Home

TheSinner.net

AGM and the new Board of Ten

Your opportunity to discuss goings on in the Debating Society, recent debates or any issues you believe are important. Questions or queries can be addressed to the moderator at debates@st-andrews.ac.uk.

Re:

Postby David Bean on Sat Mar 24, 2007 4:09 pm

Congratulations to everyone who was elected. The turnout was a little low, that's true, but it's sometimes difficult to do anything about that - the AGM in my first year, for example, was even held in Parliament Hall after a debate, and still most people left.

Any chance of a preview of what some of the new Board members are planning to do with their roles?

[hr]

Psalm 91:7
Psalm 91:7
David Bean
 
Posts: 3053
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

hmmm

Postby Jessica on Sun Mar 25, 2007 6:17 pm

I think I might make a few posters...



Nah, in all seriousness, a lot. Tons. But I'd kind of like to have a board meeting before spelling it all out. After all, I want to make sure I'm communicating the right things and not just what goes on in my silly colonial head!
Jessica
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby Jessica on Sun Mar 25, 2007 6:29 pm

YAY!!
Jessica
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby exnihilo on Mon Mar 26, 2007 10:55 am

Well, there are five threads on the first page alone where I have requested information about the Society, either directly or that it should go on the website.

So how about starting there?
exnihilo
 
Posts: 4999
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby Jessica on Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:44 am

I will indeed start with the website. Unfortunately I will not be able to put up the dates and motions for the rest of term until the board meeting. The sponsorship page is being revamped as we speak. Also there will be a page on the Balaka very soon. What other information would you like? If you'd like info regarding alumni relations I suggest you contact James Bouter.
Jessica
 
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby Dickie on Mon Mar 26, 2007 5:18 pm

Dickie
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 3:12 pm

Re:

Postby exnihilo on Mon Mar 26, 2007 10:28 pm

We shall see, we shall see. None of it happened over the last year, so time will tell.
exnihilo
 
Posts: 4999
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby Lid on Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:25 pm

Quoting Dickie from 18:18, 26th Mar 2007
http://www.yourunion.net/debates/conten ... ?page=6000

Is it just me or has Tom taken the top off his head with Bessie?


And let us not forget the missing X marking the spot, just above Chris Hawkins, the Treasure

[hr]

Mathematical Anti Telharsic Harfatum Septomin
Mathematical Anti Telharsic Harfatum Septomin
Lid
 
Posts: 1079
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 11:59 pm
Location: Luxembourg

Re:

Postby Dickie on Tue Mar 27, 2007 1:39 pm

Quoting Lid from 00:25, 27th Mar 2007
Chris Hawkins, the Treasure
[hr]


Never mind I am sure that the new Comunications Sec. will solve all the problems of the WebSite.

Has a linkup been sent re. the next debate, on the 11th?

[hr]

http://facebook.com/p.php?id=37106107&l=217e435e0a
Dickie
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 3:12 pm

Re:

Postby Lid on Tue Mar 27, 2007 4:39 pm

There's a debate on the 11th?

[hr]

Mathematical Anti Telharsic Harfatum Septomin
Mathematical Anti Telharsic Harfatum Septomin
Lid
 
Posts: 1079
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 11:59 pm
Location: Luxembourg

Re:

Postby Dickie on Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:27 pm

Quoting Lid from 17:39, 27th Mar 2007
There's a debate on the 11th?

[hr]

Mathematical Anti Telharsic Harfatum Septomin


"April 11- This House Would Abolish the Monarchy"

http://www.yourunion.net/debates/conten ... ?page=6002

is what the WebSite says!
But I have not heard via Email as yet I think I will hear on April 10th... Well if the Com's Sec is giving as much notice a last year.




[hr]

http://facebook.com/p.php?id=37106107&l=217e435e0a
Dickie
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 3:12 pm

Re:

Postby Lid on Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:59 pm

It'll be a shame to have the Convenor's first debate of the year marred by points of order and then a suspension of the standing orders. You know it will happen.

[hr]

Mathematical Anti Telharsic Harfatum Septomin
Mathematical Anti Telharsic Harfatum Septomin
Lid
 
Posts: 1079
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 11:59 pm
Location: Luxembourg

Re:

Postby Connie on Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:37 pm

If Tom arranges a good debate then the two seconds of inconvenience caused by having to suspend the standing orders is not a big deal. in fact, with the amount of crazy tradition that has to go on at this debate, one extra point of order wil hardly make any difference at all.
Connie
 
Posts: 125
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 9:40 pm

Re:

Postby qwertghjkl on Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:53 pm

Quoting Lid from 21:59, 27th Mar 2007
It'll be a shame to have the Convenor's first debate of the year marred by points of order and then a suspension of the standing orders. You know it will happen.


Well, all the speaker has to do is suspend at the beginning of the debate part 3.VI of the standing orders....
qwertghjkl
 

Re:

Postby Jamie potton on Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:53 pm

Hopefully the standard of speakers will be high enough that the Standing Orders don't have to be suspended - the debate does not require the monarchy to be insulted, after all; just argued against! Who's speaking?
Jamie potton
 
Posts: 90
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 2:01 pm

Re:

Postby exnihilo on Wed Mar 28, 2007 9:54 pm

I fail to see why standing orders would need to be suspended. Indeed, if they are, it rather suggests a weak case by the Proposition, surely a case can be made against the monarchy without resorting to personal slurs and the like? A good case, within the standing orders, indeed.

(Edit: Beaten to it by one minute, curses!)
exnihilo
 
Posts: 4999
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby David Bean on Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:10 pm

I was shouted down for making this suggestion the last time, but can I please state that if Tom gets to the stage where he feels the standing orders are in danger of being breached but that such breaches are necessary for the continuing of the debate, that he should state, from the Chair, that the particular standing order referring to the Royal Family (and I'd quote it if I had a copy in front of me - he should check in advance) is suspended. He can do that without suspending the Standing Orders as a whole - they were written to ensure as much.

[hr]

Psalm 91:7
Psalm 91:7
David Bean
 
Posts: 3053
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby exnihilo on Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:33 pm

Who is speaking? Someone from the Strafford Club perhaps? Or maybe Iain Bradley?
exnihilo
 
Posts: 4999
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby ChrisH on Wed Mar 28, 2007 10:47 pm

Surely the quality of the speakers will not affect the need to suspend. For as soon as the floor debate opens there are bound to be "insulting" comments.

Unless this is some nefarious plot by Tom who never got to throw anyone out to embark upon a purge and let Bessie see some action...

;)
ChrisH
 
Posts: 86
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 10:33 pm

Re:

Postby exnihilo on Wed Mar 28, 2007 11:58 pm

A strong (and entertaining) argument against the monarchy can be made without breaching the standing orders. If a floor speech (and it will only be one or two) breaches the standing orders, the comments should be ruled out of order. I don't see the problem.
exnihilo
 
Posts: 4999
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

PreviousNext

Return to Union Debating Society

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron