SGM: The Aftermath
It has been one day since the widely praised Special General Meeting of the Simon Fraser Student Society has taken place and people continue to voice what they have to say (I have even read comments from various other Universities) on their various blogs and online journals:
Glyn Lewis mentioned that we were uninformed as he attempted to introduce his motion to elongate the amount of speaking time he was allowed. He claimed that in doing so we were taking away the democratic rights that we assigned to him in his election. I for one have no remorse for the loss of Glyn. He was given a reset of time for his 3 minutes to defend himself within the SGM itself and all he did rather than try to save his ass and explain to us what happened (which he was originally motioning to do I might add) he turned his back to Madam Chair and irrationally told us that we were wrong. Mr. Glyn Lewis, there was a reason why we didn't allow you to speak your 10 minutes. For the two months you had to explain what had happened it was always the same, defending what you did and telling us that we were wrong.
These people seem to forget that we, Simon Fraser students, are not little naïve kids that can be pushed around, who don't know what they're doing, the ignorant ones in all shapes and forms. No, we are the Intellectual Elite! We are individuals who each have a voice that will be heard.
Spock had the right idea, "The good of the many outweigh the good of the few." Those 'few', the 'G7', clearly didn't see past their own benefit to the needs of the many and when putting that in a place for debate what does one expect, You start over. The SFSS is an operating system of students and those in question were a virus slowly eating away at our resources and 'data'. The best course of action in this situation is purge the virus, reformat, start over.
Alas if that were so easy. As far as the current news goes, all affairs with the SFSS are supposed to go through the two remaining, Andrea Sandau and Joel Blok, whom are the two remaining undisputed executive officers of the society. However yet again it is reasonable to say that the Group of Seven will do just the opposite rearranging the internals of the Society to exclude the two of them being that they deemed that the SGM illegal and thus holds no merit. I find that funny in a sence. Those same people who claim an unlawful assembly attended the assembly. To quote another blog, "They were there, they participated.” This in turn overrules the claim of an illegal meeting as the people who claim it to be attended the meeting. THAT IS UNDISPUTABLE.
The issue that I have to say was the more catalyzing of agents to the wonderful success of this meeting has got to be the snivel tactics that they used to try to gain support. Booking on the same day - Mistake. Attempting to use 'magical' powers to deem an SGM invalid - Mistake. Calling a collective body determining your fate 'Narrow-Minded' - Mistake. Clear blatant attempts to break the quorum - Mistake. I might have been a little more supportive if they came with blankets and hot chocolate ... NOT.
As more and more information comes out after the fact it gets more and more clear. Take for instance the letter sent to Andrea about Shawn's status as a student. There is something eating away at the basis of our society, rules broken and every possible loophole found. When they were elected they wanted to make a difference, the same difference that the original SFSS wanted, how far on a tangent they went...
The question is now, "What next?" The G7 have ceased communication with other on-campus groups and they are seeking legal action. Why is it that they are trying to hard to ruin a good thing - the first quorum in 10 years and the changing of our bylaws as well. Why cut out two directors of the society - who gives them the power to do so? Why not just run again and see if the body that rid them will take them back - in there they will find their answer to their 'witch hunt'. Clearly the issues have lead them to be selfish and definitely not thinking of the society. With every passing day they continue to question the motion of their impeachment when the reason stands with them - in their actions and their actions will always speak louder than their words. They claimed a fight for democracy, well democracy ruled and in so seemed to have failed with them.
- SFSS Democracy Now - SGM Debrief
- Bryan - Yeah, We Did it!
- Beyond Robson - SFU Students Impeach their Directors
- Awake To Dream - See Democracy in Action: Now with Free Food
- Including the Blogs from Yesterday
Glyn Lewis mentioned that we were uninformed as he attempted to introduce his motion to elongate the amount of speaking time he was allowed. He claimed that in doing so we were taking away the democratic rights that we assigned to him in his election. I for one have no remorse for the loss of Glyn. He was given a reset of time for his 3 minutes to defend himself within the SGM itself and all he did rather than try to save his ass and explain to us what happened (which he was originally motioning to do I might add) he turned his back to Madam Chair and irrationally told us that we were wrong. Mr. Glyn Lewis, there was a reason why we didn't allow you to speak your 10 minutes. For the two months you had to explain what had happened it was always the same, defending what you did and telling us that we were wrong.
These people seem to forget that we, Simon Fraser students, are not little naïve kids that can be pushed around, who don't know what they're doing, the ignorant ones in all shapes and forms. No, we are the Intellectual Elite! We are individuals who each have a voice that will be heard.
Spock had the right idea, "The good of the many outweigh the good of the few." Those 'few', the 'G7', clearly didn't see past their own benefit to the needs of the many and when putting that in a place for debate what does one expect, You start over. The SFSS is an operating system of students and those in question were a virus slowly eating away at our resources and 'data'. The best course of action in this situation is purge the virus, reformat, start over.
Alas if that were so easy. As far as the current news goes, all affairs with the SFSS are supposed to go through the two remaining, Andrea Sandau and Joel Blok, whom are the two remaining undisputed executive officers of the society. However yet again it is reasonable to say that the Group of Seven will do just the opposite rearranging the internals of the Society to exclude the two of them being that they deemed that the SGM illegal and thus holds no merit. I find that funny in a sence. Those same people who claim an unlawful assembly attended the assembly. To quote another blog, "They were there, they participated.” This in turn overrules the claim of an illegal meeting as the people who claim it to be attended the meeting. THAT IS UNDISPUTABLE.
The issue that I have to say was the more catalyzing of agents to the wonderful success of this meeting has got to be the snivel tactics that they used to try to gain support. Booking on the same day - Mistake. Attempting to use 'magical' powers to deem an SGM invalid - Mistake. Calling a collective body determining your fate 'Narrow-Minded' - Mistake. Clear blatant attempts to break the quorum - Mistake. I might have been a little more supportive if they came with blankets and hot chocolate ... NOT.
As more and more information comes out after the fact it gets more and more clear. Take for instance the letter sent to Andrea about Shawn's status as a student. There is something eating away at the basis of our society, rules broken and every possible loophole found. When they were elected they wanted to make a difference, the same difference that the original SFSS wanted, how far on a tangent they went...
The question is now, "What next?" The G7 have ceased communication with other on-campus groups and they are seeking legal action. Why is it that they are trying to hard to ruin a good thing - the first quorum in 10 years and the changing of our bylaws as well. Why cut out two directors of the society - who gives them the power to do so? Why not just run again and see if the body that rid them will take them back - in there they will find their answer to their 'witch hunt'. Clearly the issues have lead them to be selfish and definitely not thinking of the society. With every passing day they continue to question the motion of their impeachment when the reason stands with them - in their actions and their actions will always speak louder than their words. They claimed a fight for democracy, well democracy ruled and in so seemed to have failed with them.
posted by Mathew Pagalilauan at 11:13 PM
1 Comments:
Very thoughtful article, dude. I attended the SGM as well. I was going to take a peek and then leave. But after I saw out the way these people tried to abuse with the democratic process with their delaying tactics, I was determined to stay until all of them are voted off.
Now I hear these people still doesn't want to admit that they've been impeached and should leave the their posts.
My god, these guys are in denial. But do we have to play this expensive legal game with these people? Can we just ignore them and hold the election?
Post a Comment
<< Home