Latest News

a, Joke

IRC to have all first years run for SSMU President as part of Rez Project

by Captain America on

More in a:

After a recent proposal passed by Inter-Resident Council (IRC), a new initiative will be put in place to have all first-year students run for president of SSMU. The program, which was initially brought forth by the MORE Hall Council President, Tristcuit Renododie, aims to have all first-year students experience the crippling judgment and scrutiny that all SSMU presidential candidates are subjected to.

“We just really want to have students take a good look at themselves and ask ‘What am I doing wrong? Why am I so much more unfit for a leadership position than anybody else?’” Renododie explained. “But, of course, we understand that self-reflection can be difficult. This way, 20,000 of their peers can make those judgments for them.”

A working group is currently in place to oversee the implementation of the project for the incoming class of 2015-2016, and is being headed by IRC VP Communications, Annie Heiney, and IRC VP External, Laurie-Ann Perrier.

“We’ve been working very closely with Floor Fellows as well as engaging with Idina [Hair-Barrette, SSMU VP External],” Perrier said. “By working with SSMU, we hope to be able to heavily enforce all the electoral bylaws in the residences, to make sure students know when they’ve really messed up, and go on to publicly shame them in their own place of living.”

When developing the project with Renondin, IRC President Hollister Pottz noted that while Rez Project has done a lot of good in terms of making students aware of social and cultural differences and teaching them how to respect others, it has really been lacking in terms of making students completely vulnerable and available for baseless judgment.

“We’ve made great strides in Rez Project,” Pottz said. “We’ve really succeeded in making a noticeably more inclusive and accepting campus atmosphere. But there are still some students who aren’t really getting it. I think setting up a platform in which both undergraduate and graduate students are encouraged to rip apart first years’ flaws and hypocrisies will really help with that.”

Some former presidential candidates have expressed issues with the project, claiming that the emotional toll may prove too intense for some students. One former presidential candidate, who wished to remain anonymous, claimed that some students wouldn’t be able to handle the pressure.

“Someone broke into my home, they harassed me with Facebook screen shots and threatened me with a Supreme Court case,” the student said. “I had only been campaigning for a day, my platform wasn’t even solidified at that point. It was so awful.”

Despite these fears, after consultation with first-year students, the project coordinators decided that the benefits far outweighed the risks.

“This is more than a networking opportunity for first years,” Heiney said. “It will teach them transparency, how to properly use social media, and how to take constructive criticism. Even better, they’ll be able to interact with their community and learn crucial public relations skills as they’re lambasted for a simple mistake on a public platform that can be viewed by anyone, even future employers.”

Former SSMU VP Internal Ryan Nearnan echoed Heiney, and added his support to the project, claiming how his time being scrutinized for a minor political gaffe at McGill has helped him become a better, more introspective person.

“I will admit there are times I wish I could Google my name and not have a thousand links with the word ‘humiliating’ in the headline come up,” Nearnan explained. “But now when I go into interviews and they ask me that question about how I overcame adversary, I’m always prepared, and honestly that’s what really matters.”

This story is a work of satire and appeared as part of our April Fools Issue 2015.

Margaret Scratcher
a, Joke

April Fools’ Issue 2015

by McGill Tribune on

More in a:

The McGill Tribune presents its articles for its annual April Fools' Joke issue: 

Stories

  •  
a, News, PGSS, SSMU

Quebec student federation FEUQ faces internal turmoil

by Cece Zhang on

More in a:

Preliminary discussions of creating a new student federation are ongoing following disorder in one of the largest student federations in Quebec, the Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec (FEUQ). The  Fédération des associations étudiantes du campus de l’Université de Montréal (FAÉCUM), one of FEUQ’s largest member organizations, voted unanimously to leave the FEUQ this past weekend, also calling for a new national student federation to be formed.

The Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) Vice-President (VP) External Amina Moustaqim-Barrette explained that while SSMU is currently an independent association and not affiliated with FEUQ, she has been representing SSMU in observing FEUQ at its congresses. She cited several problems with the FEUQ based on her observations, including processes that were less democratic and a loss of reputation, and said she believed FEUQ would likely cease to exist in the next year.

“Backdoor politics is institutionalized, everyone goes for dinner on Fridays and bargains on the motions,” Moustaqim-Barrette said. “There are alliances that form that push through different motions, and it’s not a very democratic process [….] Their ability to mobilize students is just not how it used to be. They used to be heavyweights in the Quebec student movement, [but] it’s decreased steadily over the years. The name now doesn’t carry the weight it used to.”

Moustaqim-Barrette cited the example of how the annual campaign of FEUQ did not change to focus against austerity until the end of 2014, stating that this inflexibility has led to discontent from member student associations. 

“[The previous campaign] was for the Aide financière aux études (AFE), the student aid program. It seemed like FEUQ was working on this important thing but [it was] so irrelevant in the current political climate,” Moustaqim-Barrette said. “I [also] found the structure at FEUQ was very top-down. It’s the executives who present the ideas at the beginning of the year. It’s amended and voted on, but from there, there’s no real way to implement something [that] comes up in the middle of the year [which] the associations want to see FEUQ work on.”

Post-Graduate Students’ Society (PGSS) External Affairs Officer Julien Ouellet said he and the PGSS executive team disagreed with the FAÉCUM’s decision to leave. 

“Despite FAÉCUM’s disaffiliation, the FEUQ remains viable and is still the largest student association in Québec with 85,000 members,” Ouellet said. “PGSS and the other member associations are committed to ensuring a sustainable future for the student movement [….] Despite the current hurdles, the situation leaves us with a wide array of options that can only lead to a revitalization of the student movement.” 

Moustaqim-Barrette explained that the first meeting of 15 student associations regarding the formation of the new federation was held in Quebec City on March 21 and 22.

“It was a very preliminary meeting; [it was the] first time we’ve all come together to see what this could be, what each association looking for,” she said. “So most of the meeting was talking about a way to move forward, forming committees to look at what the mission and values of the federation could be.” 

The next meeting for the new student federation will be co-hosted at McGill on April 18 and 19 by SSMU and the PGSS, Moustaqim-Barrette said. 

However, not all student associations agreed with the formation of the new federation. 

“If FAÉCUM is at the centre of the new student federation, they have shown Quebec clearly [that] they aren’t necessarily going to work in good faith with other groups, and it sets a negative example that we don’t want to encourage,” President of the Concordia Student Union (CSU) Benjamin Prunty said. 

The Confédération des associations d’étudiants et étudiantes de l’Université Laval (CADEUL) and the FEUQ declined to comment. 

a, McGill, News

Demilitarize McGill protesters blockade James Administraton Building

by Laura Hanrahan on

More in a:

Individuals associated with Demilitarize McGill, a group seeking to end military research at McGill, blockaded all entrances into the James Administration building on March 24.

The blockade began at 7:30 a.m. and lasted nearly three hours, preventing students and employees from entering the building. The demonstrators, who remained masked for the entirety of the protest, held banners displaying slogans such as “Demilitarize McGill” and “Anti-Capitalist, Anti-Imperialist, Revolutionary Student Movement.”

Cadence, a student organizer with Demilitarize McGill, said that the James Administration building was chosen because of its centrality to McGill’s involvement with military research. 

“The James Administration Building is both a symbolic and literal site of decision-making and control within which military collaborations are given approval and funding,” she said. “Blocking access to the building meant that this work was literally stopped, and blockaders were able to temporarily halt the functioning of the university administration centre to such an extent that workers started leaving.”

McGill’s Dean of Students, Andre Costopoulos, stated that he did not agree with Demilitarize McGill’s tactics. 

“Demonstrating, assembling, and expressing yourself on campus are fundamental rights,” he said. “Obstructing the activities of other people is not acceptable.”

Pamphlets distributed by the demonstrators cited McGill’s involvement with certain research projects as “imperialist” and “colonialist” as the reason for the blockade. 

Police and campus security were on site for the duration of the protest. Shortly after 10:00 a.m., the protesters dispersed peacefully, allowing re-entrance to the building. 

“Once many James Administration workers had gone home and the impact had been felt, it made sense to decide to disperse on the blockaders’ own terms rather than wait for a police presence to increase again and cause distress,” Cadence said. 

Going forward, Cadence said she hopes that awareness for issues of military collaboration will improve at McGill. 

“It is true that austerity and university corporatism and repression are under-discussed at McGill in comparison to other universities,” she said, “I definitely see more and more students getting interested and involved in this fight against military collaboration at McGill, which makes me think that actions like these are working.”

Costopoulos agreed that the issues being brought forward by Demilitarize McGill are ones that should be taken under consideration. 

“Some of [Demilitarize McGill’s] literature raise very legitimate questions about research ethics and how we should conduct ourselves as a University community,” he said. “They are not the only one asking themselves those questions.”

Facebook Like Dislike button
a, Opinion

Commentary: The polarizing impact of Facebook events

by Natalie Coffen on

More in a:

The Winter General Assembly (GA) produced a large turnout and generated passionate debate, prior to and after the vote, mostly due to the proposed “Motion Regarding Divestment from Companies Profiting from the Illegal Occupation of the Palestinian Territories.” While political discussions on campus may have taken up a lot of space in recent weeks, the voices of many students are left unheard.

With McGill’s student population of roughly 27,000 undergraduates, it’s difficult but extremely important to have a representative vote. There should be less of a focus on who votes for what at assemblies, and more of a focus on actually getting students to vote. A big part of the political apathy and ambivalence seen on campus is due to social media, specifically polarizing Facebook events titled “Vote Yes for XYZ” or “Vote No” that exclude students who have not yet formed an opinion on an issue.

Since these Facebook events are often emotionally charged, this pushes a significant number of students away from participating in the discussion and the vote. When someone isn’t informed about an issue on campus, they won’t take the time to vote. When a student is unsure of how to vote, such events discourage an open dialogue and make it difficult for students to find unbiased information about the issue at hand. Students may feel uncomfortable asking for information about political debates from their peers who are so emotionally invested in the issues. Students should feel like they fit in on campus and these events leave many undecided voters in an awkward in-between space, with very little guidance on how to form an opinion on the issue.

If SSMU wants a vote that is representative of the opinions of the student body, it should find a better way to provide students with detailed information on the issues, thereby allowing them to make an informed decision and exercise their democratic right.

It may be argued that it is easier than ever to find information and it is the student’s responsibility to be proactive in doing this. The internet can without a doubt be used as a vital tool in self-education and forming an opinion, but it can also be used to promote biased information depending on the source. In addition, students may feel unmotivated, apprehensive to involve themselves in a polarized issue, or that their voice may not matter when there are plenty of other students deeply involved in the issue, advocating for either side. In order to convince students who are undecided to vote, this motivation needs to be fuelled by education. Politically motivated Facebook events allow for many students to be on either end of the spectrum—either extremely invested in the issue, or entirely apathetic. If the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) wants a vote that is representative of the opinions of the student body, it should find a better way to provide students with detailed information on the issues, thereby allowing them to make an informed decision and exercise their democratic right.

While it can be important to share one’s views, not all students are comfortable publicizing their political stance on Facebook. Students should feel comfortable sharing their opinions but sometimes, especially in the last GA, these views can cause individuals to feel marginalized or judged on campus.

While SSMU did have a general Facebook event for this GA, it should focus on mobilizing students who wouldn’t usually attend or vote. Since some students may not have much background information on certain issues, it could be beneficial for SSMU to post shorter summaries of the motions online for students to read and post links to scholarly articles or events for undecided students, instead of relying on the influence of Facebook rants by their peers. The solution should be a proper education on the political debates on campus, and once students are educated and motivated, then this would hopefully result in a more representative vote.

ethan hawke and seymour bernstein
a, Arts & Entertainment, Film and TV

10,000 hours in 84 minutes

by Max Joseph on

More in a:

Seymour: An Introduction, the new documentary from actor/director Ethan Hawke, focuses on pianist Seymour Bernstein, but it’s really an in-depth look at the search for greatness. Without taking attention away from Bernstein, who’s given a treatment bordering on hagiographic—and deservedly so—the film becomes a guide to those seeking answers to life’s questions, and it’s difficult to imagine him wanting it any other way.

The approach makes sense given how the film came to fruition, which Hawke explains at the start of a performance by Bernstein, snippets of which are interspersed throughout. Despite a storied career which included four Oscar nominations and a series of critically acclaimed collaborations with director Richard Linklater, the actor found himself questioning the direction and purpose of his art. His friend Anthony Zito (credited on Seymour as an executive producer) invited him over for dinner, and it was there that he met Bernstein. 

Bernstein, as the film tells us, was a successful concert pianist whose professional credits included a hugely acclaimed performance at Alice Tully Hall. Despite his achievements as a performer, he quit his career at the age of 50 after a quiet farewell concert in order to teach full-time. He’d had enough of the stress and excess which too often accompany a performance career, and he sought to live a simpler life.

Hawke gives the viewer a few more of Bernstein’s biographical details, including a particularly moving section where he recounts his time serving in the Korean War, but the emphasis is more on his approach to music, education, and life. He shows Bernstein working with a range of students in master class and private lesson settings, which give a hint of his impressive abilities as a teacher.

His educational talents are far from limited to musical instruction, as the film continuously reminds us. Hawke decided to make the film due to the invaluable role Bernstein ended up playing in his own life as a mentor, and both musicians and non-musicians alike will undoubtedly find lessons to learn from him. His wise words about music almost always apply to any art form, and even the most music-specific of his comments suggest a dedication to his craft from which anyone looking for a role model can learn.

Seymour also functions as a guide for the confused; it’s far from a pedantic bore. Bernstein himself has a funny, charismatic, and engaging presence, and Hawke wisely stays out of his way for most of the film. He lets us see Bernstein interact with students, peers, and admirers from various disciplines, and that’s more than enough to keep the film compelling for the course of its brief, but powerful 84-minute running time.

The range of settings in which we witness him isn’t organized with any discernible logic (aside from ending the film with Bernstein’s performance of Schumann’s “Fantasie” at the concert organized by Hawke), but it doesn’t take away from the film’s impact. Images and tales from the pianist’s youth are interspersed with footage of him practicing seemingly at random, but it all makes sense together somehow. The collage-like style provides a kaleidoscope view of Bernstein, and it’s effective for evoking his eternally sunny, youthful nature without cordoning off the different periods in his life.

Bernstein’s jovial but firm approach to music education is a helpful corrective to the one suggested by last year’s Whiplash. In that film, the dictatorial band director Fletcher berates his students into success with questionable results. By contrast, Bernstein is no less demanding, but his strictness appears to come from a genuine desire for the student to succeed, rather than Fletcher’s apparent hatred. His vast array of disciples learn far more than any of the budding musicians in Whiplash did, and, for 84 minutes, viewers of Seymour become his pupils, too.

a, News, SSMU

Alexei Simakov files J-Board petition against Elections SSMU

by Shrinkhala Dawadi on

More in a:

Alexei Simakov, former Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) presidential candidate, filed a petition on Thursday to the Judicial Board (J-Board), SSMU’s judicial branch. The petition calls for the J-Board to file sanctions against Kareem Ibrahim, incoming SSMU President.

“Alexei Simakov over the course of the campaign was libeled repeatedly both by members of candidate Ibrahim’s campaign team and by Ibrahim himself,” the petition reads. “We therefore request that sanctions and/or demerit points, with associated deductions towards candidate Ibrahim’s campaign budget cap, are issued with respect to the precedents set by [Chief Elections Officer (CEO)] during the election.”

J-Board Chief Justice Muna Tojiboeva confirmed that the case has been accepted.

“Alexei Simakov’s petition is within our jurisdiction so we have accepted the petition—we will be having a hearing,” she said. “We are following the standard J-Board internal rules of procedure with how we are processing the petition.”

According to Simakov, Elections SSMU’s CEO Rachelle Bastarache did not adequately address a slanderous post on the Facebook event page for Ibrahim’s campaign. 

“[Ibrahim] responded by posting on his event page, accusing me of orchestrating the leaks—he accused me of violating his privacy and hacking his Facebook,” Simakov claimed, referring to screenshots of a private Facebook conversation discussing Tariq Khan’s candidacy for SSMU President in the 2014 SSMU elections.

Simakov added that Bastarache did ask Ibrahim to take the message down. 

“[Ibrahim] complied with this request [… but] he issued no apology, no recantation of the statements,” Simakov explained. “The CEO took no disciplinary actions whatsoever, despite the fact that this is a clearly false accusation […. Bastarache’s] defence is that [Ibrahim] was in an exasperated state of mind after this leaked.”

Ibrahim stated that he had been sanctioned by Elections SSMU and highlighted the differences between his response to the leaked Facebook messages and an earlier incident during which Simakov was sanctioned after a member of his campaign team posted defamatory pictures on Ibrahim’s Facebook event page.

“I was sanctioned […but] I was not given any financial [penalties],” Ibrahim explained. “While [Simakov’s] campaign manager posted two inappropriate memes on my Facebook event […] I simply liked a post on my own event which read ‘Voting for you because the other guy is a stain. Keep on keeping on,’ which I saw as a message of support which I sought to validate. The magnitude of these infractions are evidently different, which is why […] I simply received demerit points.”

Bastarache stated that Elections SSMU had received and reviewed a petition for an invalidation of Ibrahim’s win from Simakov regarding this issue.

“After an informal consultation with [the Electoral Review Committee] members, we deemed that the action by [Ibrahim] did not warrant the consideration of invalidation of an election,” she said. “We felt that our prior actions in those cases were appropriate.” 

Bastarache explained why the sanctions against candidates are not made publicly available.

“It should be known that the sanctionable actions and sanctions received do not become public knowledge until 12 demerit points are received,” she said. “No candidate other than Lola Baraldi has had their sanctions revealed to the public.”

Simakov added that he hopes this issue will be quickly resolved.

“We’re seeking that the J-Board […] responds to validate our reasonably clear concerns with a well-established basis […] and [rectifies] the situation,” he said. “This will give the student body faith that the elections office isn’t completely dysfunctional [….] Hopefully, they’ll respond positively, constructively, and we can have a very short J-Board [case].”

a, McGill, News

SACOMSS hosts McGill’s Sexual Assault Awareness Week

by Corrina Vali on

More in a:

The Sexual Assault Centre of the McGill Students' Society (SACOMSS) hosted McGill’s Sexual Assault Awareness Week, which consisted of a series of workshops, from March 16 to 20. The week included events such as the “Becoming an Active Bystander” workshop and “Fire with Water,” an art show depicting artistic responses to sexual violence. There were also two “Know Your Policy” workshops, which explained McGill’s current policy on sexual harassment as well as the Sexual Assault Policy proposal. 

Vice-President University Affairs Claire Stewart-Kanigan, who has been liaising between the university administration and the Sexual Assault Policy working group, co-hosted the workshop. The working group has been developing a draft of a new policy on sexual assault since Fall 2013.

Stewart-Kanigan pointed out during the workshop that addressing sexual assault requires proactive measures, which the policy aims to introduce. 

“People who have experienced sexual assault do not have a clear path to follow for seeking recourse or support at the university,” she said. “There are places you can go—you could bring your concern to the Dean of Students or you could speak to counselling. But in terms of having a clear path for people who have experienced sexual assault to both get information on what their options are and access channels that are sensitized to deal with their specific concerns and needs, [those] are not available on campus right now.”

Stewart-Kanigan added that she felt the current policies in place, including the harassment policy and the Code of Student Conduct, were not adequate to address the issue of sexual assault, as it doesn’t spell out the specific rights of the person who experiences sexual assault and the actions needed to address this issue. 

“The Code of Student Conduct […] is the same code that would be applied if you got into a physical fight with someone or [if] you cheated on an exam,” she said. “The code is not appropriate as it does not spell out the specific rights of the person who experiences sexual assault and the actions needed to address this issue. Since sexual assault in its nature is extremely different from other violations covered under the Code of Student Conduct, the writers felt the need to formulate McGill's Sexual Assault Policy.”

The Sexual Assault Policy proposal acknowledges that sexual assault must be dealt with not only through punitive measures but also by creating a culture of consent on campus and a university-wide commitment.
“By taking a pro-active stance, the policy aims to outline not only how to respond, but also how to address sexual assault before it happens,” explained U1 Arts student and fellow workshop facilitator, Lucie Jane, who has been closely involved with the working group. “An effective example of a proactive action would be the recruitment of the Harm Reduction Liaison Officer, Bianca Tétrault, whose position entails organizing campaigns and educational workshops in order to make McGill a safer space.”

The policy has a pro-survivor approach allowing for self-definition, which would give survivors the freedom to define their experiences themselves and ensure consent at all stages of dealing with their experiences while maintaining complete confidentiality. 

“Its non-directional approach not only ensures that resources and information are accessible to the person who has experienced sexual assault, but also allows them to take any course of action they may want to take,” said working group member and U2 student Rebecca Dales, who also helped to facilitate the workshop.

A concern regarding the policy in general has been whether it would undermine the criminal justice system and seek to replace it. Stewart-Kanigan asserted that this would not be the case. 

“This policy is not intended to replace the criminal justice system; [rather] it is creating a localized option to access support, safety measures, and recourse within the immediate community,” she said.

So far, the policy has gained support from organizations like SACOMSS and the McGill branch of the Quebec Public Interest Research Group (QPIRG) which is a non-profit, student-run organization that works on environmental and social justice issues at McGill and in the Montreal community. It has also been endorsed by the Law Students’ Association, the Engineering Undergraduate Society, and the Arts Undergraduate Society. 

“We are hoping to bring it to several other faculty associations in the next couple of weeks and are seeking to have it on the agenda for information in April and for approval by the Senate by the end of the academic year,” said Stewart-Kanigan.

U0 Management student Siddhi Kapadia, who attended the workshop, said that she was impressed by the clear and wide-ranging measures stated in the policy. 

“It provides an option on campus for people who have experienced sexual assault for whom the criminal justice system is inaccessible,” she said. “Not only does this student-led initiative reflect the practical problems faced by people who have experienced sexual assault, but [it] also aims to build a preventative mechanism in order to make McGill a safer space for students.” 

SSMU Building at McGill
a, News, SSMU

Newly-elected VP Internal Lola Baraldi will not be invalidated, Elections SSMU announces

by Shrinkhala Dawadi on

More in a:

Elections SSMU announced on Thursday that  allegations of illegal campaigning by Lola Baraldi prior to her election as Vice-President Internal did not constitute sufficient grounds for invalidation, as ruled by the Elections Review Committee (ERC). 

The VP Internal race was the closest in the 2015 Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) elections, with Baraldi winning over opponent Johanna Nikoletos by 13 votes. 

Nikoletos explained that she filed a petition with Elections SSMU on March 23, asking them to convene the ERC in order to invalidate the results of the VP Internal election. According to Nikoletos, Baraldi illegally campaigned at the café in the lobby of New Residence Hall, a McGill residence, on March 14.

“Once the election results were announced last Friday, individuals started to come forward with testimonies about illegal campaigning that they witnessed,” Nikoletos said. “Some of the testimonies we heard from residents of the building included hearing […] Lou Lou, the café worker, campaigning on Baraldi’s behalf. Some testimonies included individuals who were also given free food by Baraldi.”

Baraldi refuted allegations that she had bribed students with food. She continued to explain that she was present in a non-candidate capacity at New Residence Hall on March 14.

“I was indeed hanging out in the New Residence lobby and at the café, where I’ve been going for the past three years, not for any campaigning purposes whatsoever—although a New Residence Hall Council member was present with me throughout most of the night and aware of my presence there,” she said. “I was helping work the cash, which I often do […]  in my capacity as a student helping out an employee on her last night working in residence. I did not benefit from this position nor abuse its status to campaign, nor did I initiate any conversations regarding my campaign or my platform.”

On Saturday, the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) of Elections SSMU published a report summarizing the results of its investigations into the alleged infractions.

“Based on the evidence before us at that time, the ERC determined that an infraction had occurred,” the report reads. “Candidate Baraldi has violated the stipulations of By-law 3.3 (designation of a single bulletin board in residence) by allowing a poster to be placed on the counter for a period of 2.5/3 hours; Candidate Baraldi allowed New Residence Café worker Louise Smith, a non-SSMU member, to campaign on her behalf in violation of By-law 14.5 while the poster was on the counter; Candidate Baraldi did not charge one or two people for their purchases.”

The report also outlined sanctions placed on Baraldi in light of the infractions.

“The resulting sanction that we have deemed appropriate for the confirmed infringements is the publishing of this report as a public censure of Lola Baraldi for her actions on March 14, 2015 and denying Lola Baraldi reimbursement for her financial expenses,” the report reads.

Baraldi was not sanctioned for providing food to students free of charge.

“Though we believe Ms. Baraldi did not charge one or two people for their purchases, we do not have any conclusive evidence that this was conducted for the purposes of promoting her candidacy and sanctioning Ms. Baraldi for a lapse in judgment is beyond the scope of Election SSMU’s jurisdiction,” the report stated.

Baraldi also addressed her eligibility to serve as an executive given her international student status, another subject of contention.

“I actually brought this up with the Dean of Students and International Student Services, who told me […] that I could carry a part-time course load if my part-time studies are due to an elected position with a student association,” Baraldi said. 

Baraldi expressed that she would maintain transparency throughout any further investigation of the matter.

“The allegations of slate campaigning are not valid and have all been repudiated by Elections SSMU,” Baraldi said. “Ultimately, I am happy to provide further documentation, testimonials, and evidence for any doubts regarding the legitimacy of my campaign, as I am fully confident that it was a clean campaign.”

Convention of the ERC is outlined in SSMU Bylaw book 1, article 31.1, which was added to the bylaw book this January.

“[The CEO shall immediately call for the meeting of the Electoral Review Committee…] in the case that a disqualification of a candidate or referendum committee, or the invalidation of an Election of a successful candidate or Referendum question, is to be considered,” the article reads.

According to the bylaws, the CEO has the ability to make a final decision on the petition.

“The CEO and the [deputy electoral officer] shall seek the consultation of the Electoral Review Committee, however, they shall retain the full authority vested in them by the Constitution and By-Laws to make decisions regarding elections,” article 31.4 reads. “The Electoral Review Committee shall rule on whether or not particular infractions have occurred and Elections SSMU shall rule as to the sanctions or resources that are to be undertaken in response to the infractions.” 

Nikoletos stated that she is planning to appeal the ERC’s decision through the SSMU Judicial Board (J-Board), the judicial branch of SSMU.

“I am disappointed with the decision by Elections SSMU,” she said. “My team and I will be pursuing a J-Board case against Elections SSMU for failing to uphold [its] mandate of ensuring a fair election in accordance with the SSMU bylaws.”

According to the SSMU bylaws, Nikoletos will have five days to submit a petition to the J-Board.

World

Dubai Police fine 388 vehicles for excess load

on

More in World:

This is some dummy copy. You’re not really supposed to read this dummy copy, it is just a place holder for people who need some type to visualize what the actual copy might look like if it were real content.

If you want to read, I might suggest a good book, perhaps Hemingway or Melville. That’s why they call it, the dummy copy. This, of course, is not the real copy for this entry. Rest assured, the words will expand the concept. With clarity. Conviction. And a little wit.

In today’s competitive market environment, the body copy of your entry must lead the reader through a series of disarmingly simple thoughts.

All your supporting arguments must be communicated with simplicity and charm. And in such a way that the reader will read on. (After all, that’s a reader’s job: to read, isn’t it?) And by the time your readers have reached this point in the finished copy, you will have convinced them that you not only respect their intelligence, but you also understand their needs as consumers.

As a result of which, your entry will repay your efforts. Take your sales; simply put, they will rise. Likewise your credibility. There’s every chance your competitors will wish they’d placed this entry, not you. While your customers will have probably forgotten that your competitors even exist. Which brings us, by a somewhat circuitous route, to another small point, but one which we feel should be raised.

Long copy or short – You decide

As a marketer, you probably don’t even believe in body copy. Let alone long body copy. (Unless you have a long body yourself.) Well, truth is, who‘s to blame you? Fact is, too much long body copy is dotted with such indulgent little phrases like truth is, fact is, and who’s to blame you. Trust us: we guarantee, with a hand over our heart, that no such indulgent rubbish will appear in your entry. That’s why God gave us big blue pencils. So we can expunge every example of witted waffle.

For you, the skies will be blue, the birds will sing, and your copy will be crafted by a dedicated little man whose wife will be sitting at home, knitting, wondering why your entry demands more of her husband‘s time than it should.

But you will know why, won‘t you? You will have given her husband a chance to immortalize himself in print, writing some of the most persuasive prose on behalf of a truly enlightened purveyor of widgets. And so, while your dedicated reader, enslaved to each mellifluous paragraph, clutches his newspaper with increasing interest and intention to purchase, you can count all your increased profits and take pots of money to your bank. Sadly, this is not the real copy for this entry. But it could well be. All you have to do is look at the account executive sitting across your desk (the fellow with the lugubrious face and the calf-like eyes), and say ”Yes! Yes! Yes!“ And anything you want, body copy, dinners, women, will be yours. Couldn’t be fairer than that, could we?

1 … 839 840 841 842 843 … 1,363

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue