punditry.ca — uncovering DSU elections

Hey gang!  It’s the moment of truth, the election results will be announced starting at 9:00pm AST, and punditry.ca will be there liveblogging it all for those at home (or in the Killam, as the case may be…)

We have been informed that this year the results will be interspersed with the finalists for Dalhousie’s Got Talent, with a position being announced between every few acts.   If all goes according to schedule, President should be announced sometime around 11:30…so expect a midnight or later announcement for the big job.

Jebus, the Grawood still sells energy drinks, right?  This pundit is in for a long one…

Stay tuned to this spot!

9:10:  Sorry friends, so many technical difficulties.  Fellow pundit Mark Coffn wins the award for my knight in shining Internet armour…he’s not just a pretty smile, folks.

9:15:  Senate results are announced.  They’re going to show us the candidate videos first and then announce the winners…it’s like the Oscars, but hopefully without all the suck.

9:20:  Technical difficulties are the name of the game tonight, no candidate videos, just photos of the candidates with the Election Committee’s own take on punditry’s “6 word game.”  Christian Browne is the boy band member of the crew, apparently.

9:22:  Oh my, that went by quickly.  Your new Senate Reps are Maggie Lovett, Ben Wedge and Carly Nicholson.

9:30:  Wow, that was a little stressful, but we’re up and running now.  The Grawood, incidentally,  is packed.  Methinks it’s more for the Dalhousie’s Got Talent than the election results…just a thought.

9:32:  The band on stage right now looks a bit like early Hives, but is singing a medley of Disney songs, and, like, not just the “Whole New World” standards one would expect, but pulling out the B string “Man Out of You” Mulan type stuff.  A bold move, let’s see if it works out for them.

9:38:  A reliable source [who says punditry doesn't have journalistic integrity?...] has told me that Sen. Wedge was triple fisting with some of Nova Scotia’s finest ale in celebration of his victory.  That source may or may not have been Wedge himself, so I feel comfortable writing about it.

9:41:  In case anyone was wondering, I am sitting front stage centre (leftish) with a laptop on my lap in the middle of the packed bar…I am officially the coolest person you (virtually) know.

9:45: RELEVANT POST ALERT: VPSL is up.  I am in so much suspense…I’m predicting a come from behind win for “no.”

9:46:  Hannah “if she were any better, she’d be twins” Dahn takes the VPSL position for 2010-2011.

9:58:  I don’t know who this comedienne is, but she is ginger, from PEI and pretty hilarious…the pundits corner has decided that we should befriend her.

10:00: VP EDUCATION!

10:01:  Rob “his apples are delicious” LeForte takes the two-peat for VP Education-soon-to-be-VP Academic and External.

10:04:  Next talent group up.  I, again, have no idea what their names are.  (Protip, commercial radio lady who is hosting this whole shindig:  If the gal up front with the computer who is paying attention can’t catch the name of any of the acts, the ones in the back imbibing some of power hour’s finest brew don’t have a chance.  This becomes problematic when you later want them to vote for a winner.)

10:08:  Sublime’s “Badfish” to a “socialble” call to Neil Young’s “Harvest Moon”…I’m in a tailspin of genre-mashing.  I’m also struggling for things to write about in these half hour breaks, just in case it wasn’t obvious.

10:12:  Some people have asked in the comments for the percentage break down along with the winners.  The reason I can’t do this is because they aren’t announcing the ballot count or the percentage of votes for each candidate.  Yeah, no, I don’t know either…

Thankfully, we at punditry.ca have Mike Smit, who will be posting the percentage counts as they come in (or, at the very least, has been in the comments…)

10:14:  A note on the above, in my rush to post the winners, I don’t think I’ve quite been able to convey just how rushed and anti-climactic the annoucements have been.  It’s a bit of a shame, really.  With no percentages or day by day break downs of votes as in years past, it’s a pretty quick process and seems a little bit of an afterthought compared to the rest of the night.  A little disappointing.

10:22: THIS BAND IS SINGING BAD ROMANCE!! The law of Gaga says that they win by deafult, show’s over, amirite?!

10:25:  Just in case you were wondering, this band (Simply Dusted!) also sang Folsom Prison Blues and All for You by gone but not forgotten mid-90s band Sister Hazel.  A mixed bag indeed…

10:26:  VP INTERNAL:  This required a third ballot, says the CRO.  A close race, to be sure.  Apparently, the field mouse can come out on top, and the next VPI will be Kayla Kurin.  This pundit, for one, did not see that one coming.

10:32:  Next up is a magician.  She just made a glass bottle vanish when it was clearly in a paper bag.  BURN THE WITCH!!!  To quote Pundit Buchanan: “She’s going to make that bottle disappear and I’m not going to have a clue where it went.  That’s why I hate magicians!”  One for the books, ladies and gents.

10:35:  The pundit corner likes magic…they really, really like magic.

10:38:  This girl went to magic camp.  I’m going to declatre that cooler than my years at debate camp.

10:40:  PRESIDENT:  Again, not much pagentry.  Saulnier takes the big prize.

10:43:  What a sin, Bailey apparently didn’t have his I.D on him to get into the Grawood and so has two big “X”s on his hand to denote underage status.   Also, CandC Music Factory is now playing.  I feel like I’m at a grade 7 dance all over again…Dance Mix ‘96 what?!

10:57:  Actually, I think they have just put on the Dance Mix ‘96 tape…regardless, the dance floor is bumping.

10:58:  This pundit is going to finish her $3.50 beer (god bless campus pubs) and head to bed…pundit over and out.

Jen Bond Uncategorized

In the spirit of punditry.ca having morphed into somewhat of an “everything about campus politics” blog, we interrupt this regularly scheduled programming for a Dalhousie public service announcement:

The NSPIRG Board Elections are happening *today* and *tomorrow* from 10:00pm-4:00pm. All Dalhousie students who did not opt-out of their NSPIRG fees are able to vote.

Go *here* to check out the bios of people who are running.

Assuming the “Upcoming Events” section of the NSPIRG website has the most up to date information, there will be polling stations at the Killam atrium and the B-Building Student Lounge on Sexton campus.  No word on whether or not Carlton campus ever did win their battle to have easy access to their franchise.  I know NSPIRG CRO Jane Kirby reads this blog from time to time, so maybe she can let us know if there have been any changes.  I assume you’ll have to have your Dalcard to vote, but I’m just speculating on that one.

Happy Voting!

Jen Bond Uncategorized

Today, SMAC had an event in front of the Killam library.  Well, they actually piggy-backed on the weekly Food Not Bombs gathering that was coupled with an NSPIRG…rally?  Meeting?  Tabling (sans table)?  Regardless, there was definitely a sign that said “support NSPIRG”.  FNB is a group that offers free vegetarian food each week in front of the Killam (in addition to other places around the city).  In truth, no one would have been able to know it was three different, “completely unaffiliated” groups converging in the same spot…but I digress.

There were people juggling, a couple of guitars going, and a handful of people enjoying some no doubt delicious veggie fare.  I have been struggling with how to write about my experience, I think I’m going to opt for a straight up narrative.  We’ll see how it goes.

I arrived at around 4:15.  There were a few DSU types hanging around the Muskoka chair area chatting and looking furtively over at the 15 or so NSPIRG/SMAC/FNB supporters a few feet away.   I felt like I was at a grade 6 dance, but divided along imaginary (and false) political lines.  I decided I would head on over and peruse the literature on offer, Eric Snow in tow.  As soon as we approached, Jane from SMAC came up to us, handed us a flier and said, “Would you like a flier?  I feel like you’re misinformed.”  She then walked off, so I didn’t get to ask her any of my questions.   The flier had SMAC’s general “about us” information on it, which can be found here at their much improved website.  There were an assortment of other fliers and publications kicking about including: the Single Parent Handbook (an NSPIRG publication); the report on the commercialization of campuses, the name of which escapes me (also through a PIRG working group); and a copy of the SMAC motions from the AGM (SMAC is “in solidarity with PIRG”, just in case you were wondering how one of these things is not like the others).

After meeting up with John Hillman and Ben Wedge (who may stil be there waiting for someone to give him a flier, poor lad), enjoying an apple from the FNB crowd and dancing along to some protest songs, I thought it might be time to actually get some information at this information session.  I sought out Jane to ask a few questions.  First, I wanted to know who drafted the AGM motions.  It was a collaborative effort, I was told.  Did they know that the DSU has a turnitin.com policy on the books that opposes the service and calls for, at the very least, an opt-0ut system?  They were aware of that, I was told, but the motion spoke more to  wanting a stronger stance.

Here’s the BIRT part of that motion:

BIRT that the DSU will take an active stance against the use of Turnitin.com on campus and will petition, lobby and fight Dalhousie University to remove this gross violation of student rights from all classes.

Call me nitpicky, but if you want a stronger stance, you might want to acknowledge that there’s a stance to begin with…otherwise people (like me) are just going to scratch their heads and say “But we already have a policy…we already do this…I’m confused by your ire.”

My next question was, if SMAC could choose one motion to pass at the AGM, which one would it be?  Jane didn’t want to speak for the group (fair), but said that really, the most important issue was NSPIRG.  Needless to say, I found this interesting.  Was Jane opposed to the re-visiting of the referendum question?  Yes, she was, because she felt it was an unfair attack on PIRG.  Since this was an information gathering exercise for me and not an opportunity for debate, I refrained from asking how in fact she thought NSPIRG should be held accountable for its $60,000 per annum…

Really, though, I was interested in the main goal of SMAC.  I was told that it was to mobilize students on campus.  That is why they wrote the AGM motions, to get students involved.  Sure, I buy that.  I even commend that.  I still don’t know why we had to have so much carrying on about non-Dal students being at the AGM if the whole point of SMAC is to mobilize *students* though…

Finally (and this is possibly my favourite part of the exchange), I asked if the SMAC meetings were open.  “They *were*”  replied Jane.  “Oh?”  I asked “They aren’t anymore?” Jane told me that the group hadn’t quite decided, but offered (I’m going to say reluctantly) to take my e-mail address and let me know.  I pressed her on why, if the goal of SMAC was to mobilize students, their meetings wouldn’t be open to…students (of which I am one).  I didn’t get an answer to that particular question, but I imagine it’s that SMAC doesn’t want students “like me” at their meetings.  Please SMAC, feel free to prove me wrong…preferably by telling me when your next meeting is.  I have also subsequently followed up with an e-mail to the SMAC contacts, Alia Saied and Kaliegh Trace, to see if I could get on their mailing list.

So, that’s about everything exciting that happened.  Fellow pundit John Hillman took some photos, I hope he puts them up.  If anyone knows when the next SMAC meeting is, let us know.  A combined 2,500 words in 2 hours, I’m spent.

Jen Bond Uncategorized

As has been the tradition for the past few years, Monday night was the “Presidential Debate” in the Grawood.  For the first time we had all three Presidential candidates in the same place for a debate.  Colour me excited!  I have tried to stick to an overview of the answers given but (of course) couldn’t resist some editorializing.

After the opening statements, which I won’t re-hash because we all know the standard claims, the first question asked the candidates to articulate some of their presidential goals and predicted completion guidelines.

• Snow talked about  revisiting the issue of 24 hour study space on campus.  He would focus on this over the summer.  He also would like to fix the date of the Union’s general meetings and ensure there would be a minimum of two students on every Senate committee.  In addition, he wants to work on grad policies with ANSSA.  (Ed note: Heavy on the ideas, not really on the deadline part)
• Zimmerman would work with ANSSA to ensure the MOU stays on track.  She would have DSUSO do an environmental audit of the SUB in July to pinpoint where the SUB could cut down on its consumption.  She would work to get more students on BoG committees, and committed to meet with every faculty Dean by June.
• Debogorski’s first move would be to move the desks of all of the execs (save the VP FO) to the first floor near the Info Desk.  He would have the framework for his direct democratic process in place by September and the framework for a “student economy” (ed note:  I’m still unsure what this is) by December.  Also by September, Debo would have priced out the Union’s options for taking back food services.  In addition, he wants to have a campus wide celebration on the Commons, monthly AGMs, to work with faculties and not Deans (ed note:  the difference is?) and try to quell the “heated relationship” between the Muslim and Jewish students on campus.

(Ed note: I also have written down here *Debo looks disgusted*…I guess I felt it important enough to take note of, so I’ll pass it on to you fine folks.)

The second question asked what the candidates saw as the top 3 obstacles to 24 hour study space.

• Zimmerman:  Her top three obstacles were: the admin isn’t behind us on the issue; it’s not currently financially fesible; and security.  She also said that if we’re going to preach to the university about this issue, we have to show that we’re investigating ways to do it ourselves.
• Debogorski:  Pay students $15/hr to monitor 24 hour study space.   We’re paying $200,000 on council (ed note: what?) alone, we shouldn’t have to wait for the admin to move on the issue.
• Snow:  The top two issues are cost and safety.  The long term goal must be securing 24 study space with the administration.

Question 3 was about the Union’s strategic plan.

• Debogorski:  He doesn’t believe that the Union has a strategic plan.  Imagine sucks, direct democracy is the way to go.  Furthermore, the Union should be opt-in (ed note: Plz to be talking to Australia and getting back to me re: that).
• Snow:  We need to incorporate the interests of students into how we explore our role as a Union and really bring more students into the fold.  He agrees that we need to expand the focus out of the SUB and increase participation from other campuses.
• Zimmerman:  Imagine isn’t a strategic plan, but simply a way for students to give input.  She would start the strategic planning and Imagine campaign earlier in the year, and agrees with Greg that not enough students show up for Imagine.  There is still too much focus on Studley and not enough on Sexton.

The fourth question had to do with CASA.  What should be the external lobby priorities of the organization?

• Snow:  “Loves CASA.”  The DSU need to be the Atlantic Canadian/Nova Scotian voice in the organization and start taking more of a leadership role in ANSSA and HSA (ed note:  ANSSA chair for 4 years wasn’t enough of a leadership role for you?).
• Zimmerman:  Wants to focus on infrastructure funding and bringing back the CASA Ambassador programme, which allowed for greater direct student input into CASA.  She also thinks that CASA needs to talk to party caucuses and not just the parties in power.
• Debogorski:  Talk is cheap, academic policies are silly.  Debo sees no utility in students lobbying the government; they don’t care about us.  They care about media attention, and therefore we should be militant like the students in Quebec, they have low tuition there.  (ed note:  Talk to Laval about what happened when the cap finally came off their all too artificially depressed tuition, or the students at McGill about the crumbling classrooms at their uni due to hundreds of millions in deferred maintenance).

Question 5:   If you were DSU president, what would be the highest thing on your priority list to bring to Dalhousie president Tom Traves.

• Zimmerman:  Already has a great relationship with TT.  Not many people know, but Traves is a very powerful man on the national university circuit.  She would push the admittedly unsexy issue of infrastructure funding.  She also believes that discussion with the uni pres should be on big issues and not the small stuff.
• Debogorski:  The broadness of our education is narrow (ed note:  I call it like I hear it).  There needs to be a better choice of classes on campus.  Students need more work experience and need to be able to grow their resume (ed note: I can get behind this).  This is also why we need to shed some of the executive responsibilities and pass them as jobs on to students.  Also, enrolment isn’t in peril, during a recession more people go to school.
• Snow:  Would push 24 study space (which he says is not a “little issue”)–it needs to be available to all students on all campuses.  There also needs to be increased student representation on BoG, especially on committees.

The final question asked the candidates their top priority for the DSU Board.

• Debogorski:  Admitted he couldn’t really give an answer because he would have to canvass what students thought (ed note: At least he’s consistent). He then went on to say that we have to focus on a student economy through welding shops and student day traders.  We must also learn to  “make money with our money”.
• Snow:  Sustainable financial mode.  The Board needs to work better on its role as a “second pair of eyes” to council.
• Zimmerman:  Wants to continue working on making sure the Board is strategically viable (ed note: I wrote this down, but I’m not sure what it means).  It also needs to be vital in developing the Union’s strategic plan.

/prepared questions.   By this time it was 7:23, I was sick of writing and Debogorski’s tea/coffee count was at 5 cups.  From here on in it was questions from the floor.  I won’t give a play by play (because I didn’t take detailed enough notes) but here are the highlights:

• Debo’s solution to student apathy is to make up controversy.  Snow would rather apathetic students to angry ones.  Shannon thinks students are more involved than anyone gives them credit for, just on a smaller scale.
• Former VP Internal candidate Victoria Jones asked her question about the Executive Review Committee via speakerphone from Edmonton (ed note: wicked).   Everyone agrees it needs to be fixed.  External auditing seems to be a popular solution.
• Debogorski, on one of his many sojourns off stage to get coffee, kiss his girlfriend or roll up his sleeves, made a gesture like he was shooting himself in the head while Snow answered a question (ed note: classy).
• Snow advocated for NSPIRG’s working groups becoming seperately ratified.
• In response to a question about NSPIRG, Zimmerman stated that as president, she would be responsible to everyone.  She sees the role as being a mediator, and her personal beliefs shouldn’t play into issues.
• Debogorski doesn’t see safety as an issue with regards to 24 hour study space.  This was in response to a question about safety and the 24 hours study space idea by a female night manager at the SUB.  (ed. note: Know your audience.  Also, know crime stats in Halifax.)
• Debogorski asked a question of Snow and Zimmerman about the undercurrent of tension between the Israeli and Muslim students on campus.  Both of them stated that if it became a problem, it would have to be something the DSU would mediate, but they didn’t see evidence of it currently.  In answer to his own question, Debo would like to sit both groups down in a room and talk it out.  (Ed note: DSU becomes Camp David, reel at 11.)

That’s all she (and by she, I mean me) wrote…

Jen Bond Uncategorized

I’ll post my recap of the Presidential Debate later this afternoon, I promise.  There’s still one more day of voting left, and I really can’t resist the urge to ask Debo what the heck was with the 5 (non-reusable) cups of tea/coffee.

In other news, for those of you who don’t incessently troll the comments like I do, SMAC is having an information shin-dig outside the Killam library TODAY at 4:00pm.  I, for one, would not miss this for the world.  The last time SMAC had a “public” organizing meeting, all accounts (I wasn’t there) were that the perceived “pro DSU” types found themselves not welcome.  Let’s see if “fostering critical thought” works both ways for SMAC this afternoon…

Jen Bond Uncategorized nspirg, smac, stopnspirg

Lisa, John and I were all at the Studley debate today.  I think Lisa’s going to do a full recap, so I’ll just stick with a few of my “friendly observations.”

President:

Only Snow and Zimmerman showed up.  Debo made a cameo during the VP Education portion of the programme, but had left by the general question period.  I’m sure he had a class.  I’m also sure half of the other candidates also had a class…but I digress.

Snow isn’t confident at the podium, Zimmerman looks relaxed and at ease.   Zimmerman doesn’t have awesome voice modulation, Snow is an engaging speaker.  They both need to work on their eye contact.

They both answered questions well, but let’s face it, this is for all the marbles, they aren’t going to screw it up.

VP Internal:

Can we just elect them both?  They are so committed and really know their stuff.  I am concerned/confused about Mark’s plan to have a DSU website that can be updated by anyone.   There’s info on his website about how we could do this. I have no question that it *can* be done, I’m just not sure we *should* do it.   Mark did, however, show that he was a class act when he stood up for his opponent in the face of attack.  Bravo.

VP Education:

I’m surprised how much Burns knows for being a newbie to the scene (he’s so young looking I feel like if I got close enough, he’d smell like womb).  LeForte demonstrated that he knows both a whole lot about the intricacies of PSE funding and also how to tie a double windsor knot.  I approve of both.   Once again CASA is a hot topic.  Burns says we should drop down to associate member status.  He hasn’t given me a good reason why.

VP Student Life:

Kris is running unopposed.  Like John, I say if he wants the job again, we should give it to him.

Senate:

Best.  Race.  Ever.  Between Simms’s quirkiness, Evans’s adorable/genuineness and Blake’s general smile inducingness, this is by far the best group to listen to.   Big points to everyone for reading up on the Academic and External committee and coming to class knowing the answer. Extra points to Simms for picking up the microphone so that he didn’t have to slouch at the podium (Snow, Burns et al. take note!)

Board of Governors:

Why aren’t these people running the country?  They’re all so well-qualified and eloquent it makes me a little queasy.  Give me something to nitpick about, people!

Harris has commented many a time about how he was the President of “another institution” and he used to live in Antigonish…people can put two and two together Harris, why not just tell them that magical institution was St. FX?  Also, would it kill FPW or Horne to smile?  I know BoG is all serious and stuff, but come on.  Look at that, I totally found stuff to talk about.  Crisis averted.

There were general questions from the audience (which was quite full, actually.  Nice one) but I only half paid attention.  Bad pundit.  Lisa took better notes than I did.

Jen Bond Uncategorized burns, debate, harris, hobbs, horne, leforte, osmond, perron-welch, snow, zimmerman

6:30:  I arrive at the second floor of the SUB.  I haven’t seen this many students since the War in Iraq motion of ‘03.  It’s going to take a long time to get all of these people verified as Dal students.

6:50:  I’m in, but not after getting stuck in the middle of a scuffle btwn. Dal Security and a guy who  “works for NSPIRG” (his words, not mine).

7:00:  I’m sitting in the back with the bad kids.  Next to VP I Candidate Craig Jennex and CRO Sarah Amyotte.  I also made a new friend, Greg A. (not Deborgorski).  He is fascinated by the craziness of tonight.

7:14:  Mat Brechtel starts the meeting.  I hope he stretched well beforehand.

7:20:  Motion to amend the agenda to add a motion re: letting in the non-Dal students who are staging a sit-in outside to be inside.

7:29:  Motion fails.  I can’t remember the number for and against.  I recorded my vote for.  I say we should talk about it.

7:30:  Motion by the VP Finance to strike the contract motion and the CASA motion from the agenda.

7:36:  Challenge to the chair!  Note:  We haven’t even accepted the agenda yet.  Mat is currently explaining what this means.  Better you than me, friend.

7:42:  Tara Gault is here!

7:43:  I am absolutely lost on this.  I have no idea what’s going on anymore.  I am going to run out and get a paper copy of the Constitution.  I can’t scroll through my electronic copy fast enough.

7:47:  The offices are locked.  I don’t have a paper copy as a result.  In other news, the cops are here.  There’s a girl here who isn’t a Dal student who won’t leave.  Apparently she works for the Gazette (according to the guy who was just yelling at the cop).  Greg A. continues to be fascinated.

7:51:  We’re voting on the challenge to the chair.   It just passed, that means that the aforementioned motions will be struck from the agenda.

8:01: We’re moving on a vote to the second challenge to the chair.  If you vote yes, the girl from the Gazette gets to stay.  If you vote no, she goes.  Very clear, Mat (I really hope someone is buying him several beers after this).

8:03: Someone just proposed the cops be ejected.  Greg Deborgorski just likened this meeting to Nazism.  He apologized.  Mat Brechtel ignored the cop outburst.

8:03:  Motion to challenge the chair fails.

8:03:  This must be what it’s like to go to York.

8:05:  New motion to add a motion to the agenda.  Motion about quorum at the meetings.  BIRT:  If the meeting is adjourned, council will hold a subsequent General meeting to discuss the other issues within 3 weeks.  To be clear, this is a motion to simply add this motion to the agenda.

8:09:  Motion passes.  There are now 5 cops here.  Greg A. says “The jails in Dartmouth must be unguarded.”

8:10:  Motion to add the newest motion that we just passed to the top of the agenda after business of the executive.

8:11:  Motion passes.

8:12:  Motion to add a motion.  Daniel Pink moves that NSPIRG makes an official apology by April 1 for being general jerks , they should stop funding their non-student staff and they should vacate the SUB (Daniel is much more eloquent than I).

8:12:  The Gazette girl and Greg Debogorski have just been removed from the room by the police.

8:15:  A NSPIRG member just rose on a point of personal privilege (that wasn’t).  NSPIRG doesn’t organize Lockheed Martin protests, they just have a “working group” that facilitates “critical thinking.”

8:17:  Discussions re: whether or not to put Dan Pink’s motion on the agenda.  Point well taken that this is a motion that greatly affects students and thus should have been moved 2 weeks ago.

8:18:  I’m not going to lie.  I feel really bad for Mat Brechtel.

8:18:  Greg A. says that this is like “chocolate cake on a Sunday morning.”  I agree.

8:22:  I just had an outburst.  One of the NSPIRG people just said that the NSPIRG levy was between students and NSPIRG and had “nothing to do with the DSU.”  I yelled “What?!  Are you out of your mind?!”  It takes quite a lot for me to yell out of turn (ask my grade 3 teacher).  These people are cray cray.

8:24:  We are voting on whether or not to add the Dan Pink motion to the agenda.  I’m not a mathmagician (typo, it’s staying), but this motion is getting on the agenda.

8:28:  Oh, I forgot about the 2/3 part.  Mat is recounting.

8:28:  Sarah Amyotte just levied her first fine against Debo for the Nazism comment.

8:31:  Motion to add the Dan Pink motion to the agenda fails.  VP FO Mat Golding moves for a ballot vote.

8:34:  Challenge to the chair re: allowing the ballot vote.  His challenge starts with “I want to tell you a story…”  It’s a parable about a butterfly…I can’t re-phrase it.

8:36:  We’re moving to a vote as to whether or not we should have a ballot vote.

8:43:  We’re having a ballot vote.  There was a lot of confusion as to how we would go about that.  I went and got logoed paper for us to vote on.  There is a rep from each side (we’re taking their word for it) who will work as scrutineers.  This is officially a gong show.

8:47:  I would like to be in the mind of one of these people…how do you be so contrary about everything?  It’s painful, really.

8:49:  Mat is very patiently trying to make this ballot vote happen.  I kind of felt badly for suggesting to Mat how we might do it.

9:09:  We are having a ballot vote now on whether or not to add the Dan Pink motion onto the agenda.  Mat is currently explaining everything to us.  This needs a 2/3 majority to pass.

9:17:  Just to be clear, we haven’t even accepted the agenda yet.

9:20:  We’re now voting on whether to extend the meeting until the building closes.  We’re kinda sorta close to the 3 hour mark.

9:24:  The meeting has now been extended to 10:45.

9:26:  Shout out to John Hurley for bringing Starbuck sustenance.   Also a shout out to Murray for coming down to join in on the action…liveblogging brings all the boys to the yard.

9:36:  Mat is speaking.  Everyone listen.

9:36:  I think I just had a conniption fit in my mind.  There were 8 more ballots counted than handed out.  This made a difference to the 2/3 majority.  We get to have a ballot vote again.  I’m not joking at all.

9:38:  Fred Perron-Welch “Point of Information:  How did you guys fuck this up?”  Mat says we are very close to the end of decorum.  I think we passed that point a long time ago.

9:42:  Just a reminder.  We haven’t actually passed the agenda yet.

<<9:45: punditry.ca goes down>>

10:11: Punditry.ca just crashed. I have continued on a Word document and will post it later.

10:13: 116 to 56. 67% The motion passes. Now someone is complaining about how close it was. Apparently this doesn’t work out mathematically. Mat has ruled the motion passes.

10:15: Motion to move the business of the executive to the end of the agenda. It has been seconded. Mark Coffin says that the business of the executive is actually very relevant to the new business at hand.

10:17: There was a friendly amendment to just move the motion about having another general meeting w/in the next three weeks to deal with unresolved issues. Passes unanimously.

10:18: Motion to APPROVE THE AGENDA!!!!!!!

10:19: It passes!!! We now have to debate the motion about whether or not we should have a meeting three weeks hence re: unresolved issues.

10:19: Courtney just asked whether or not this motion violates the constitution. It doesn’t. However, because of the wording of the by-laws, coupled with the wording of the motion, we must have the meeting on April 1^st and only April 1^st. Trust me on this one, I couldn’t make it up if I tried.

10:20: I am sitting in the midst of a Mat Brechtel fan club. He is very pretty, apparently.

10:24: Motion passes. We are having a new meeting on April 1^st. We now move onto business of the executive.

10:26: Courtney has started her report.

10:27: Greg A. “Serving students since 1966, eh?” John Hurley “Oh, I thought that’s when the meeting started.” Zing!

10:35: We’re back up and live!

10:38:  Dan just started his report.  There’s a powerpoint presentation.  Someone just cackled rudely when Dan mentioned he wanted to help societies transition into the next year.

10:40:  Why is this writing so small?  I really shouldn’t be the one trusted with the interwebs.

10:45: The meeting is ending…now.  Dan is speeding up so that he might finish before the deadline.  Impressive.

10:45:  Annnd, we’re done.  Thanks to all of you for sticking with me through all of this (two crashes, I’m impressed).  A special shout out to Greg A. for putting up with my snarky comments for the entirety of the meeting, and to John and Murray for providing some much needed mid-AGM hilarity.  See you all on April 1st (of course I’ll be there, it’s not like I have a degree to finish or anything…)

Jen Bond Uncategorized agm, brechtel, nspirg, stopnspirg