Who is the new association president?

[Haunted]

Go Tom!

[Tom]

At the end of the day, I'm happy that he won because he is a genuine person who I believe actually cares about the students and not only blatant self-promotion.

[Paranoid]

I'm afraid Sid if you had actually met the guy in person you'd realise why he has such strong support here. He is the most down to earth, self-less, and most importantly enthusiastic person I have ever met (and for once I don't say this flippantly!).

To say he shouldnt be allowed the position of President because he hasn't experience in the environment is complete rubbish! The guy has the character and integrity to get the job done and I just wish I was still a student to experience his rein!

I also think you greatly underestimate the situation he entered when originally taking up the post of Senior Student of JBH. I was there at the time and everything was on the rocks (Tom's already listed the details on his own thread in reply to a question). He managed to turn things around within a year, which certainly didn't look possible 9 months earlier.

Well done Tom, I hope this result is true (yet to hear official confirmation)

[hr]

..I've got this pain down all the diodes on my left side...

[flossy]

I'm honestly happy that it's someone who seemd to want the post rather than thinking how good it would look on his cv. i've met him and he's likeable and seems like he'll do a good job. Hackery doesn't equal a good sabb, just a lot of hard work. It's nice to see a new face and hopefully will encourage more non-hacks to stand next year.

[hr]

Not to put too fine a point on it, say I'm the only bee in your bonnet

[flarewearer]

Quoting LK Today from 18:58, 22nd Mar 2006
Ok, this is getting very old very quickly. I am sorry that nobody ran against me. I am sorry that I didn't have to spend the full £55 of my budget to run a full campaign in order to secure the position. I am sorry if you all think that I have come into the position unopposed, or, as some like to say, by default. However, none of that was my fault, and NEVER was I appointed or choosen by another Union Hack to take this position. I received the support of a large number of people when I told them I had the intention to run, however, I never told people not to run against me, neither did Laura nor Graeme. We got these positions fairly and squarely, and I'm sorry if we didn't give people an exciting race, however, I can promise you we will give you quality service next year. Now the 'team' is complete, I look forward to taking office and getting on with the job you have given me to do, putting these so-called 'undemocratic' elections behind me. And, as I've said elsewhere, if I'm not doing my job to YOUR satisfaction, then please come tell ME and I will do everything I can to change.

Lee Kane
DoSDA Elect

Sorry Lee, I have made myself misunderstood. I wasn't having a dig at you (although reading back it does look like that). After all, you took the intiative to stand and thus were duly elected and it's not your fault that nobody ran against you.

My point is that it is a free and open election and anyone (including the Gatty cats) can run. Anyone is entitled to do the job if they get the most votes, irrespective of whether or not they have the right hack credentials and experience.

[hr]

image:www.magnificentoctopus.com/x/elgar.png

[flarewearer]

Quoting Paranoid from 19:44, 22nd Mar 2006

The guy has the character and integrity to get the job done and I just wish I was still a student to experience his rein!

Ooh! I'd have voted for a candidate who was into a bit of stableyard role play too

[hr]

image:www.magnificentoctopus.com/x/elgar.png

[Sid]

I understand your point and you have every right to make your point, but I feel differently. I'm sure Tom is a great guy, my friend spent time with him in our version of Big Brother and spoke very highly of him, but I really feel that someone with experience of the union and someone who has shown an interest in the union was more deserving of the position.

What saddens me is the amount of people on here who mention hacks as though they are some kind of pest. The 'hacks' care about the union and really try to make a difference, and we really need people like them. It's very easy to sit back and point the finger rather than do anything about it yourself.

Quoting Paranoid from 19:44, 22nd Mar 2006
I'm afraid Sid if you had actually met the guy in person you'd realise why he has such strong support here. He is the most down to earth, self-less, and most importantly enthusiastic person I have ever met (and for once I don't say this flippantly!).

To say he shouldnt be allowed the position of President because he hasn't experience in the environment is complete rubbish! The guy has the character and integrity to get the job done and I just wish I was still a student to experience his rein!

I also think you greatly underestimate the situation he entered when originally taking up the post of Senior Student of JBH. I was there at the time and everything was on the rocks (Tom's already listed the details on his own thread in reply to a question). He managed to turn things around within a year, which certainly didn't look possible 9 months earlier.

Well done Tom, I hope this result is true (yet to hear official confirmation)

[hr]

..I've got this pain down all the diodes on my left side...

[Al]

But surely he is trying to do something about it himself?

[Sid]

Who is he? I was talking about the people who criticize hacks, not any person in particular.

Quoting Al from 20:52, 22nd Mar 2006
But surely he is trying to do something about it himself?

[Andrew Cusack]

Quoting Sid from 18:27, 22nd Mar 2006
You're fucking kidding me???!!!!! But he knows fuck all about union politics?!!!

Students who don't get involved or know the system shouldn't vote.

I hope there are appeals.

So you're saying union positions should be limited to self-important hacks who live in a delusional world of their own creation rather than being open to the entire student body? Interesting, interesting.

Fair enough really. Let's let the hacks have one union consisting solely of themselves which is completely irrelevant to the student body. Then let's have another union which has all the rest of the students with Tom d'Ardenne, a damn fine man, as our president.

Down with the Hacks! Long live Tom!

[Sid]

No, I'm not, I'm saying that I think people who have shown an interest in the Association would be better experienced for the job.

Why is everyone so down on the people who get involved? Your damn fine man is now also termed a hack. Anyone who gets involved is a hack to the rest of the student population. My problem is that, it's only now he's decided to get involved, and I feel that he's gone for a job that would benefit from someone with experience.

Quoting Andrew Cusack from 21:17, 22nd Mar 2006

Quoting Sid from 18:27, 22nd Mar 2006
You're fucking kidding me???!!!!! But he knows fuck all about union politics?!!!

Students who don't get involved or know the system shouldn't vote.

I hope there are appeals.

So you're saying union positions should be limited to self-important hacks who live in a delusional world of their own creation rather than being open to the entire student body? Interesting, interesting.

Fair enough really. Let's let the hacks have one union consisting solely of themselves which is completely irrelevant to the student body. Then let's have another union which has all the rest of the students with Tom d'Ardenne, a damn fine man, as our president.

Down with the Hacks! Long live Tom!

[flossy]

Just because Tom is now involved with the union doesn't make him a hack- there's a big distinction between those who are actively involved in the union (whether they be SRC, SSC, ents etc) and "hacks"; those who seem to see the union as a stepping stone to some future political career and will run for any position just to see their name in lights.

[hr]

Not to put too fine a point on it, say I'm the only bee in your bonnet

[Paranoid]

I can understand your point Sid, but in reality people develop over time, and University of all places is a time when your views and values change.

Because of that I'd say that those who decide to run for such positions shouldn't be considered less capable than someone who has dedicated their university careers to the Union. As was shown in this election, it is about more than past experience. I think you mentioned it earlier, that if it was about voting for the most experienced then the election shouldn't be open to the entire student body. As it stands, students have spoken out for someone they can relate to and associate themselves with. Someone who's come up through the ranks that are most accessible to the majority of students (i.e. clubs, societies, hall committees) and there is no shame in that (how many people have had experience running a university hall before joining such a committee in St.A? I certainly hadn't).

Ultimately, no ones perfect, and in elections there are always winners and losers (unless your a Republican...only kidding!). I only hope Tom will prove your initial thoughts wrong, and I'm sure you'd like to share this hope with me.

[hr]

..I've got this pain down all the diodes on my left side...

[Paranoid]

Was never going to find another way of phrasing that last bit without sounding a bit camp!

[hr]

..I've got this pain down all the diodes on my left side...

[Cain]

is there going to be any more from the EOC or anybody else regarding official results than just Tom won pres...?

[hr]

I hold an element of surprise

[SerialKeeler]

The fact that the student body voted for someone outside of the union reflects the current state of the union itself. People want change...not just kicking a dead horse.

[kats]

Here is how the elections turned out:

1. Tom
2. Preston
3. Seth
4. Anders
5. Bonnie
6. RON
7. Brendon

This is purely the overall count...this is how it turned out... and we counted and sorted SEVERAl times!!!!

[Grandpa]

Quoting Cain from 22:21, 22nd Mar 2006
is there going to be any more from the EOC or anybody else regarding official results than just Tom won pres...?

There is going to be something happeneing.

That he was disqualified and because someone who thought that they would then re-qualify mr d'ardenne, is totally out of order.

Saying this, I am glad tom has the support that he does, however, canvassing for votes over the internet is and was against the election rules and he should be penalised as the rules dictate - not as the will of someone or other dictates.

Rules are there so that all involved can have a fair chance - if someone abuses the rules, their right to partake should be in some way revoked.

This seems not to have happened, as someone on the elections committee has seen fit to disregard such rules in favour of an 'i didn't know' or some other such excuse.

Not knowing is not excuseable. All the candidates were told of all the rukles at the mandatory candidates meeting. If he was not there (and I say if, as I don't know if he was or not) then the fact that he neglected to show up is his fault, and if he had good reason for not going (like someone dying) then the election committee should have told him - which I'm sure they did if this was the case.

He did not adhere to the rules. The election committee failed to treat him fairly. They, and Mr D'Ardenne, should be held to answer for this miscarriage of a correct and fair process.

[l][l][l]
No 'democracy'.

No accountability of the elections committee.

No accountability of candidates who transgress the rules.

What a disaster of an election.

[/l][/l][/l]

[hr]

[s]Cogitationis poenam nemo meretur, facias ipse quod faciamus suades - pax vobiscum.[/s]

[Al]

What else can happen? If the Chair of SAB has overturned the disqualification then that is that.

[Cain]

Quoting Grandpa from 22:48, 22nd Mar 2006
[l][l][l]
No 'democracy'.

No accountability of the elections committee.

No accountability of candidates who transgress the rules.

What a disaster of an election.

[/l][/l][/l]

the only verdict is vengeance

And in fairness, rules are only as good as the people who enforce them.

I was actually asking if we could see the nuber of votes cast/spoilt, etc, as the EOC had provided for the other posts, rather than redo the arguments about who did what illegally.

[hr]

I hold an element of surprise