Talk:Ructions: Difference between revisions

No edit summary
Line 49: Line 49:
As it's Friday, I'll stick my nose in.  
As it's Friday, I'll stick my nose in.  


I fail to see why this merits a page all of its own and in quite so much detail. At most it would require two or 3 lines to summarise on a page of general 'no confidence' somewhere else, maybe hung off the officer's page.  It's nothing unusual I don't think, there were at least 3 no confidence votes in my 4 years (one passed, two rejected) as well as a host of personal disagreements. People leave for URY, people join having left URY, the world keeps turning.[[User:Sprow|Sprow]] 08:19, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
I fail to see why this merits a page all of its own and in quite so much detail. At most it would require two or 3 lines to summarise on a page of general 'no confidence' somewhere else, maybe hung off the officer's page.  It's nothing unusual I don't think, there were at least 3 no confidence votes in my 4 years (one passed, two rejected) as well as a host of personal disagreements. People leave for URY, people join having left URY, the world keeps turning. [[User:Sprow|Sprow]] 08:19, 16 November 2007 (UTC)


Sprow - first, as you'll see from the discussion above, we agree about the level of detail being too much, and this will be cut down. As for whether it merits its own page, I think it absolutely does. This was a '''''very''''' big deal - it dominated an entire term of YSTV and almost ripped the place apart. And I don't know about your time at YSTV, but votes of no confidence are absolutely not the norm now. Something has to be seriously wrong for one to be called. Also, surely a vote against an SD is seriously big news compared to any other post. This series of events had a more marked impact on the society than almost anything else I can recall during my time at YSTV, and I think those of us who were there at the time feel it needs recording. Finally, we're not in some Wikipedia-style regime of "it has to be proven to be noteworthy to be written about". I for one would like all members of YSTV over the years to share as much as they like about their experiences of YSTV, without people telling them that those experiences are not important enough. [[User:Rowan|Rowan]] 10:00, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Sprow - first, as you'll see from the discussion above, we agree about the level of detail being too much, and this will be cut down. As for whether it merits its own page, I think it absolutely does. This was a '''''very''''' big deal - it dominated an entire term of YSTV and almost ripped the place apart. And I don't know about your time at YSTV, but votes of no confidence are absolutely not the norm now. Something has to be seriously wrong for one to be called. Also, surely a vote against an SD is seriously big news compared to any other post. This series of events had a more marked impact on the society than almost anything else I can recall during my time at YSTV, and I think those of us who were there at the time feel it needs recording. Finally, we're not in some Wikipedia-style regime of "it has to be proven to be noteworthy to be written about". I for one would like all members of YSTV over the years to share as much as they like about their experiences of YSTV, without people telling them that those experiences are not important enough. [[User:Rowan|Rowan]] 10:00, 16 November 2007 (UTC)


It does need documenting - as Rowan says it was a very big deal indeed, and really soured the atmosphere of the society for a good few weeks if not the whole term (and the lack of an SD hung over the whole summer).  There are other elements I think could be included to better reflect this and I will include them when I go through this in a few days...there are also factors to this whole saga which can't really be included and others which already are which probably shouldn't (such as the "rumours" bit)which made it a bigger deal for those at the time.  I appreciate the point that no confidences happen all the time but this was really the mother of all no confidences!!  The only reason it's being written now is that all the people involved have finally left uni.  The main thing I think needs to be altered is the way it perhaps comes across (unintentionally) as a bit personal with all the detail after all these years when we're all (as far as I know) on good terms with the guy in question now. [[User:Jonathan|Jonathan]] 10:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
It does need documenting - as Rowan says it was a very big deal indeed, and really soured the atmosphere of the society for a good few weeks if not the whole term (and the lack of an SD hung over the whole summer).  There are other elements I think could be included to better reflect this and I will include them when I go through this in a few days...there are also factors to this whole saga which can't really be included and others which already are which probably shouldn't (such as the "rumours" bit)which made it a bigger deal for those at the time.  I appreciate the point that no confidences happen all the time but this was really the mother of all no confidences!!  The only reason it's being written now is that all the people involved have finally left uni.  The main thing I think needs to be altered is the way it perhaps comes across (unintentionally) as a bit personal with all the detail after all these years when we're all (as far as I know) on good terms with the guy in question now. [[User:Jonathan|Jonathan]] 10:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
For reference, the 3 no confidences I was referring to were Treasurer, Station Manager, and Director (spread over 4 years - not all on one night!). These were also highly devisive and generally split everyone into two groups (obviously), though I still wouldn't stretch to a whole page on any of them - they're in the minutes and generally only of interest to those directly involved. I'm not favouring anyone's point of view here since these [[Ructions]] mean nothing to me but it does read like dirty laundry being aired. [[User:Sprow|Sprow]] 10:15, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
9

edits