Website

[Jessica]

To be unveiled soon!

[ChrisH]

The new version of the website has just been uploaded. Well done to Miles for producing a comprehensive revamp.

I'll be adding a sprinkle of geeky magic behind the scenes to enable the site to be much more easily updated.

[TC]

Well done Miles, its brilliant.

[hr]

Per Ardua ad Astra

[Jessica]

Beautiful.

[Lid]

Quite good, but with a few issues that I've found:

What's the difference between Calendar and Termcard, except the fact the Calendar is blank, and the Termcard is a rollover away?

Also, the UDS isn't 'affiliated' to the Students' Association, as hailed at the bottom, it's a subcommittee thereof! Societies are affiliated, subcommittees are subcommittees.

I'm actually, if anything, annoyed that it isn't a shambolic cobbled-together effort, as I really fancied a rant. Well done.

[hr]

Mathematical Anti Telharsic Harfatum Septomin

[James Shield]

The website looks really good! If you would like www.yourunion.net/debates to point to your new site, just send me an email to dorep@st-and.ac.uk and I'll change it for you.

[Jason Dunn]

Smashing job with the website. Very well put together and thorough in content. I especially approve of the retaining of the rules about not dissing HMQ, which disappeared for a bit last years, and head-covering when raising a POI.

As an alumnus and paid-up member of the Things-were-better-in-my-day brigade, like the esteemed Lid, I am moved however to offer a few points for consideration.

There are two ts in litteris in the motto, inter'-varsity crops up occasionally instead of inter-'varsity (I'd drop the apostrophe altogether), and I saw a sargeant on the alumni page. Also, though it seems that debates are being held in Upper College Hall, Lower (sic) Parliament Hall is still used to refer to The House in the pages on traditions and rôle of the BOT. This might confuse a neophyte or a returning student unsure of where debates are being held.

Tip-top effort though and I look forward to the first debate.

[ChrisH]

We decided to keep LPH in the relevant places as it is only until November (hopefully!) that debates will take place elsewhere.
Otherwise we'd have to keep potentially changing locations around and may end up with crazy and confusing references.

[David Bean]

Yes, very well done; to my eye it's the best iteration of the web site we've had since the last version of the 2001-class site.

I notice the 'Minutes' section is rather spartan at the moment; is that because they haven't been put up yet, or you don't have them? If the latter, I'd be happy to help track some of the previous ones down.

[Mr Comedy]

Yes, well done. It's definitely the best effort since the Alex S one (that disappeared into the ether when he left the BoT), and does rather well. Much better than that awful one on the Union website.

I'd echo old Beanage and say - any chance of previous minutes? I can also send a few sets as well - I know Bean put a load on the web at one point as well which I assume you can still get if you dig around for them.

[David Bean]

Correction, Mr Vinton: Alex S was never on the Board of Ten, but he did own the domain name and hosting. There was some rumour he was going to run for Clerk against me, but Alan Patterson nobbled him as a favour. And that site still exists - as I pointed out a while ago, you can find it on the Wayback Machine, along with the minutes from 2002-'03 (my year as Clerk, when the web site was part of that remit - incidentally the first year minutes were ever posted online! )

[Al]

Is an alumni newsletter actually produced? I've emailed to join the mailing list several times and have never received a thing.

[Mr Comedy]

I've come to the conclusion that such a thing does not exist. I might have got an email once, but that has been the extent of my alumni mailings. Call me a bitter and twisted old cynic, but I don't think it'll ever be done. Naturally every Clerk who is elected outlines at hecklings the great work that they will do with alumni, but nothing ever happens. Indeed, some haven't even produced sets of minutes.

Thanks for the clarification on the webpage Beanage - I remember your writing all over it, but I didn't remember where S fitted into the mix. And there were a few debates typed up and online from 2005, which would be good to see again.

[Eliot Wilson]

I saw a sargeant on the alumni page

Shocking. Not a serjeant, then?

A word on this. I whollyheartedly endorse having a Serjeant at Arms, rather than a Sergeant or a Macer or whatever weirdness goes on elsewhere, but if the Society is picky about the spelling, it should be because it adheres to the rules and practices, so far as is possible, of Parliament (or rather, the House of Commons, unless you want to replace the Serjeant with a Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod). That being the case, it might be a good idea actually to adhere to said rules, something the Society hasn't really wholeheartedly done for many a year. Just a thought. I do know this shit, you know.

As you were.

[Eliot Wilson]

No idea where "whollyheartedly" came from. Apologies.

[Jsiegel]

There will indeed be an alumni newsletter this year. I seem to have not gotten your emails of address. The letter will be on paper not by email. If you wish to receive it (obviously for free) please email me your post address at js482 by the end of this coming week (oct 4)

[Bizarre Atheist]

Put some slightly more recent minutes up there and you'll have a near-perfect website. Full marks.

[Anon.]

A word on this. I whollyheartedly endorse having a Serjeant at Arms, rather than a Sergeant or a Macer or whatever weirdness goes on elsewhere, but if the Society is picky about the spelling, it should be because it adheres to the rules and practices, so far as is possible, of Parliament (or rather, the House of Commons, unless you want to replace the Serjeant with a Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod). That being the case, it might be a good idea actually to adhere to said rules, something the Society hasn't really wholeheartedly done for many a year. Just a thought. I do know this shit, you know.

As you were.

I notice the utterly ridiculous title of Chief Whip for the Training Secretary (started circa 2003) is still being used; somebody stop it please. If you just want to use parliamentary titles for the sake of it, why has the Chairman of Ways and Means been renamed the Treasurer? At least that had some tenuous relation to the job description.

[Eliot Wilson]

Concur wholeheartedly. Am trying not to rant further.