuted both UMC and SRC for some time, flair's all well and good (and mine had it), but it's still not an intellectual task, and as Dickie says the important thing is getting the damned things done.