NUS LGBT Summer Conference

Rt hon NickyDyke85 · Lord of the Rings

NUS LGBT Summer Conference

richardyoung71 · *Censored*

How was anyone meant to know about the elections when they weren't told? What happened to democracy?

Rt hon NickyDyke85 · Lord of the Rings

Well the committee originally took charge of conference organisation & sent out an e-mail about it to members, only one application was sent in. As you know in past conferences when there has been little interest from people about going and positions haven't been contested, those people have automatically gained a delegate position.

This left 3 places to be filled, so in the name of fairness for both groups the lgbt assembly opened its nominations & well theres only 2 assembly members, 1 of which is going.

Seems that theres still 2 places to fill, 1 open place & one womens place the assembly have re-opened nominations for the positions for anyone who's interested and are now dealing with organising the conference delegation, as it is in the constitution that the organising of conference is the assemblies responsibility.

If you have any questions about the nominations which were opened by the society, you're best off asking the committee about them.

-- Edited by Rt hon NickyDyke85 at 22:52, 2006-05-12

JohnK · Pieces of me you've never seen

How were the assembley nominations conducted? Is there an assembley mailing list?

More transparency please!

Rt hon NickyDyke85 · Lord of the Rings

Like I said there's literally just 2 active assembly members, the delegate for the assembly was decided by applications and the assembly members having a discussion to choose who attended on behalf of the assembly. Seems that it was just one position been taken by the Assembly, as its imperative that there is an assembly representative there due to the information gained, contacts made and utilisation of these to enable the assembly to operate sucessfully.

Due to people not been involved with the assembly all year and it literally been just 2 people, there's as u can imagine a very small mailing list because people weren't interested in getting involved.

The society conducted their nominations, with the same system of using an application covering the same 3 questions. As I stated earlier, after nominations for the society had closed there had only been one member who'd applied.

This leaves 2 places spare, one of which has to be a female, which have been re-opened for nominations for anyone who is interested in attending.

richardyoung71 · *Censored*

How can you expect people to be invovled in the assembly when there havn't been any meeting for 6 months?

The LUU Website reads: "All students are welcome to come along to the monthly meetings, whatever you’re passionate about, this is the perfect place to get heard and you don’t need to be elected or worry about agendas or minutes."

And as far as I'm aware there was never an email sent out by the society about LGBT conference either. I certainly never received one, and know plenty of other people who didn't either. This whole thing stinks.

Scotty · The saviour of mankind

I dont really want to get drawn into this debate but i would just like to say that i have made an official complaint about the way that this has all been handled and it is set to be discussed at the committee meeting on thursday...

AliceH · Butter Me Up!

Scotty wrote:

I dont really want to get drawn into this debate but i would just like to say that i have made an official complaint about the way that this has all been handled and it is set to be discussed at the committee meeting on thursday...

Thanks, Scott.

This whole matter is appalling. I thought the whole constitutional amendment about the LGBT Assembly running democratic elections for those wishing to attend Conference was intended to prevent this sort of malarky?

Sending out an email to a select few members simply isn't good enough. Firstly, there seem to be gross problems with the email system considering I didn't receive it, nor did Nic, Joey or Dominic who I live with, nor did Richard. Secondly, it's unfair on those members who do not regularly check email, especially as this time of year when quite a few of us have been heading home to revise or been away from the uni. It would take, what, 15 minutes to print out information about elections and stick them on the Office door and leave them in Coffee Hour for people to look over?

I've heard people argue that having nominations for Conference results in people voting for their friends, but surely having the Society and Assembly deciding who should go is manipulation in exactly the same way!

Rt hon NickyDyke85 · Lord of the Rings

Firstly, Rich. The meetings were poorly attended & **** all came out of them. There have been opportunities to get involved all year, I've posted on the forum informing people what was going on, what we wanted 2 do and asking for involvement, I sent e-mails to the society to send out to members asking for involvement and things we planned to do... these were never sent out, I've spoke to people in coffee hours and asked for involvement there, I've had a high level of contact with members all year long and hardly anyone wanted to get involved. Same as my phone n contact details have been plastered everywhere and only one or two people like Ben W made the effort to get involved. There's not been a lack of opportunities to gain involvement in the assembly, so please don't try and blame peoples apathy on the fact that poorly attended unproductive meetings ceased to be held as they wer a waste of time.

As for the way all of this conference stuff has been handled, I'm ****ing fuming. The motion I passed at the AGM was intended to stop farces like this happening, however, the exec didn't take note of what was passed at AGM & gave the forms to the society, far too late I may add. I wasn't informed that the forms had gone to the society, despite asking the exec about them constantly & was speaking to the committee about how we'd like to run conference, but were told that the committee would get back to us about our ideas, no1 got back to us & then I find out from other people that the society had opened & closed nominations with only one person applying and were in the process of discussing what to do with the other positions and sending who they wanted to send. Apparently hardly anyone has had this e-mail about conference & any publicity about it is invisible. Thats not democratic at all. Especially without talking to the assembly about it either n keeping everything secretive.

I found out about all of this yesterday & have spent most of yesterday hunting down the conference forms (they are now in my safe hands), finding out exactly what has just gone on & trying to rectify the situation, which to be honest is completely unjust.

Seems we've got 2 LGBT groups on campus, one political & one social, it's only fair that they both have representation at conference. This is why the assembly has one position, as it needs the information and contacts gained at conference to operate. The assembly position has already been sorted by its members.

This brings us to the places for the society, which is 3 places (more than fair). In the name of fairness all the nominations have to be in to lgbt.assembly@leeds.ac.uk by 5pm Friday 18th May, the other open place position will be opened as well & the person's application will have to be voted in democratically if there are more than 3 people applying for conference.

Once I've recieved the applications, they will be posted on the forum & a less selective e-mail will be sent out to members informing them of this. Unfortunately coffee hours are no longer running so we can't place manifesto's in there or hold voting in coffee hours.

It's more than likely going to be a case of voting will have to be done via e-mail to the assembly account spanning over 3days & a day of balloting in the union. I appreciate this isn't a fantastic resolution, but it's the best I can do considering the time limit I've got to sort all this out & the awkward time of year for people.

Apologies for this, if the forms would have been delivered to the assembly and on time all of this would have been organised alot more democratically and effieciently.

JohnK · Pieces of me you've never seen

Whilst I appreciate the situation in, e-mail voting is totally undemocratic. I am also still unclear about who was voted in by the assembly and how this 'vote' was conducted. (As far as I can remember don't all the decisions the assembley takes have to be voted on by at least 10 people? or does that no longer stand?)

In my opinion, the problem lies in the fact that the political wing of the committee has been removed and the onus for that placed on the assembley. The LGBT community on campus should be united, and the only way the effective and fair representation of LGBT students on campus can happen is if the group with the largest number of LGBT students is the one that has clout. An assembley 'ran' by two people making decisions about the lives of LGBT students on campus and the society with over two hundered members, around half of which I'd say were active in some way, having no ability to impact on the unions decisions making process is what is undemocratic about this and is why I think that it is time for the union to review the necessity of an LGBT assembley within the union.

That's not to say that the work that the assembley does and has done, and what it stands for is something I don't agree with. That's not the case at all. I just think it would be better if the LGBT society committee had a politics/Union rep sitting on it which took over the role of the assembley.

JohnK · Pieces of me you've never seen

On another point, it's interesting to see that the conference is being held in Sheffield again. The summer one only happened there a couple of years ago. (In fact, Sheffield was where my first conference was).

Why not Manchester? Leeds? Newcastle? Liverpool? Nottingham? York? Hull?

richardyoung71 · *Censored*

I agree completely with that. Without wanting to take anything away from the achievements of the Assembly over the last year, it isn't a democratic body, which is essentially what it was set up to be in the first place.

Rt hon NickyDyke85 · Lord of the Rings

It's been ran in Sheffield again cos it's cost effiecient. Also the union by-law about 10 assembly members havin 2 make a decision was scrapped.

The assembly is there for people to get involved, have their say and be active, but only a few people have, thats not taking anything away from the society or its members... the opportunitys for people to get inolved have increased and are there. Everyone has a fair chance of been involved in the democratic process & no1 is been denied that opportunity. Look at the work done by the assembly over the last year and all the changes that have developed, its a hell of alot more than has been done by the society in the 2yrs that I've been here, just because a society has 200 odd members doesn't mean it has all the clout... the Assembly is there with the union power n clout to makes changes as it is headed by a union councillor who is part of running the union & like I've said before there are opportunities for everyone to get involved and have their say in how the union is ran, its upto people who want to have their say to get involved.

I agree that the society and assembly should be alot more closely linked which is why I fought to get the motion for strengthening links between the society and assembly passed at the AGM, however as I remember you were one of the people who was against this.

I've been on both the committee and the assembly & I know it can work and really well... Joe was mens officer for the soc, kate's been trans officer for the soc & I was events & acting womens for the soc... the problems we came across that wer outside of society boundaries were dealt with by the assembly which had more clout & were sorted out, the main problem holding all of it back is poor communication between both parties and the problems it then creates with working together.

A major part of this is the society committee resenting the fact that the assembly has got responsibility for the political side of things and been unwilling to change or get involved with the assembly to work together and move things forward. I've been trying all year to sort this out & the fact of the matter is that the union aren't going to scrap the assemblies, they've got a 3year plan in place to support & improve the assemblies to make their democratic structure more accessible to students. Rather than fightin the fact that we've got a voice and a structure in the union to improve our position we should use it and make the most of the opportunities presented to us by LUU.

End of the day, all this bickering n sneaking about has to stop & we should ****ing well sort it out. The society is a good strong society & the assembly is a bluddy good strong assembly, if we pull together and all work together we could collectively have the strongest soc n assembly in LUU & quite possibly the best LGBT community in any university union.

As for the online voting thing, yeah its not a brilliant solution but considering that all the messing about with conference forms and organisation, me only finding out yesterday & having to sort out all this crap has given me just 2 weeks to get nominations in, sort out a delegation & have the form back in2 NUS, its pretty much the only way to do it that involves as many members as possible & get everything done on time.

-- Edited by Rt hon NickyDyke85 at 16:39, 2006-05-13

JohnK · Pieces of me you've never seen

Well I've made my opinion clear. I also don't think the society's committee resents the fact that responsibility for LGBT politics has been handed over to the assembley. I just think it's absurd that an assembley which has, as you say, only a couple of activists is given the ability to have more impact on the lives of LGBT students on campus that the LGBT society which represents a significanly larger number of students. This is the root of the assembleys undemocratic nature.

I might also add that for students, the fact that there are two seperate bodies representing them (because, whether we like it or not, the LGBT society is much more visible on campus than the assembley) is pretty confusing. That's why I reckon the two things need to be reunified so that LGBT policitcal activity can involve a wider number of students without having to subscribe to another group.

One of the main reasons I think turn out for these meetings has been low is apathy and a disinterest in politics. COnducting the work of the assembley within the society would make it easier for people to get involved if they wish.

Could you also let us know who got elected in the assembley 'elections'.

Oh and whether there is a short time frame or not, I will always prioritise democracy. The voting process must be democratic if it is to hold water. If it isn't I think questions will start to be asked.

Laura · Vodka! Books!

i think we need to jus remember that nic only found out about this yesterday and has been wrkin her tiny sexy lil ass off tryna sort it out...
whether we agree with the assembly or not, it was voted at the agm that the assembly should organise the delegates for conference, with close links to the committee....as far as i can gather from reading and speaking wiht nic, she was left completely in the dark about the organisation of it...so i think we need to address the committee and ask why the constitution hasnt been followed, and why has such a shambles been made of the entire process!
i personally agree that the assembly is a good idea, it means extra funding for lgbt students to take advantage of... it jus neeed to be linked better wiht the society and not pushed out of the way!
i cnt think wt i was tryin to say...my brain is actuallly turnin into a mash full of databases and algorithms...and java,
im not meaning to offend anyone or object their opinions, bt i think we need a thought for what the assembly...including nic joe akte etc has actually done this year despite the lack of interest from members...

love laura xx

Laura · Vodka! Books!

ive been told my spelling is appalling! sorry...i can spell very well when i want, bt yea i dont have time! so yea sorry!

richardyoung71 · *Censored*

I don't think anybody is saying the Assembly isn't a good thing, people just have concerns about an apparent lack of democracy. Afterall an assembly is a collective group of people with similar interests or concerns which the Assembly Chair has been elected to head. If there are no meetings, no gathering together of these people, there is in effect no assembly and no democracy. In order to move forward maybe we should be looking at ways to get people to meetings and get people involved. I know plenty of people who are interested in lgbt politics, perhaps we should be finding out what would get them to a meeting?

monkey · Forum Guru

Ok i have been reading this thread + do think important issues have been raised, however again it all has seemed a bit negative up until here; as Laura said Nic's "been wrkin her tiny sexy lil ass off tryna sort it out..." so maybe just try to remember there is someone doing alot of work for all of our benefit.
Also i think Rich's suggestion about finding out what will get ppl to go to meetings is a very good one, and perhaps a few more positive suggestions like it need to be made instead of just complaints.

x

Rt hon NickyDyke85 · Lord of the Rings

There have been opportunites there all year for people who want to get involved to get involved. Don't start rattling on about the meetings meaning there is no assembly, there are assembly members who do work hard for the assembly and are involved in the union's democratic process by writing motions to go to union council which is what one of the functions of the assembly is there to do.

The main point about assemblies which you both don't seem to understand is the fact that they were a completely new structure, nobody knew how they wer going to run or operate & they wer literally an idea, which we had to take and turn in2 a reality. All of the things which were stated by the union are written by people who heard the idea and knew the gist of the general idea, they haven't been the ones taking it and turning it in2 a reality. The review has shown that students hate attending meetings and want to get involved with the democratic process without attending meetings. The LGBT assembly has made this possible and it has been done and worked.

As for the point of more people been involved with the political side of LGBT life if it was included with the society stuff... there was bugger all to do with LGBT politics by the society in the 2yrs I've been here, unless u count queer week, which was one week that no1 was interested in and only a couple of active members got involved with keeping it going, in the grand scheme of things it actually achieved **** all cos nothing productive came out of the week. Yeah there may only be a few active people involved with the assembly but there have been a hell of alot more achievements made by the assembly in one year than the society has done in the past few years, as the political stuff is often pushed to one side in favour of the social stuff. This year its not been swept aside and its been addressed and had a chance to shine.

Despite the society havin more members, the comments I've heard all year are "I can't be bothered with LGBT politics" "they dont interest me" "they don't affect me" & "its not my problem to deal with" but they are interested in getting drunk, clubbing and been social.... how is that representative of LGBT people? "lets all sit on our arses and do **** all cos sum1 else will do it, ooohhhhh party, YAY!". The ones who are genuinely interested and want to make a difference have had that avenue provided and have actually been involved with LGBT politics and achieved alot. Having the 2 groups has been beneificial cos they cater for all and provide opportunities for involvement in both, as well as sorting out the problems which "aren't others to deal with" or are of no interest to others.

As for the who has been more heard of on campus, well to be fair John you've hardly been around all campus so you don't know who's been heard of or what. The LGBT assembly is the most high profile assembly and a large number of students have heard of the LGBT assembly and what it does, similarly the assembly is the most influential assembly & most if not all of the union & university services know of the LGBT assembly and the nature of work that it does.

There doesn't need to be unification of merging of the 2 groups for things to work, just better communication and a better working relationship.

Hmmmm, not so sure about your democracy comments, or have you completely forgotten this time last year? I'm doing the best I can to rectify a situation which has only just cropped up in the last 24 hours giving me a 2 week time period to operate in, am doing everything as democratically as possible considering the obstacles and limitations in place. Or I could have just left things as they were and had the society just send people who they wanted to go without notifying members of conference, cos thats just so democratic. The best course of action is been taken to resolve the situation and open it up for members and run fair elections. Unless you're a complete angel who'd never screw up the democratic process, stop been the voice of hipocracy.

JohnK · Pieces of me you've never seen

I ain't going to argue with you Nic, I think my opinions and comments are fair to be honest. I stick by them. I also stick by my opinion that you have worked hard to raise the voice of LGBT people within the union and that you should be rightly congratualted for that. That doesn't mean the assembley is free of problems and it similarly doesn't mean that I am unjustified in making comments about it. I'm an LGBT student at this uni and have a right to express such opinions about it.

And the LGB(T) (it was known without the T a few years back) has achieved loads within the union over the past 20 or so years, not least supporting hundreds of LGBT students through coming out and all sorts of situations. Queer Week was pretty crap, I'll be honest. Attendance was generally poor, though we got a lot of people on some nights. But sometimes I think just being visible and standing in the foyer of the union being open about my/your/our sexualities did enough of a job. Sure, it didn't get hundereds of people involve. Indeed it didn't affect one piece of union policy. But we were seen and heard by hundereds of students and our visbility increased because of this. I'm proud of what the society achieved.

And Nic, no matter what my criticisms of the assembly are, you know I wholly support the cause you are fighting for. Indeed I was an advocate for it myself during my time on the committee.

___________________

Richard is right though. In order for the assembley to be viable it needs to be transparently democratic. This means engaging LGBT students in politics. The job of the chair is perhaps not to have 25 people attend every meeting. But they must find ways to involve people more actively if all the hard work that they put in is backed up by man-power.
___________________

Re: Elections.

I don't really know the full story. Can only comment on what I read. I accept you're working hard on resolving this issue Nic, but I also think it's a integral part of this resolution that the process behind it is democratic and clearly visible to students in the union. My criticisms are mainly focused on the general handling of this situation though, not simply your handling of it, as I accept that it was perhaps out of your control.

AlbyFC · You best sima!

From the feeling I get from JohnK's last post, it seems this thread is finally going to cool down a bit. I've read it all at once and it's felt like a roller-coaster!

Anyway, irrelevant comments aside... My own humble opinion is that both the Assembly and the Society need to compromise. I'm of JohnK's opinion... the existence of two bodies can be confusing, and, as we have nearly daily proof, obstrusive, but since it seems the Assembly is here to stay, both bodies need to COMPROMISE to be able to carry out their duties.

I think one of the most important things to be done to make the Assembly work is finding out how to get people involved in the future. Listing once and again the achievements of the Assembly and stressing once and again the lack of support the Assembly has had during the last academic year isn't getting people involved in any way, and, what's more, it might alienate those that want to get involved. Meetings have to be carried out, however poor past attendance has been. Without meetings, there's no dialogue, and without any dialogue, how can we achieve anything?

Pleeeeeeeeeeeease call a meeting after exams, at least to introduce the new LGBT Assembly Chair, and to give a chance to LGBT students to interact. It doesn't need to be carried out in a stuffy, poorly ventilated room. Do it on the lawn of the Union! In the park! With biscuits!! Sorry.... My Saturday night mood is making me go bonkers. Will shut up now.

AlbyFC · You best sima!

Oh, and about the elections... I can't gather the whole story here... it seems the Society has tried to do their thing, and then the Assembly snatched the papers and tried to do their thing in turn... as I said: COMPROMISE!!!

And about democracy... that is something we definitely CAN'T compromise. Email voting is highly suspect... we can't sacrifice democracy to the commodities of technology.

Rt hon NickyDyke85 · Lord of the Rings

I never said the assembly was problem free, I haven't said that all year & I'll never say it isn't cos it's been the first year of turning an idea in2 a reality with limited support, bugger all training and not much else, not exactly an easy ride.

As for the interaction, theres the assembly part of the forum, I've spent all year talking to people and trying to get a compromise between the society n assembly... it's not like I've not been trying.

The situation with conference, well am not gonna go that deeply in2 it, but the exec ****ed up n caused confusion, the society opened n closed nominations which hardly any members have known about & there was no democracy with how the other delegates were going to be decided, all done behind assemblys back. We've been left with a situation where theres 2 weeks to get everything sorted, with no coffee hours to meet with members n get the manifesto's shown & votes conducted. If anyones got a better idea about how to sort all of this out please post it on here rather than criticising the best possible option at the moment. It's not a case of the assembly snatching it away from the society, they've had a bash at organising it & its at the point now where we can't afford to be pissing about cos it needs sorting out. Plus the delegation leader and person/s in charge of organising conference should be those who have attended conference before and know what it entails and how to organise it. Before we found out what had gone off without us been consulted, we had been talking to the society committee about how we wer collectively going to run the organisation of conference & were waiting for the committee to get back to us about what had been discussed, no-one got back to us & then we found out what has gone off since then, so we've re-opened nominations to give people a fair chance of attending conference.

As for a meeting after exams, they don't finish til end of June & by then most people will have gone home, there's no chance of getting more than a couple of people turning up to it.

-- Edited by Rt hon NickyDyke85 at 03:40, 2006-05-14

richardyoung71 · *Censored*

Ok, well i think everyone agrees that the elections for conference have gone a bit tits up. Good luck trying to salvage something from the situation in the most democratic way you can.

This thread has moved on a bit now though, onto the future of the assembly and how it should be working with the committee. Like every new body there has been teething problems with the Assembly and how to integrate it with the Society, that's to be expected.

But i think that 1 year in we should be looking at how to move forward together. I think it's absolutely imperative that the assembly holds meetings or gatherings of some sort. Just a regular opportunity for people to physically get together and bounce some ideas around. I know meetings haven't been popular in the past but surely 7 or 8 people at a meeting is better than 2 or 3 people emailing each other?

Perhaps if there isn't time for a meeting this semester, could the assembly chair meet with the society to discuss where to go? Something we agreed a long time ago was that the Assembly needed the Society in order to reach its full potential. Perhaps somethign for the future would be to introduce a political officer onto the committee of the society so there is a clear and definite overlap between the two? i dunno, just an idea.

At the minute it seems like we're going round in circles though. Everyone has their own opinion, lets try and get somethign positive out of it all and move forward.

PatrickT · Forum Guru

I hope we have a comment from the Society Chairperson on this at some point. As wonderous as our esteemed Mens and Womens Officers are, there appears to be a lack of leadership on the behalf of the society. Is the Communications Officer concerned about the lack of due process?

Just a couple thoughts, though I'm sure these will be raised at the Committee's next meeting.

xx

thaidave · Not Thai Dave

Hey there,

Like Alberto i think this thread has been a bit of a rollercoaster, and i'd like to give my own opinion on the situation.

Regarding the forms for conference application: we all know that the AGM passed a motion concerning the strengthening of ties between the LGBT Assembly and LGBT Society. This motion contained quite a lot within it, though for our immediate purposes it highlights that political issues are property of the assembly. Thus for these forms to come through to the society, is, in my opinion, an error. As i understand it, the committee, in possession of the forms, appear to have sat on them for a while and to have opened and closed nominations. During this time only Cory put his name forward by the closure due date. Obviously this lack of publicity and lack of information to the LGBT assembly chair is unacceptable conduct and will be discussed at the next committee meeting as a follow up to Scott's afore mentioned complaint. I think another issue for muse is whether Cory automatically gets to go because of his application.

Now that Nic is in control of the situation things should progress incredibly smoothly. In one day she has formulated an entire plan for a democratic solution, something the committee appear not to have managed at all. Who are we to give the assembly such a slating??? Surely if any blame is to be had it is to be levelled at the society committee, or, if we are feeling particularly like shirking our responsibilities, John Schless for messing up with the forms initially. I personally feel more at fault for not even knowing about this, than Nic should feel. If you want a scape-goat, you can look no further than your own society committee, which is something that i might not be thanked for, but i'm not going to lie about it.

_________

As regards the political processes: The assembly place is a given whereas the other 3 seats (2 open, 1 female) ensure a gender equality which is fitting with the overall conference aims. Please also remember that the deadline for this application is next friday, so there is plenty of time for applications to be submitted.

Transparency within the assembly is definitely needed, though i don't think Nic or Joe have acted in any way which deserves some of the unhelpful criticism noted above. They have certainly not been obscure in their actions. Rich has some interesting ideas for improving the system and i think the generation of a "political officer" would be a great idea, so long as the design of the position was carefully planned, as we don't want us to be sprouting off in even further political directions. I would like to talk to him about the merits of this further and perhaps come up with a motion regarding this to be submitted for the next AGM. All suggestions welcome.

I also agree with Alberto that it is important for the society and the assembly to call a joint meeting in which we can discuss how to work together. The meeting should, as with all our meetings, be open to anyone to attend. "Speaking rights" too, in my opinion, should not be imposed on the LGBT Assembly at our meetings, as the assembly motion that was passed at the AGM stipulates that we should be working closer together with the society. I opposed this motion on some levels, and accordingly tried to have it voted down for a revision but the majority agreed that...

This Society resolves:
1. That all relevant e-mails sent to the society webmail will be forwarded to the Assembly Chair.
2. That in the future the LGBT Assembly and the LGBT Society committee will work together to share facilities, resources or information etc.
3. Due to the political importance of NUS LGBT conference, the information gained there and the influence it has upon the Union & University politics with regards to LGBT Students, the LGBT Assembly is in charge of organising elections and delegations to attend the conferences with the help of the Society committee. All LGBT Society members will still have an equal opportunity to go.
4. As the LGBT Assembly’s and LGBT Society’s welfare officers duties overlap, the welfare officers will work closely with the LGBT Assembly Chair to run awareness campaigns. These will be funded for from the LGBT Assembly’s campaigns budget and gain the best possible representation, support, and advice for members by working with the LGBT Assembly and their contacts in the various departments of the Union & University.
5. To work co-operatively with the LGBT Assembly by publicising its contact details (and website when completed) and pass important information between the LGBT Society members and LGBT Assembly, to ensure effective communication and representation for all LGBT Society members.

Therefore doesn't it make sense for the assembly to come along to the meetings and talk? How can welfare officers communicate if the assembly chair has no speaking rights?
__________________
___________

What stands out here, for me, is that we need to communicate more. As a society committee member i am therefore putting myself forward to be on the LGBT assembly in 2006/07. Next year i dont have to work so can try and help out a bit more. I do however think it is imperative that future assembly meetings are held frequently and that communication with the society committee is intensified. Together we can make a huge difference to the life of LGBT students at Leeds University, though without the society, the assembly will undoubtedly flop.
In the meantime we should ensure that all relevant emails are forwarded to the assembly, that we show support for the fantastic work the assembly has been doing, and respect the efforts of Nic to salvage this complete and utter debacle.

ThaiDave xx

-- Edited by thaidave at 14:28, 2006-05-14

JohnK · Pieces of me you've never seen

A sensible post which I, on the most agree with Dave. And nicely put too!

Cheers!

forum admin next gen · Posting Addict

Contrary to what has been written above there has been no process of
election that have been opened and closed. The papers that have been handed
to me ONE WEEK AGO regarding the conference have been under consideration of
the welfare officers, and I have made numerous attempts to make sure that
the event has been known about. I.e. telling people in coffee hours and
explaining to the group as a whole what is going on. This has been done on
more than three occasions.

Regarding what has been happening with the assembly we were assured when the
assembly chair came to one of our committee meetings to discuss this matter
that it was in hand with them and as they were the 'political wing of the
LGBT' it was for them alone to deal with.

The reason that nothing more has been done about this by the society
committee in a more formal way is that at that committee meeting the
assembly chair informed the committee that everything regarding the
conference was to be arranged by the assembly. This can be confirmed by the
minutes taken from that meeting so perhaps the comments made regarding the
society committee not being able to do this are somewhat ill informed.

We were told as a committee that the selection process had already been
decided upon by the assembly and that society members were going to be asked
to submit manifestos for consideration with their application. This is
something that you may not remember Dave as we believe this was one of the
two committee meetings that you have missed.

At this meeting we were also informed that the assembly would NOT be awarded
an automatic position at the conference and that they would also be subject
to the democratic process. This it seems is not the case after all.

Dave, on a serious note, to say 'I personally feel more at fault for not
even knowing about this, than Nic should fee.' is wrong. This is something
that you DID know about as it was brought up in the one committee meeting
that you have attended since obtaining your position. We feel that it is
unfair of you to express your opinions regarding this matter (especially as
you are a member of the committee) when you have had little if any input
into society matters since the AGM.

However this is a matter that will be discussed with you on a more personal
level and is not a topic for further discussion on the forum.

The reason there has been no comment from the chair regarding this matter is
the fact that there is a meeting this week regarding this situation at which
the assembly chair and the societies officer will attend. We have been
waiting for the outcome of this meeting before we give you any further
information on the relationship between the society and assembly.

We would therefore just like to stress a few points; firstly the assembly is in charge or organising and running conference and came to the society to ask, very nicely, if how they were going to do it, by a process of manifestos and democracy by all, was ok by us. These goal posts were then changed to favour the "members" of the assembly.

-- Edited by forum admin next gen at 18:37, 2006-05-14

Date: Sun May 14 17:52 2006

Well it seems that we have been somewhat decieved by the so called members of the assembly. i personally appreciate the society making the situation a little bit clearer. It does however concern me to see that there is such a lack of communication between the Assembly and the Society, surely as the 'political wing' of the society, the Assembly should be as transparent as the Society has been. From my very limited knowledge of the mechanics of the Assembly ti seems that all power is rested in the hands of a very few people, who coincidentally happen to live together. Democracy?? hmmm.

This whole situation could have been avoided if the Assembly was to have involved the society more, and it seems strange that after the Assembly Chair fought so hard for the Assembly and Society to be linked more closely at the AGM, thye now seem content running the show on their own. Troubling, indeed.

JohnK · Pieces of me you've never seen

Who is 'Forum Admin Nex Gen'?

Why are you openly telling someone from your committee off on the public members forum?

As much as I appreciate you informing us of the committees position on this, I find the entire post sinister and its tone ill-judged.

forum admin next gen · Posting Addict

this is the forum admin, same as last year but with a new name.

we are an open society and when a committee member openly derides the society's committee on the public forum without consulting any other member of the committee we feel it fair to both committee and society members that the matter be resolved openly.

thank you for your comments on this matter john your opinions as an ex chair are always appreciated.

-- Edited by forum admin next gen at 19:07, 2006-05-14

JohnK · Pieces of me you've never seen

Okay. Still I think it could have been put much better, or perhaps discussed in the private forum first.

Also, forum admin shouldn't really be expressing opinions (IMHO). If you want to do that do it under your own name i reckon. It's impossible for one person sat at a computer to represent the 'views' of the entire committee. Doing it under your own name would make it much more 'open', if that's what your aim is.

Ohh, and out of interest, where has old forum admin gone? and how are you controlling the board without that one? I miss Supernanny!

-- Edited by JohnK at 21:12, 2006-05-14

JohnK · Pieces of me you've never seen

Ahhhhhh, that's better!

Adam · *Censored*

forum admin next gen wrote:

Dave, on a serious note, to say 'I personally feel more at fault for not
even knowing about this, than Nic should fee.' is wrong. This is something
that you DID know about as it was brought up in the one committee meeting
that you have attended since obtaining your position. We feel that it is
unfair of you to express your opinions regarding this matter (especially as
you are a member of the committee) when you have had little if any input
into society matters since the AGM.

Why is Dave not allowed to express his opinion on this matter and you are? At least he posted his opinions under his own name rather than insulting other people under an anonymous username.

JohnK · Pieces of me you've never seen

My point exactly Adam. I also object to the 'We feel' bits of this poem, as if this post was written by the entire committee, when it patently wasn't.

JohnK · Pieces of me you've never seen

Poem? POEM! I need to stop planning lessons on Blake and go do something less purposeful. It's hurting my brain!

ChrisH · Mmm eyebrows!

It was written collectively by several committee members so 'we feel' is appropriate. He's allowed to be entitled to his opinion but it would have been appreciated more if he had made sure what he was saying was based on what has actually been happening.

-- Edited by ChrisH at 00:07, 2006-05-15

indie_hunk · Guru of the Gay

"Dave, on a serious note, to say 'I personally feel more at fault for not
even knowing about this, than Nic should fee.' is wrong. This is something
that you DID know about as it was brought up in the one committee meeting
that you have attended since obtaining your position. We feel that it is
unfair of you to express your opinions regarding this matter (especially as
you are a member of the committee) when you have had little if any input
into society matters since the AGM.

However this is a matter that will be discussed with you on a more personal
level and is not a topic for further discussion on the forum. "

If this "matter" is going to be discussed on personal level, why did you openly chide a person on forum? Just to disprove the member's opinion publically? Also, if this represent the view of the society, is it fair for a group to openly reject their co-member's opinion on the forum? Last but least, if you wish to discredit other's view, can't you phrase it in a less condescending manner?

-- Edited by indie_hunk at 02:39, 2006-05-15

inlowercase · I caught you a delicious bass.

the committee reply was co written by a few members of the society and highlights a point that has already been brought up with the person in question therefore i feel that the use of the word we is justified.

i can see why there have been posts on here that have asked why we felt it necessary to rebut this persons argument publicly.

what has not been mentioned is the fact that if this person did have a complaint, especially when they are a committee member, they should have brought it up at the weekly meetings or to as john suggest it bring it up on the committee forum before going ahead in making a statement publicly when they did not have the full information. this is why members of the committee and myself have dealt with this matter in this way.

-- Edited by inlowercase at 00:35, 2006-05-15

Date: Sun May 14 23:54 2006

Shall we get Trisha in on this one? You're all being so petty about something that's already being solved!

Now grow up the lot of you! If I could get my way I'd give you all a good spanking and there'd be no dinner coming your way this evening!

I want love, but it's impossible
A man like me, so irresponsible
A man like me is dead in places
Other men feel liberated

I can't love, shot full of holes
Don't feel nothing, I just feel cold
Don't feel nothing, just old scars
Toughening up around my heart

But I want love, just a different kind
I want love, won't break me down
Won't brick me up, won't fence me in
I want a love, that don't mean a thing
That's the love I want, I want love

I want love on my own terms
After everything I've ever learned
Me, I carry too much baggage
Oh man I've seen so much traffic

So bring it on, I've been bruised
Don't give me love that's clean and smooth
I'm ready for the rougher stuff
No sweet romance, I've had enough

AliceH · Butter Me Up!

forum admin next gen wrote:

I have made numerous attempts to make sure that
the event has been known about. I.e. telling people in coffee hours and
explaining to the group as a whole what is going on. This has been done on
more than three occasions.

Collective or not, the post is badly edited considering 'I' and 'we' both appear in it! Whatever has been done to make sure the event is known about has clearly been ineffective considering I know a large number of people in the LGBT and yet only one person (a Committee member!) was aware of these efforts. Telling people in coffee hours is, for lack of a better phrase, a piss poor way of telling people. Even if 20 people showed up to that Coffee Hour, you'd still only be reaching 10% of members. Why couldn't it be a) posted on the forum, b) emailed to ALL society members who are on the mailing list and c) taped to the LGBT Office door.

Also, publically chastising a Committee member on a public section of the forum is, in my opinion, incredibly bad taste. Can I refer you to the forum rules? "Personal attacks on anyone, whether known to you in person or not, are unacceptable." John K is right, it's ill-judged and bad taste and gives a very bad impression of the Committee as a whole. (I'm willing to bet that not every Committee member would agree with the edited post.)

PS - Lay off the Elton John quoting, Anon, unless you want your head on a stick.

-- Edited by AliceH at 01:08, 2006-05-15

inlowercase · I caught you a delicious bass.

what you fail to metion in your post alice is the part where it is the job of the assembly to get the message out there and campaign for the political side not the committee.

Drew

Date: Mon May 15 00:22 2006

So a single committee member can 'chastise' the rest of the committee with a post and that not be seen as an attack?!

AliceH · Butter Me Up!

inlowercase wrote:

what you fail to metion in your post alice is the part where it is the job of the assembly to get the message out there and campaign for the political side not the committee.

Drew

Actually, it is the Assembly and Committee's job to work together. Might I refer you to this point in the constituion?

5. To work co-operatively with the LGBT Assembly by publicising its contact details (and website when completed) and pass important information between the LGBT Society members and LGBT Assembly, to ensure effective communication and representation for all LGBT Society members.

This is pretty important information! The LGBT mailing list seems like the best channel to distribute information. If anyone can think of any ways the Assembly could pass on this information to the entire LGBT Community at LUU without having a mailing list then I'd like to hear about it!

thaidave · Not Thai Dave

Wow! I'm overwhelmed! So much scorn for an honest opinion!
Well, it is interesting that "Forum Admin" feels the need to publicise my so-called "failures" so publically, but when one of the two missed meetings were held when i was in Africa and the other one held at a time when i was in a lecture, i don't think there is really a proverbial leg for the committee to stand on. Besides, you forget i am not the chair or mens officer, but the international officer, and as for that, doing my job quietly and efficiently, as was promised at the AGM.

Open chastisement on this forum for my honest opinion is disappointing, and will of course be taken up privately. As for openly criticising the committee...... if papers were passed on to us then why weren't they passed on to nic? is it enough for us to say we are new or only received them a week ago? I personally, and i stress the word 'personally', think not. Nor do i think it fair for Nic to get flack for what i deem a committee error, an embarassing one when you consider that i'm on the committee and want it to succeed.

Probably the most embarassing and sad thing of all though is that some of the readers of this will think i have some form of agenda. This is simply not the case. I'm the international officer and will be so until forcibly removed, i have no grander ambition or claims and will make no apologies for defending the unfair criticism levelled at Nic and stand by my opinions regarding future co-operation between the lgbt society and assembly.

Finally, if the committee feel offended by what i have to say i would ask you to reconsider your take on it. Read through my post. Is it a personal attack? Am i denouncing any individuals or apologising on your behalf? And am i entitled to have my opinion voiced?

Now compare it to the forum admin post. Condescending, personal and overall quite disappointing to me as an individual on the committee.

You all have my phone number, none of you called me.
you all have me email address and instant message service and none of you messaged me.

Ask yourselves about your efforts and the cheapness of the shot. Viva Forum Admin! I made no apologies at the last meeting for the Gay Night at the Uni comments and i don't believe i owe you any for the latest opinion. And i stress, opinion. I'm not gonna come to committee meetings and spend our limited time whinging about my opinions when we should be focussing on the good of the society after all.

If anyone has any personal questions regarding my opinion, i'm more than glad to answer.

Committee. See ya on Thursday,

ThaiDave x

AliceH · Butter Me Up!

Dave: see you soon, hopefully. I'll buy you a (nice, stiff) drink and we can forget all of our respective troubles in the comforting blanket of inebriation.

PS -- of course you have an agenda! We all know about the proposed CU/Conservative Future/LGBT merger you've been masterminding.

ChrisH · Mmm eyebrows!

Frankly Im a tad fed up of yet more constant bickering between everyone... its getting to the point where people are just getting offended and its not getting anyone anywhere. The point of the thread was about the conference this has now been sorted and there is a meeting planned to bring together society and assembly.

Now seeing as tho its all gotten a bit heated I propose that the whole issue be finished and done with and personally as there have been bad things said all round I think the thread should just be deleted as all sides have been listened to and there's not much else we can gain from this.

Is everyone agreed on this? We'll see what the general consensus is in the morning...

Thanks and good luck to those with exams tomorrow!
Chris x x

-- Edited by ChrisH at 01:42, 2006-05-15

thaidave · Not Thai Dave

I do believe Chris has a point. As i stipulated in my first post the conference is now in the safe hands of the assembly and ties between the two bodies should be strengthened. though the 800th of my posts was certainly the longest, it would be a shame if this entirely legitimate and interesting thread were to be deleted. Night everyone x

-- Edited by thaidave at 01:51, 2006-05-15

Rt hon NickyDyke85 · Lord of the Rings

At the committee meeting I attended I didnt tell you how it was going to be ran, I put forward our ideas and asked what you thought, to which I was told you'd get back to me, so I waited for a response and had none.

Then a couple of days ago I was told that the nominations had been opened and closed and only one person had applied, when I asked if the assembly could change what it had originally put forward and asked if anyone would mind there been one position for the assembly & 3 for the society so there was fair representation of both groups. This is before finding out from other committee members that there had supposedly been another e-mail sent out to members and the committee had discussed who'd they'd been wanting to send.

It's not that hard to contact me, so I'm unsure as to why I didn't get a response back and then found out all this other information. Also if the assembly were in charge of running the conference organisation from the start, why wasn't I notified that the society had been given the forms and why weren't they passed onto me? Rather than me having to ring around and try to hunt the forms down after finding out they had been in the societies possession for over a week. In addition if the case is true that you hadn't organised the delegation but had the forms, why did no-one contact me asking what was going on, rather than sitting on them and not saying anything?

I'm not pissed off about the organisation of conference, I'm annoyed that the exec made a mistake where that is concerned. However it's been sorted. What has got on my tits about all of this & it's not a slagging off of the committee cos u know I like all of u & get along with u, is the lack of communication which has lead to chaos (and me getting ripped to shreads again). You were all at the AGM when the motion to strengthen links was passed, its in your constitution & it highlights the fact that to have a better working relationship together we need to have better communication and made things clearer about how to do this. How can this be achieved when there isn't 2-way communication?

The meeting with the assembly chair/s, committee & exec, isn't on my side going to be about the whole organisation of conference, it's going to be about actually working to strengthen links and sort out the communication problems so that we can effectively work together for the benefit of all. This is something which I've already spoken to Chris about and mentioned on here, seperately both groups are good strong groups regardless of numbers of members, working together to combine those strengths and is only going to see things move forward in a positive light. Isn't that what we all want to see here? So why not get it sorted out now so everything is running smoothly for next year, instead of going round in circles?

Rt hon NickyDyke85 · Lord of the Rings

Anonymous wrote:

Well it seems that we have been somewhat decieved by the so called members of the assembly. i personally appreciate the society making the situation a little bit clearer. It does however concern me to see that there is such a lack of communication between the Assembly and the Society, surely as the 'political wing' of the society, the Assembly should be as transparent as the Society has been. From my very limited knowledge of the mechanics of the Assembly ti seems that all power is rested in the hands of a very few people, who coincidentally happen to live together. Democracy?? hmmm.

This whole situation could have been avoided if the Assembly was to have involved the society more, and it seems strange that after the Assembly Chair fought so hard for the Assembly and Society to be linked more closely at the AGM, thye now seem content running the show on their own. Troubling, indeed.

Yeah cos I love going round decieving people, just chuck me sum lederhosen n a feathered cap, why not start calling me pinnochio while ur at it!

The assembly is so small because there's been little involvement from others, the fact that some of us live in the same house is irrelevant, as has been stated before there have been opportunities provided for people to get involved, e-mails sent to the previous committee to send out 2 members about the assembly weren't sent out, the assembly section of the forum where I've posted information all year has been there to show what the assemblies planning to do/progress made with things & again asking for involvement. How much more transparent do u want me to be, I'll get an x-ray machine fitted to me if that helps? It's not my fault people chose not to read the assembly section of the forum or get involved, if more people were involved there'd be more people involved in the union's democracy, or is this a point you're too thick to notice?

As for the comments that the whole situation could have been avoided if the assembly involved the society more, what ****ing planet are you from? I fought to get that motion passed to "do exactly what it says on the tin" and strengthen links between both groups, I spoke to the committee about our ideas for the organisation of conference, asked their opinions and were waiting for them to get back to us, so we could agree something & crack on with it... or is that not involving them at all?

Following the lack of communication recieved back, the little amount of time left to sort it out, mixed messages I've been getting from other committee members and general confusion, the situation had to be acted upon and resolved which is why I've took over the organising, SO IT GETS DONE & LUU HAS LGBT REPRESENTATION AT NUS LGBT CONFERENCE, WHICH IS IN THE LONG RUN BENEFICIAL TO THE LGBT COMMUNITY AT LEEDS UNIVERSITY, why is it troubling that we are acting in the best interests of LGBT students to ensure that they get the representation, information and support they deserve?

In future anon instead of making bitchy swipes, unfounded and ill informed comments under the cover of the anonymous tag, **** right off or actually post something constructive under your own forum account.