Oh my goodness: soooo cuuuuuuteAli (friend, not prof) was in town the week before last. It was awesome hanging out with him again, if only for a little bit
( Read more... )
Yeah. The WCF constitution has been almost entirely abandoned over the past few years. A year ago there was a push to replace it with something we could actually follow (a lot of the current one doesn't make sense), and a new one was written even, but there was a lot of hush-hush politics about it and most people didn't understand why we needed a new one in the first place.
The thing about WCF is that it's not (usually) the exec that's the problem; it's that we now have three full-time "employees" of an off-campus international organization (IVCF) that I consider downright creepy. It's their fulltime job to be hangin' out with the club, particularly exec, and while they usually claim not to participate as active leaders, that's far from the truth. We didn't used to have these "staff workers" at all in the capacity in which they currently exist, we used to have as much to do with IVCF as the CSC does with the ACM. Similar raison-d'etre, really. IVCF had a massive change over the past four years or so, but if they implement it slowly enough then no one student body will see it happen.
This is very close to a situation that Feds would care about. They disbanded a club, The Embassy, because it was basically an off-campus church abusing Feds club status. WCF is now like that, although many still don't know it, and some agree with it, and many or most of those who disagree left. *shrug*
Wow. That does sound creepy. This is, for instance, one of the reasons why I was solidly behind the CSC Constitution rewrite to limit exec positions to current undergraduates.
Are these IVCF people Waterloo students? I believe the Feds clubs charter requires club members to be U(W) students. That may be something you can use.
Alternately, they've already thrown the gauntlet - "leave and start your own club". If you go to the Feds and make the case that WCF is being suborned by an off-campus organization, you can get WCF disbanded and then start it up again next year with a Constitution that has some careful exclusion clauses.
Realistically, though, subversion from within is almost impossible for any democratic organization to resist. If the majority of the current voting members of the club are aware of what's going on and don't care, there's very little anyone can do.
The presence of "staff workers" is not uncommon for Christian clubs, here and at other campusses. I don't "get it", but most people in these circles seem to be used to the idea, and even appreciate it, which makes it difficult for me to convince people that we have a problem; it comes down to negotiating the details of a relationship, not the relationship itself.
The staff workers aren't Waterloo students, but two of them used to be at some point. Feds requires that full voting members be UW students -- but, in CSC-style, there can be other types of members. It would even be difficult to prove that the staff are participating as active leaders. They're now tightly involved in suggesting new execs, which now tend to be people who will carry out the staff's suggested ideas. And only the exec knows what's going on behind-the-scenes; noone else can know if there is a problem or not.
Yeah. The WCF constitution has been almost entirely abandoned over the past few years.
It's a consequence of living in a country that doesn't really have a Constitution that most undergrads don't understand why the Rule of Law is important.
The thing about WCF is that it's not (usually) the exec that's the problem; it's that we now have three full-time "employees" of an off-campus international organization (IVCF) that I consider downright creepy. It's their fulltime job to be hangin' out with the club, particularly exec, and while they usually claim not to participate as active leaders, that's far from the truth. We didn't used to have these "staff workers" at all in the capacity in which they currently exist, we used to have as much to do with IVCF as the CSC does with the ACM. Similar raison-d'etre, really. IVCF had a massive change over the past four years or so, but if they implement it slowly enough then no one student body will see it happen.
This is very close to a situation that Feds would care about. They disbanded a club, The Embassy, because it was basically an off-campus church abusing Feds club status. WCF is now like that, although many still don't know it, and some agree with it, and many or most of those who disagree left. *shrug*
Reply
Are these IVCF people Waterloo students? I believe the Feds clubs charter requires club members to be U(W) students. That may be something you can use.
Alternately, they've already thrown the gauntlet - "leave and start your own club". If you go to the Feds and make the case that WCF is being suborned by an off-campus organization, you can get WCF disbanded and then start it up again next year with a Constitution that has some careful exclusion clauses.
Realistically, though, subversion from within is almost impossible for any democratic organization to resist. If the majority of the current voting members of the club are aware of what's going on and don't care, there's very little anyone can do.
Reply
The staff workers aren't Waterloo students, but two of them used to be at some point. Feds requires that full voting members be UW students -- but, in CSC-style, there can be other types of members. It would even be difficult to prove that the staff are participating as active leaders. They're now tightly involved in suggesting new execs, which now tend to be people who will carry out the staff's suggested ideas. And only the exec knows what's going on behind-the-scenes; noone else can know if there is a problem or not.
Reply
It's a consequence of living in a country that doesn't really have a Constitution that most undergrads don't understand why the Rule of Law is important.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment