January 28, 2005

The Rush

At 4.55pm yesterday, it was the (relative) quiet before the storm. Across candidates people stood quitely in front of noticeboards, trying to claim their space. At 5pm, Elections Group let it be known that the time had come, and bam! all hell broke loose on campus. Within what felt like seconds there was no space left on a single noticeboard across campus The elections publicity drive has begun. Lecture and Kitchen tours have also already started, and will be continuing through to the end week 5 as candidates jostle for your votes.

I think we secured some fairly good noticeboard space for my candidate, Mike Britland, who is running for FIA.

As I said yesterday, I'm fairly pleased with how our posters turned out. Here is the first of them, keep your eye out for them in a Union near you.

- 6 comments by 1 or more people Not publicly viewable

[Skip to the latest comment]
  1. Postering was insane wasn't it. I should have had an army of minions.

    29 Jan 2005, 00:25

  2. Minions are and always will be good. A campaigner needs his minions.

    29 Jan 2005, 07:58

  3. My only slight concern with Mike's posters is the one saying, "More drinks offers, cheaper soft drinks," after he argued against drinks offers in the Union Council meeting, back in week 3. The meeting had been told that without offering cheaper doubles, we would face financial ruin… and yet Mike's running for Finance and Internal Affairs Officer. Ho hum. :)

    Still, they look pretty.

    29 Jan 2005, 09:02

  4. I can understand the confusion. The thing is that there are other ways of providing cheaper drinks to students without resorting to encouraging stronger drinks, which is what the double shot campaing does.

    29 Jan 2005, 10:36

  5. Hello again Tim,

    Were you at the Council meeting? If you were, you would have seen me arguing (as I have done for some time) for more happy hours and the like. I've never opposed the introduction of drinks offers. However, many people were concerned with the current promotions, and so I thought it appropriate that the issue get discussed amongst students; in this case, Union Council. I've been a trustee of the Union for 2 years, overseeing our financial revival; the last thing I want to do is harm that revival.

    Mike Britland

    29 Jan 2005, 19:40

  6. Hi Mike, I'm probably becoming quite annoying. Yes, I was at the meeting.

    Clair: the proposer for the motion, Nick Young, was very clear about this; they've done a lot of research, and produced some very nice graphs. The research showed that:

    • At the current trends, the Union would be £126,317 below its bar takings budget at the end of the year.
    • That it was impossible to reduce the singles prices any further.
    • That offers on doubles were what would actually persuade people to go to the Union.

    There was some stuff about current market trends being towards spirits, etc. etc. – much of this didn't make it into the minutes. But this specific issue had made it into the Boar, and Gareth Barker had managed to collect 265 signatures against it in just two hours, showing that the student opinion on the issue was non-trivial. As presented to the meeting, it was made clear that there was no other way that the Union would manage to meet its bars budget for this year.

    Mike, you were the one speaking against the amendment to remove 'Resolves 3 (a) and (b)' from the policy. Thus you were arguing against cheap doubles, which was what Nick Young et. al. had shown was needed. In fact, I notice that the policy still needs tidying up to remove similar sentiments from 'This Union Believes'. Virtually no-one was disagreeing with you about happy hour, but the argument over doubles dragged the meeting out even further. Afterwards (at 10pm – a 3hr meeting!) I was sorely tempted to get an 18-shot bottle of vodka from Costcutter's, and drown my sorrows, as most of the first-years must have been doing at that time – and will continue to do unless the offers on doubles are there.

    But hey. The Boar can't report on what you did because it would bias the election, so you'll probably win because you've got the best posters. ;)

    31 Jan 2005, 00:56

Add a comment

You are not allowed to comment on this entry as it has restricted commenting permissions.

January 2005

Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su
Dec |  Today  | Feb
               1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Search this blog



Most recent comments

  • gufhjnxjvbnmjkbnn nvgjhbm u nf jbn febjh bdn dj bh vjhf bj gmkoml; qmldko w,nk2 mnjkr5 m, m,n mc mhi… by fhfio on this entry
  • Tell us how to get 4233 pls :) by grid on this entry
  • High score 4233, and I can reproduce it. by supruzr on this entry
  • Should any care, the original may be at link by Hogweed on this entry
  • How boring are you!!! by Joe on this entry

Blog archive

Not signed in
Sign in

Powered by BlogBuilder