Oh snap! Did I get this right? Ex-girlfriend? Bitter ex-girlfriend?
Regardless of her motives for testifying, it still confirms what we already knew (at least, what I already knew...): there was sharing of resources. Should that necessarily be forbidden in the future? I don't think so. The volunteer pools are always limited, and I can see how it would be hard to find individual, unique groups of volunteers. However, for the time being, it was not allowed. It's not about punishment; it's about having the process respected, which it clearly was not.
she was so not pleased about the verification of "being in a relationship" with iain. amazing.
regardless, this video is fantastic. i hope that more people will finally come forward and say yes, we helped out on jean/roxanne/seamus/julie's campaign. they personally, the volunteers won't be punished, correct?
what else is ridiculous, is that it is the responsibility of the candidate to inform ALL of their volunteers the rules. it really is a shame that jean-guillaume got "taken in" by them, he's a super great guy who could have done great things. its too bad that he will be associated with this.
not only sharing resources but she confirms that the button maker was from CUSA and not the OPIRG button maker which means that the candidates committed fraud when they submitted fake receipts from OPIRG for their buttons. That I think is VERY problematic.
can we please stop with this insination that any time a female student decides to go against the political tide that it's because a man? she isn't the first girl I've heard these types of comments about. of course, any time a woman expresses political dissent, she must be a scorned lover or is trying to prove her love for some dude on the other side. stop it, you know better!
to respond to your comment about how it's silly for it to be"the responsibility of the candidate to inform ALL of their volunteers the rules"
During the elections, your volunteers are an extension of you. They are representing you and your campaign on campus. I don't think it's unreasonable for the responsibility to lie in your hands, as a candidate, to inform your volunteers of the rules and make sure that they are following them.
The same thing applies during 101 Week, when it is the associations' responsibility to ensure that their guides are trained and following rules like By-Law 13.
Anonymous said: it really is a shame that jean-guillaume got "taken in" by them, he's a super great guy who could have done great things. its too bad that he will be associated with this.
I can't help but feel the same way. It is really unfortunate, when someone from outside the circle wants to get involved, and in the process the circle decides to make him a "member". Obviously he's a big boy, and made the decision knowingly, but I still feel that somewhere down the line he was taken advantage of by those who knew better than him.
Maybe RPG should have asked: "Do you agree to be filmed and for the video to be sent to half the school over the Internet."
you know, to be fair...
the orange jacket makes it look like Guantanamo. this whole thing is surreal.
clearly the best interests of the SFUO (i.e. if it has to have any credibility at all next year) demands that an agreement on a process (i.e. an actual process, not a proxy trial on the Internet) be made as quick as possible. If this last for much longer, even the winners lose.
i totally was not clear at all in that. i meant that it was ridiculous that the candidates DID not inform their volunteers. i am a firm believer of reading rules and ensuring that EVERYONE knows them ALL.
also, i want to clear that i was not insinuating that she came forward "because of a man" i truly believe that she came forward because she was finally informed/came into the information and realized that what was going on was wrong.
i truly hope that more people come forward and that those that lied and commited these infractions will be punished
Balls and a conscience and morals... A lot more than I can say about others.
It really pisses me off that Rox continually states that her team did everything alone. Riiiight. Hey Rox! Remember that time Seamus and Jean's volunteers made your buttons?
Cheaters FTW!
They deserve the boot from their new positions and should bow out early from their current positions.
Hmmm...regardless of how I feel about this issue (and really, my opinion is not as black and white as you may assume), I find it kind of sad for Iain. I would never do that to someone. Knowing the circumstances of their "relationship", this is kind of cold.
The original raison-d'être of this blog was to liveblog the Board of Administration meetings and let students know about all of the crazy shit that goes down.
However, the promise of iPods influenced us to stray from this path for a bit to cover the 2009 SFUO elections. Since then, we've been covering a bit of everything SFUO-related.
If you've got tips about exciting things on campus, let us know by emailing us at boavoice.blog@gmail.com.
18 comments:
Oh snap! Did I get this right? Ex-girlfriend? Bitter ex-girlfriend?
Regardless of her motives for testifying, it still confirms what we already knew (at least, what I already knew...): there was sharing of resources. Should that necessarily be forbidden in the future? I don't think so. The volunteer pools are always limited, and I can see how it would be hard to find individual, unique groups of volunteers.
However, for the time being, it was not allowed. It's not about punishment; it's about having the process respected, which it clearly was not.
she was so not pleased about the verification of "being in a relationship" with iain. amazing.
regardless, this video is fantastic. i hope that more people will finally come forward and say yes, we helped out on jean/roxanne/seamus/julie's campaign. they personally, the volunteers won't be punished, correct?
what else is ridiculous, is that it is the responsibility of the candidate to inform ALL of their volunteers the rules. it really is a shame that jean-guillaume got "taken in" by them, he's a super great guy who could have done great things. its too bad that he will be associated with this.
not only sharing resources but she confirms that the button maker was from CUSA and not the OPIRG button maker which means that the candidates committed fraud when they submitted fake receipts from OPIRG for their buttons. That I think is VERY problematic.
"...They've already dug their hole too deep, all they can do is hide now."
Awesome. Just like professional politicians? Maybe a little too much...
or the part about some being more innocent than others? guilty is guilty, although julie had no buttons so this video does not really implicate her.
I think "they" referred to the official reps that lied about helping more than one candidate.
can we please stop with this insination that any time a female student decides to go against the political tide that it's because a man? she isn't the first girl I've heard these types of comments about. of course, any time a woman expresses political dissent, she must be a scorned lover or is trying to prove her love for some dude on the other side. stop it, you know better!
agreed, Miatta.
I'm proud of these people who are coming forward, and I don't think their reasons for doing so should be reduced to being an angry ex-girlfriend.
Anonymous -
to respond to your comment about how it's silly for it to be"the responsibility of the candidate to inform ALL of their volunteers the rules"
During the elections, your volunteers are an extension of you. They are representing you and your campaign on campus. I don't think it's unreasonable for the responsibility to lie in your hands, as a candidate, to inform your volunteers of the rules and make sure that they are following them.
The same thing applies during 101 Week, when it is the associations' responsibility to ensure that their guides are trained and following rules like By-Law 13.
Anonymous said: it really is a shame that jean-guillaume got "taken in" by them, he's a super great guy who could have done great things. its too bad that he will be associated with this.
I can't help but feel the same way. It is really unfortunate, when someone from outside the circle wants to get involved, and in the process the circle decides to make him a "member". Obviously he's a big boy, and made the decision knowingly, but I still feel that somewhere down the line he was taken advantage of by those who knew better than him.
Please forgive all the typos in my first comment. I don't want to be reprimanded by RPG!
Maybe RPG should have asked: "Do you agree to be filmed and for the video to be sent to half the school over the Internet."
you know, to be fair...
the orange jacket makes it look like Guantanamo. this whole thing is surreal.
clearly the best interests of the SFUO (i.e. if it has to have any credibility at all next year) demands that an agreement on a process (i.e. an actual process, not a proxy trial on the Internet) be made as quick as possible. If this last for much longer, even the winners lose.
re: girl 4
i totally was not clear at all in that. i meant that it was ridiculous that the candidates DID not inform their volunteers. i am a firm believer of reading rules and ensuring that EVERYONE knows them ALL.
also, i want to clear that i was not insinuating that she came forward "because of a man" i truly believe that she came forward because she was finally informed/came into the information and realized that what was going on was wrong.
i truly hope that more people come forward and that those that lied and commited these infractions will be punished
haha, glad you cleared that! i may have misread it as well.
Guantanamo Bay, anyone?
Lauren's got balls!
YES!
Balls and a conscience and morals... A lot more than I can say about others.
It really pisses me off that Rox continually states that her team did everything alone. Riiiight. Hey Rox! Remember that time Seamus and Jean's volunteers made your buttons?
Cheaters FTW!
They deserve the boot from their new positions and should bow out early from their current positions.
Hmmm...regardless of how I feel about this issue (and really, my opinion is not as black and white as you may assume), I find it kind of sad for Iain. I would never do that to someone. Knowing the circumstances of their "relationship", this is kind of cold.
Post a Comment