Originally Posted by fullsmash26

If you feel the facts are incorrect, provide unbiased information to correct them. Why not have a copy of the petition online? Why not have the contract online? Why not have something on the front page of the MSU homepage?

Then let students discuss that information without heavy handed police state-wannabe tactics.

Please re-read my post. This is exactly what we are doing.

As for the accusation of information being incorrect on the facebook groups...keep in mind we cannot be everywhere at once, we are trying to moderate as effectively as possible but we are full time students and have other things to do. However, what the VP finance is referring to is $24/year x over 20,000 students at McMaster.

Cheers,
John McIntyre
Elections Committee Member

I was happy I found ONE side of the issue which felt it was important to get students involved in a referendum about a student fee.

I have no problem with the SRA's or the MSU's position on the fee. It doesn't matter to me. I will (and have) made up my own mind about this fee.

Why are they assuming what we hear is biased? Why don't they trust us to make up our mind? Had my previous posts not been deleted, you would have seen that I asked for more information on the subject. Why can't we get the full story from the beginning rather than having to dig for facts? A simple, impartial announcement, DETAILING the facts of this fee would have sufficed to allow students to make up their own mind.

Originally Posted by DannyV

Why are they assuming what we hear is biased? Why don't they trust us to make up our mind?

The issue here isn't that they don't 'trust' you to make up you own mind, it is that, like I've said before, this deal sounds great on paper! Why WOULDN'T you vote for it? Well to answer that, you need to see this fee in light of the bigger picture, like I've also said before. THIS is something that students WON'T immediately see when they hear "$24 for unlimited DVDs". It's not that they don't trust you, it's that you only hear that tag-line without thinking of the longer term ramifications of it.

And I think the reason they assume that what you hear is biased is because every time they try to follow the Referendum rules or inform people of their position, they either get accused of forming conspiracies, or the discussion turns into a rhetoric about 'free speech'. I'm not saying that the whole debate on free speech and censorship is unwarranted, in fact, I think it's an important issue to bring before the MSU, but the point of this referendum is getting mixed up in this debate, and THAT leads to unfair biases.

Just off the top of my head, I wouldn't vote for this because I feel I already pay enough in fees for services I don't use. While there would be an opt out of this one, I don't like the idea of giving money to get it back 3 months later. Time value of money comes to mind.

I will admit I didn't think of the point made on the Facebook group: It would be hypocritical to pass this fee since we're complaining about tuition.

If they are afraid of biases, post the bare facts of the proposal. Then each sides views should be explained. Trying to force us not to talk about it except through controlled channels doesn't make sense.

I realize they have a tough job to do. It would be made a lot easier if instead of being afraid of discussion, they would encourage it. (From the start, not 2 days after they realize they can't stop us from discussing issues).

Hey Danny,

Just to correct some information provided. You say that there would be an opt out. Unfortunately that is not guaranteed, that is purely based on whether the MSU can work this into their agreement with the external organization.

Cheers,
John McIntyre
Elections Committee Member

Again, they weren't 'forcing' you not to talk about it, part of the Elections Committee's job is to PREVENT an UNFAIR bias by the distribution of incorrect, or more importantly, INCOMPLETE information, which I'm sure you've noticed is EXACTLY what has started happening with the Facebook pages. The point of the referendum is lost on the argument of free speech and the use of 'tuition' versus 'fee'.

"If they are afraid of biases, post the bare facts of the proposal. Then each sides views should be explained"
They posted the bare facts on the MSU website, and allowed each side to explain their position, just not online, where facts can get skewed very quickly.

Originally Posted by McIntyre

Hey Danny,

Just to correct some information provided. You say that there would be an opt out. Unfortunately that is not guaranteed, that is purely based on whether the MSU can work this into their agreement with the external organization.

Cheers,
John McIntyre
Elections Committee Member

Oh ok, thanks for the correction John. I was under the impression this had already been worked out. We should not be going to vote if the opt out isn't a guaranteed clause.

Hi folks

I wanted to let everyone know that I have been informed that the Elections Committee have released a new ruling on how campaigning can occur for the DVD Rental referendum. The new ruling was made in order to make sure that the referendum would not be invalidated based on the unofficial discussions happening online. The ruling will be better explained and posted here soon by Temara Brown (MacInsiders Staff and also on the SRA).

As for the topic of censorship, my personal view is that open discussion is important in any sort of debate with two sides and the need to vote one or the other. As I've said in the past many times, I feel online discussion should be allowed and is the best way to engage students in useful conversation. Whether the proper facts are posted or not seems like a non-issue as MacInsiders has staff who are on the SRA, has users who are SRA/BOD/MSU Staff and have the ability to post (We've seen SRA members posting their responses in here already), plus all students and members of the McMaster community are able to register for the site - no different than on a wall in an 'official' Facebook group (which, some students may not use Facebook and not be able to read any discussion at all - MacInsiders allows for non-registered users to be able to read discussions). There are clear ways to contact us as well as report buttons on every post if something needs to be brought to a staff member's attention that is violating our Terms of Use.

However, being a recognized and funded club of the MSU means we do have guidelines to follow and will respect those policies until we're told otherwise. If this new campaign ruling allows us to openly discuss the issues then we will do our part to fulfill our club mission and post all the information we can to keep students informed, as this is what we're here for. We'll do so in as unbiased a manner as possible (see our coverage of the MSU Presidental Elections for example). Until then, MacInsiders will be refraining from posting any information about this referendum on our homepage.

Updates with regards to this new ruling will be posted as we learn of them.

Indeed, I can finally say what I want now that this new ruling has been past.

I was asked by an SRA member to take down your original post, Danny as it was in direct violation of campaign rules at that time. So it wasn't that your post didn't take (as you had thought), it was me taking it down.

Although MacInsiders is an MSU club, we are not entirely governed by the MSU (if you all recall MacInsiders provided the best coverage of the MSU Presidential election earlier this year and had a forum with many members discussing the voting process, which technically would be seen as going against the MSU). However, I was under the impression that your post (Danny) was going to do something to the outcome of the election (ie invalidate one of the sides). So to make sure no side got more 'power' (so to speak) in the referendum, your comments needed to be taken down until we were certain that posting such comments was allowed.

Personally, I didn't (and don't) agree with the campaign rules of that time. Unfortunately students rely on the internet for a source of information (and count Facebook as a legitamate source), and I do see that as a bit of a problem. I do also wish we could have been able to discuss the issue earlier...as...let's face it. Even if it doesn't affect myself, it will likely affect a lot of you still here at Mac next year.

That being said however, there has been limited information posted throughout campus. There are posters in MUSC, but generally in areas already occupied by the MSU.

My personal view on the matter: why are we giving some external corporation a crapload of money when we can download movies for free off the internet?

I have been informed that MacInsiders is now allowed to advertise the DVD Rental Referendum.

I'm waiting on further details before giving the team the go ahead to do so. Expect news about the referendum on the homepage soon if this is the case.

Chad,

As an elections committee member I can tell you that facebook and macinsiders are open for campaigning and discussion now. We do require that uploaded stuff (such as campaign posters and advertisements) are approved by the CRO first, but discussion is open. The EC will be keeping an eye on all discussions for inaccurate information and will only respond if something inaccurate is posted. Have a great night!

Cheers,
John McIntyre
Elections Committee Member

I'd like to state that I was originally against the referendum. I honestly believe that this is a stupid idea for numerous reasons. The point of my post was not to bash the SRA at all. I apologize if you think that's what it was. I know that those on the SRA work really hard and a lot of them are great people. My only complaint was that they chose a side and are promoting it. I feel that in the future they should not allow this. The students should be fully informed of the pros and cons of this referendum rather than just the cons. Nevertheless, I felt that the cons of this whole referendum override the pros even before knowing how the SRA felt. Still I feel that Ian Finlay should not have been the creator of the group since he is the VP Finance of the MSU. I disagree with the way this has been set up. I am not against the SRA or the MSU. I nevertheless feel that some sort of change should be made for the future. If we are being guided to vote no for a referendum, who is to say that we won't be persuaded to vote a certain way for elections in the future? In all honesty, I really am not against the MSU or anything affiliated with it I am disappointed with how things were run this time and I think people should think about this in the future.

Hey Nicole,

Perhaps I can shed some light.

The MSU and SRA have been seen as dithering, irrelevant and unable to take a stance on anything in recent years. This is something that has personally aggravated me, because when interacting with students, they have at times lived up to this.

Students are free to disagree with us, and the other side has been allowed to present their argument using the same rules we are allowed to use.

However, this is a group trying to take advantage of us. As a student and a student representative, and for someone who purports to be some kind of student leader, I can't allow this. I can't take this sitting down. The SRA shouldn't.

The Elections Committee has to be unbiased, but I'm not on that. Therefore I am going to say loudly that I am voting no, and I encourage everyone to do the same.

why would we need a dvd rental thing when we have dc++ i see noo point at all

It says that I was to reply with an update from the EC but McIntyre is ON the Elections committee so there's the word straight from the horses mouth (hate that expression! Like, where did that come from!?).

I would whole-heartedly like to stand up to the efforts made by the EC. They are students like you or me investing their time into assuring everything is done fairly. As a campaign team member who just had to hold herself back from throwing her shoe at certain facebook groups, I am glad that they have promptly addressed the issue and have recognized that what was done on facebook wasn't fair.

To those attacking the SRA, read what Summer has said + this... Also, I can imagine a lot of you are asking what the SRA even is. Macinsiders recently featured an article about that so check it out as it is an excellent opportunity to gain a better understanding seeing as how all of those reading this post are probably invested in what's going on and, therefore, what your SRA does for you.


THANK YOU SUMMER!.. have I told you lately that I love you? EVERYONE, reread her posts. She hit the nail on the head several times.

What I intend to have here is a breakdown of what has happened starting from the beginning to further clarify everything that goes on "behind the scenes" and up until now.

- Firstly, none of this is behind the scenes. SRA meetings are open to everyone and we LOVE to have observers! It sure does make my heart feel good! You also can come visit us anytime during office hours or email us and we can tell you what's up. We've been doing a lot this year to really bring what's going on with your students union to the forefront of your attention so please, before you consider attacking us, actually talk to us and find out why we do what we do. We are students just like you who invest our priceless spare moments into making sure that WE AS A STUDENT BODY gets the best possible experience while at McMaster.

Okay... here goes.
In 2007-2008
An external group not affiliated with McMaster in any way found out that if a petition is made with at least 3% (roughtly 300 signatures) of the student population in support of this, it has to go to referendum. This is stated in the MSU constitution.

The company putting forth this petition made a presentation to the SRA and brought forth their plans. I'll speak more to this later.

What would then be in proper order according to the MSU bylaws would be to then set the date for when the referendum would take place. According to our elections bylaw, which outlines all procedures that we must follow in order to be considered as having a fair election:

3.4.1 Referenda shall be held concurrent to fall by-elections, the Presidential election, or the SRA General election. Upon receipt of a resolution or petition calling for a referendum pursuant to Article VII of the MSU Constitution, the Election committee shall grant a poll concurrent to the next scheduled election.

But, by the time the petition was received and could be counted up and all of the people on the referendum list were verified to actually be MSU members, it would have been far too late to go to either presidentials or SRA generals. So, the speaker made a ruling that it would come to where it is now. Hopefully this addresses any rumours that we were trying to 'cover it up' or were putting it off. Also, the minutes with this decision are posted for all to view.

2008-2009 - this year! yay!
The Elections Committee is a component of the Elections Service who's goal it is to ensure a fair and unbiased election/referendum. It consists of the Chief Returning Officer (CRO), Deputy Returning Officer (DRO), 5 SRA members and some MSU members (any undergrad student with 18 units or more). There is currently a seat open on the EC for an MSU member. So, if you are interested in helping with this process, I'd recommend considering it. Or, you can always go and simply talk to any of the members of the committee.

Anyways, the committee has been working hard in preparation for the upcoming election and has been following all proper procedure as outlined in all MSU policy.

Have beef with these policies? Again, talk to the Bylaws and Procedures committee.. The Ombuds office is also working to review it after what happened last year.

The "PROCLAMATION" posters were up all over campus.... I'm a nerd and took a picture of it (it's normal for me). This advertisement was also all put up on the MSU's website. I agree that a massive blitz campaign could have happened and then all students would have been informed and then the MSU wouldn't be charged with 'hiding information.' But, the elections committee had ultimately done everything it was required to do.

At the SRA meeting held on September 28th, the SRA entered closed session to have a discussion. What closed session means is that only official members of the SRA are allowed in the room and essentially what happens in the room stays in the room. However, in this decision we had made a clause in the motion that all of what had happened in the meeting would become public at the start of campaigning. Why? Because this is the day we decided to take a campaign stance against this whole DVD thing. If it was public before the beginning of the campaign period, it would be considered pre-campaigning and that's bad.

At the meeting, we went over the proposed service that McMaster students will be asked to see if they're interested in. We revisited what it was from what we were told in the presentation and also went through all of the MASSIVE FLAWS in the whole plan. Some of the points that were raised were:

1. The company who came to us had... questionable credibility at best. This is not Block Buster, people. This is some random company from who knows where in Hamilton who is just trying to make a buck off students.

2. Do we really want to hand over $500,000 of student money to these guys? HALF A MILLION DOLLARS!

3. If this goes through, this will be a service that is not required to operate under any MSU policy, these are policies that are written BY students FOR students. So, essentially this 'service' could run and do whatever it may please and not be required to listen to students. It could take it's money and run with it... It could take it's HALF A MILLION DOLLARS IN STUDENTS MONEY and run with it. We'd still have to cut them the cheque if this referendum goes through.

4. Where on earth would this service go? The people putting this referendum through didn't really have a plan for that either. If you've ever worked or volunteered for the MSU, you might have come across the issue of how there is a complete lack of space/storage on campus. According to this group, they would run out of the House of Games.. but they actually didn't make any agreements with this establishment. Also, the House of Games is an establishment that pays rent to the MSU for the space that they have. Losing this service would lose revenue for the MSU, ultimately making the this DVD thing more expensive for students.

5. The most potent one for me: As students, we all face the rising cost of tuition and textbooks. Our Vice President Education's job is to work to make sure that we have our voice heard on many levels of government when it comes to these issues. If we keep approving fees on frivoulous things, especially those that have absolutely no connection to academia, how on earth can the government possibly take seriously any claim that "tuition is too high." By letting these extra fees upon ourselves, we're only making our VP Education's job irrevalent. He will not be taken seriously if students spend half a million dollars on DVDs instead of investing that in our own education.

6. The proposed "opt-out" plan. Okay, let's be realistic. Opt-out plans take A LOT of time and money.. STUDENT MONEY to run. The opt-out plan we have with our health and dental plans requires a substantial part of a full-time staff member's job to coordinate. Students pay this employee's salary, so really this is just going to cost you even more money than you expect. Also, looking at the insurance plan opt-out plans, we ALWAYS get frustrated students saying that they are not efficient and students should have the option to choose to join into it or not.
We also need to put deadlines in place. Students will enevatibly miss these deadlines and get pissed off.
Moreover, there is nothing in this referendum question that requires this service to even have an opt-out plan. If you think this is a win-win deal, think again.

7. I put this here because I am only one member trying to bring up all the points. There are SO many more that I'm sure other members would have to say. I welcome further discussion and if I was wrong with anything, let me know. I have said everything to the best of my understanding.


Personally, I'm in fourth year and have not ever rented a DVD during my university career. DC++ anyone?? Graboid, torrents, all those streaming sites... now I know this isn't a good excuse and shouldn't be encouraged but I'm going to be honest and realistic with it and just put it out there.


After all this discussion, the SRA passed a motion which stated something along the lines of: Moved by (name) seconded by (name) that the SRA, excluding those members on the elections committee, declare a campaign stance against the question in the upcoming referendum and that this information be made public at the beginning of the campaign period.
Remember, all this was passed in closed session so we could not say what we were doing until last Thursday.

There was some confusion as to whether or not this was a legal thing to do; the representative government taking a stance against a question that is seeking to poll the opinions of students. The speaker than made a ruling that stated:

(1) Nothing in the Constitution, Bylaws, Policies, or Roberts Rules of Order Newly Revised (2000) prohibits the Student Representative Assembly or Board of Directors from declaring a public stance on an MSU-administered referendum;
(2) The nature of Academic Division Representative is representative and not proxy. As such, ADRs are elected to advocate in the best interests of their constituents and are only bound to the will of the electorate in meetings of the General Assembly and in MSU-administered referenda; and,
(3) The nature of the Student Representative Assembly does not change during a referendum.
Therefore:
(4) The Student Representative Assembly may, as a body, declare a public stance in an MSU-administered referendum, and its members are entitled to all rights and privileged detailed in Bylaw 10 – Elections; and,
(5) The Board of Directors may, as a body, declare a public stance in an MSU-administered referendum, and its members are entitled to all rights and privileges detailed in Bylaw 10 –Elections.


Now it's campaign period and your SRA members (minus those who are putting great efforts into the elections committee) are working to campaign against this.

So, there you have it all out in the open.

Remember that if you ever have any questions about what is going on or perhaps disagree with anything that's going on, visit our office hours! MUSC 204!!

The facebook/macinsiders censorship stuff:
Internet has always been a burden on the elections committee, who's aim it is to run a fair unbiased election as has been said numerous times. Basically, the challenge is this: how do you possibly monitor the information to make sure that all is accurate. After all, you'd be pretty pissed if all the posters on the wall were filled with lies, right? If everything you were told from either side of the campaign was completely filled with lies and inaccuracies to earn one side of the vote or another. This is why all campaign material (ie. posters, etc), must be approved by the CRO or DRO. The will of the elections committee has remained the same as in previous elections and referenda and that all online campaigning is forbidden unless otherwise sanctioned by the EC.
The groups that were created on facebook were created by MSU members who are not registered on any campaign side. The groups were biased although these members claimed they were not. The EC had demanded that these groups be removed as it was breaking all of the rules laid out before hand. People got mad and 'shamed the msu.' But, what really was the worst consequence of these groups was exactly what Mavis was saying. These MSU members were pushing one side of the campaign and bashing members of the otherside who were legally bound and following the rules and not saying anything back. Oh trust me, I was holding myself back and uber frustrated.
Because this was creating an unfair advantage in the election in that one side of the argument was getting away with posting on the internet, the EC had to figure out a way to maintain fairness in the refendum and avoid complete invalidation (where we'd have to call off the whole thing and try and figure out how and when to do it again.. not the best route to take). This is why a ruling was sent out this past Sunday stating that facebook and macinsiders.com would be allowed for discussion about the referendum. That is when I let a sigh of relief and start writing back to all those things that had me cringing.

Please note that everything I have posted above are my opinions and interpretations of what has happened. My intent is to clarify discussion and to bring light to what the SRA is actually doing about this... Other SRA members, please clarify things or correct me if I am wrong with anything.

Also, I more than welcome any more questions and encourage discussion on the topic. We are glad to write back and answer questions.

Moreover, I have an office hour today if you want to speak to me about anything. 11:30-12:30 in MUSC 204.