Comments on: VUWSA 2010 Election Results

By: Martha Focker

Martha Focker — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 14:30:23 +0000

Good result… for VSM that is.

I think we should make National compulsory, more students in NZ voted for them than any of the other guys. If Peter changed his argument to that instead of ACT then we’d be onto a winner.

I can imagine hearing you pathetic CSM flunkies crying into your breakfast every day if you had to pay the Nats every year. You’re all complete and utter fucktards.

By: Alpha

Alpha — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 07:57:21 +0000

NICK JACKSON: THESE ARE CAPITAL LETTERS. THEY COME AT THE BEGINNING OF SENTENCES, AND AT THE BEGINNING OF PROPER NOUNS. PLEASE NOTE THIS FOR FUTURE REFERENCE.

By: nick jackson

nick jackson — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 07:33:50 +0000

nothing personal againts peter by the way. i respect everyones views and all that. but some peoples (ie his) methods are freaking rediculous. and seriously who argues on these things anyway. plus his last name is annoyingly hard to spell.

By: nick jackson

nick jackson — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 07:23:37 +0000

wooo fraser won!!! better luck next time mr no confidence!!!

By: nick jackson

nick jackson — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 07:21:38 +0000

peter maccaffrey is a total fuck wit

By: Weta

Weta — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 02:41:35 +0000

Well Peter, if there was CSM of ACT on campus, and anyone could change the constitution by referendum, then it sounds to me like this would pretty much just be VUWSA with a different name… not your most convincing argument thus far.

By: Jackson Wood

Jackson Wood — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 16:47:06 +0000

It’s a report, Gib. But not as we know it.

By: Gibbon

Gibbon — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 13:07:42 +0000

really, JJW? it exists?

By: MattF

MattF — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 11:04:03 +0000

Well, so what? If there was evidence that compulsory trade union membership had benefits to workers that outweighed the loss of freedom of association, perhaps it would be worth supporting. Perhaps not. Most likely is that, if both sides would relax on the ideological argument just slightly, effective compromise might be more likely. The point I’m trying to make is that arguments from principles like that, while all good and noble, often just don’t lead to actual solutions, just endless bickering. Either that or a highly satisfactory outcome for one side and highly unsatisfactory outcome for the other. I’m not saying that we should just abandon all principles, by any means; but I do think that sticking to them absolutely, in every case leads pretty close to zero-sum reasoning alot of the time, often where fairer, more widely beneficial solutions seem possible.
As for the fact that the “vast majority of students don’t know or care about their student association,” I disagree that this is a reason for VSM. As I said, not knowing, caring, or voting doesn’t necessarily mean you don’t benefit from membership, or use the services.

By: peteremcc

peteremcc — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 09:37:51 +0000

Weta, you’ll be able to modify the ACT on Campus constitution too once you’re all members.

Matt, interesting comments, but in my experience most of those in favour of CSM for students associations also believe in compulsory trade unions.

The vast majority of students don’t know or care about their student association but that’s even more reason to make them voluntary.