Home

TheSinner.net

Bean censured!

Welcome to the Union message board. Here's your opportunity to tell us what you think of what we're doing on your behalf. Enjoy! - Oli Walker, Head of Media, Marketing and Design, http://www.YourUnion.netPlease post any requests for advice (about anything) on The Sinner's ADVICE board. Ta!

Bean censured!

Postby gotcha on Fri Mar 24, 2006 11:44 am

Following his fastidious behaviour at a certain debates event, Mr David Bean, MA(Hons), Association Director of Student Development and Activities (DOSDA), Father of the House and Convenor Emeritus for the Union Debating Society, and holder of other such high ranking and socially enviable positions has had a vote of censure imposed against him at a recent meeting of the SSC.

Not only is Mr Bean meant to be in quite close a relationship with this committee, given his position of DOSDA, but now that he has this effective vote of no confidence, does this mean that his validity is finally at an end following a year of controversy and bad press?

Only months ago, it was reported by no other than a Mr Christopher Brads, who was hired to do a study on the efficiency of each of the union officers and sabbs, that Mr Bean was often late for work. In fact, on the very morning that Mr Bean was to meet Mr Brads in his capacity of study-maker, Mr Bean was hours late for work owing to a hang-over. Mr Bean claimed that he was not well. Mr Bean did oppose this the last time it was mentioned on the sinner, but we can reveal that in an interview with Mr Brads and other members of the union SSC that it was mentioned that Mr Bean was indeed late for work due to alcohol related activities and is still often not to be found in his ofice, where one would expect to find him.

Whether Mr Bean's abscence is due to poor planning on his behalf and a constantlack to update his diary, or if it is due to his implied continual abuse of the position he is in, we do not know. However, what we can say with all sincerity and confidence is, no matter the support Mr Bean might have in the public St Andrews realm - he is far from a clean sheet and boxes filled with ticks for him to live this down quickly.

However the tone of this post, we the authors do regret that bad news makes good news.
gotcha
 

Re:

Postby Al on Fri Mar 24, 2006 12:12 pm

If you're so sure of this, why don't you put your name to it?
Al
 
Posts: 3992
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby RJ Covino on Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:21 pm

I fully expect that in 4 weeks' time there shall be some coverage of this debates drunkenness within the student media which will undoubtedly clear things up.

[hr]

http://www.ralphcovino.com
RJ Covino
 
Posts: 728
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby David Bean on Sat Apr 08, 2006 6:22 pm

I just found this pile of tripe - as far as questions about who wrote it are concerned, I think the barely comprehensible English is a pretty good giveaway. Allow me to correct a couple of points of fact, however. Firstly, I don't have a 'close relationship with' the SSC: I sit on it. Second, your claim that a motion of censure is 'effectively a vote of no confidence' is utterly false, and in posting it you've proved yourself already to be either a liar or an ignoramus, or possibly both. They are two entirely different things, and have different meanings; nobody on the SSC would ever have brought a motion of no-confidence against me on the strength of the things I was accused of doing wrong, never mind voted for it, irrespective of whether the accusations were true or false.

Now, let's take a step back a minute, and talk about the 'reports' of Chris Brads. I find it slightly strange that he himself denies saying anything like what you keep claiming he said, but even if you were right, who the blazes appointed him as an arbiter - how the devil would he know what you claim he said? He wasn't 'hired to do a study' on our efficiency: he asked for a job training us, and in the course of this he followed me around for two days, in which, yes, I was ill (sue me). How those two days are supposed to be enough to base a claim as to my general behaviour, I don't know, but you haven't let common sense or logic stand in the way of anything else you've ever posted, so perhaps I shouldn't worry. And as for that bit about how it was subsequently revealed that I wasn't ill after all, I don't even know what the hell you're talking about, but it looks like rubbish to me.

Now, you say I'm often late for work. What, exactly, do you mean by that - that I don't work a 9-5 job? Well, no shit, Sherlock. Looking at my diary for next week, on three of the five days I have evening appointments that are likely to stretch beyond ten o'clock at night, and if I manage to get out for 45 minutes at about 5 or 6 for a bite to eat, I'll be doing well. So after all of that, you expect me to come in at nine in the morning - or at least if I don't, you'll accuse me of being late? A child of two could figure out that in a job like mine, the hours must be fitted around the needs of the student body I serve, whose activities are, naturally, shifted until later in the day when they don't have classes. If I decided to work a strict 9-5 job and refused to go to any of my evening appointments, you'd think I was a lunatic, and you'd be right - but if you further expect me to work 9-5 plus five hours or more on most evenings, well, I'd like to see you try that one yourself, and see how it feels. Meanwhile, if I'm not in my office some of the rest of the time, it might occur to you that I'm probably either doing something somewhere else, or in a meeting. But hey, why choose the obvious explanation when you can make up a lie?

So as working hours are obviously not a measure of performance, what is? One thing only: results. Let me tell you something, sunshine. The night after that censure vote at SSC, the St Andrews Voluntary Service appointed me an honorary life member, to thank me for the work I'd done in steering through their affiliation. She gave me a card, the convenor, and I hope she won't mind me quoting her words: "If you'd have achieved nothing else other than what you have with SVS you'd have had a momentous year - and yet I know you've done so much more." Like the fairs, training, work with the St Andrew's Festival and National Postgraduate Committee, careers events and the Laws - my AGM report is on the web site if you're interested.

And that's where the public support you admit I enjoy comes from. Yes, people like you don't like me very much, but what do I care about you, when my constituents are happy? They're the ones who got me here, they're the ones who I'm working for and they're the ones I'm accountable to. And as long as they're happy, I'm happy. And they are. And there's nothing you, the Saint or anyone else can do about it.

[hr]

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

Re:

Postby Al on Sun Apr 09, 2006 9:01 am

In a wild swerve off topic, when did the SVS change from "Student Voluntary Service" to "St Andrews Voluntary Service"?
Al
 
Posts: 3992
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby harmless loony on Sun Apr 09, 2006 12:47 pm

In fact the official title of SVS was always the St Andrews University Voluntary Service (as was written in the constitution)

It was never the Student Voluntary Service.

And I'm not going to say much more about SVS cos David knows I disagree with his tactics and secondly, I find it funny how again the constitution was not followed the former convenors were not informed of the AGM.

But hey whatever suits your agenda eh?
harmless loony
 
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2003 10:42 pm

Re:

Postby Al on Sun Apr 09, 2006 1:18 pm

"It was never the Student Voluntary Service."

Then why in so many places - for example, the list of beneficiaries in various Rag Mags, and the Societies Directories - was it referred to as the Student Voluntary Service?
Al
 
Posts: 3992
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby David Bean on Sun Apr 09, 2006 1:24 pm

Yes, I think there was a slight problem in that the university didn't like the presence of the word 'University' in the title of the group, but I haven't looked into the matter in any depth. To make things even more confusing, there is another body called the SVS that is also involved with volunteering: the Student Volunteering Scotland group, which is like a kind of cross-university body for information sharing.

Just to clarify, notice of the AGM was certainly provided according to the terms of the Constitution - it was publicly posted, and several emails were sent to the list - but the SVS Committee handled that, part of things. So far as tactics are concerned, everything we did was in consultation with the SVS itself, through its committee and subsequently approved unanimously by the membership. Everyone running the SVS right now is perfectly happy and, with the addition of the MV Award scheme, added security and plans for a publicity event, it's pretty much business as usual.

Edit: Al, I'm not sure, but I daresay they just got the name wrong.

[hr]

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

Re:

Postby Al on Sun Apr 09, 2006 8:14 pm

"Al, I'm not sure, but I daresay they just got the name wrong."

Perhaps. But more than once? And I would have hoped that the SVS bod who wrote the blurb for the Societies Directory would have known the correct name of their organisation. Still, it's all academic now.
Al
 
Posts: 3992
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby Cain on Sun Apr 09, 2006 10:20 pm

Quoting gotcha from 14:56, 22nd Mar 2006
Following his fastidious behaviour at a certain debates event...


I would be surprised if fastidious is the word that you want to use

[hr]

I hold an element of surprise
I hold an element of surprise
Cain
User avatar
 
Posts: 4439
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2003 8:31 am

Re:

Postby Lid on Tue Apr 11, 2006 3:05 pm

Facts about David Bean:

* He instigated the Crimean War
* He eats babies
* Given the chance, he would kill you and everyone you care about.

Enough with the Bean-bashing for goodness sake.

Anyway, few points:
It's not an effective vote of no confidence. It's a vote of censure. A vote of no confidence would be a vote of no confidence. A vote of censure is a vote censuring Mr Bean.

He wasn't censured for being late to work, so what's your point? The late / different hours Bean works has been done to death on other boards. It's boring me.

A year of controversy and bad press - like people slagging him off on The Sinner, many of them poorly informed..

I was with Bean the entire night in question, and I was personally astounded that I found out (from sources other than Bean, because of course this motion was taken in camera) he'd been censured for such things.

Enough with Bean-bashing, let him get on with his job.

[hr]

We are not drunks, we are multi-millionaires
Mathematical Anti Telharsic Harfatum Septomin
Lid
 
Posts: 1079
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 11:59 pm
Location: Luxembourg

Re:

Postby liliputian on Wed Apr 12, 2006 8:56 pm

It has been brought to my attention that a few people seem to think the original poster was me.

Just to clarify for everyone - it was not.

I do not post unregistered messages on this website. Nor do I post such slamming statements against fellow officers, even if I have been known to disagree with an officer in the past.

Also I know enough about Association standing orders by now to know that a motion of censure and a motion of no confidence are not the same, and also that things discussed in camera are not to be mentioned again outside of the meeting.

[hr]

i know you want the sin but not the sinner...

http://standrews.facebook.com/profile.php?id=37100186
[i:143mmj9f]i know you want the sin but not the sinner...[/i:143mmj9f]

http://standrews.facebook.com/profile.php?id=37100186
liliputian
 
Posts: 750
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2003 3:25 am

Re:

Postby Jono on Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:39 am

Quoting RJ Covino from 13:21, 24th Mar 2006
I fully expect that in 4 weeks' time there shall be some coverage of this debates drunkenness within the student media which will undoubtedly clear things up.

[hr]

http://www.ralphcovino.com

Perfect timing! This weeks saint says exactly that.

Out of curiosity; are they correct in saying the Association AGM held in camera. If so, why?

[hr]

Don't mention the Nazi's!
Now some people weren't happy about the content of that last post. And we can't have someone not happy. Not on the internet.
Jono
Moderator

User avatar
 
Posts: 1252
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 9:44 pm

Re:

Postby Al on Fri Apr 21, 2006 11:26 am

How can a general meeting be held in camera?
Al
 
Posts: 3992
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby Little Miss Giggles on Fri Apr 21, 2006 12:23 pm

The AGM was held in the Main Bar. It couldn't get any more out of camera than that.
Little Miss Giggles
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2004 3:21 pm

Re:

Postby Pedant on Fri Apr 21, 2006 2:53 pm

EX camera, EX camera.

It's Latin.
Pedant
 
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby Al on Fri Apr 21, 2006 2:59 pm

Quoting pedant from 15:53, 21st Apr 2006
EX camera, EX camera.

It's Latin.


You still haven't corrected your own mistake, I notice.
Al
 
Posts: 3992
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby Grandpa on Wed Apr 26, 2006 12:06 pm

How boring this thread is!

[hr]

We are gentlemen that neither in our hearts nor outward eyes envy the great nor shall the low despise.
We are gentlemen that neither in our hearts nor outward eyes envy the great nor shall the low despise.
Grandpa
 
Posts: 773
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 3:42 am

Re:

Postby Al on Wed Apr 26, 2006 5:11 pm

Then you should feel right at home.
Al
 
Posts: 3992
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby Grandpa on Tue May 02, 2006 4:45 pm

Quoting Al from 18:11, 26th Apr 2006
Then you should feel right at home.


hehehe,

no I like a little more than latin spellings to keep me interested, however, if there a certain among us that salivate at the chance to correct a mispelt latin word, then I'm sure they're more than welcome to carry on.

[hr]

We are gentlemen that neither in our hearts nor outward eyes envy the great nor shall the low despise.
We are gentlemen that neither in our hearts nor outward eyes envy the great nor shall the low despise.
Grandpa
 
Posts: 773
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 3:42 am

Next

Return to The Students' Association (Union)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron