Yep, those were nasty viscous personal attacks. Awful of me, I know.

This despite there being students from across the spectrum voting for the motion.

Don’t recall passing any comment on the meeting, the motion, or anything of the sort.

Throw in the fact that you just didn’t want to address the main issue that of VSM.

Again, it’s an open mic thread. There’s no “main issue”. I think I’ll just stick to what I’m interested in, thanks.

I guess you could compare that indiscretion to how I routinely see Jeanette Fitzsimmons commuting on Air New Zealand between Auckland and Wellington rather than using the Overlander.

If flying were illegal then, yes, you could. But it’s not.

I guess the only difference between that and ACT on Campus is that Jeanette would contend that those emissions will ultimately cost lives.

Um, no. As above.

How many lives will be lost by not paying royalties on a youtube clip viewed less than 1,000 times?

I can’t believe I’m bothering, but how many lives will be lost by pulling wheelies on someones lawn? Knocking over their letterbox? Tagging their fence? Stealing their car? Breaking their legs? Pissing in their pool? Emptying their bank account?

Are you serial?

Ad hominem… reducing the argument to playing the man rather than the ball. i.e. “gimp Peter McCaffrey”, “chimps like Clint Heine”. This despite there being students from across the spectrum voting for the motion.

Throw in the fact that you just didn’t want to address the main issue – that of VSM.

“freely admit that they don’t actually adhere to those principles?”
Fair cop.
I guess you could compare that indiscretion to how I routinely see Jeanette Fitzsimmons commuting on Air New Zealand between Auckland and Wellington rather than using the Overlander… that almightily popular train service that we should all be made to travel on. How many tonnes of emissions did Jeanette contribute with the CHOICE she made to fly???
I guess the only difference between that and ACT on Campus is that Jeanette would contend that those emissions will ultimately cost lives.
How many lives will be lost by not paying royalties on a youtube clip viewed less than 1,000 times?

It’s an open mic thread Jagilby. And anyhoo, you were replying to my comment, not the other way around.

I don’t know or care much about student politics so I’ll leave that to those who do – but the second issue I raised was in response to your absurd contention about ACT and principles.

Do you realise how silly it looks to say:

“ACT the party with principles.’

….and then freely admit that they don’t actually adhere to those principles?

Also, what did you mean by “Ad hominem anyone?” in your first reply to me?

Why can’t you stick to debating the topic in question?

Now answer me this – Do you think that the behaviour of VUWSA was acceptable???

In my view it was an absolute disgrace and just highlights how utterly ridiculous student politics has has always been. Student associations are deplorable insular tin-pot dictatorships. I can’t believe that they are an acceptable attachment to any centre of higher learning.

I left VUW after one year because I found the student association suffocatingly unrepresentative. I finished my degree in Otago but will attest that OUSA wasn’t any better. For me, paying my student association fees felt like paying a compulsory donation to the defense of North Korea’s foreign policy – How can you actively defend CSM??? Opting out is not, and never has been, a realistic option.

“cheering for a party that won less votes than Winnie to determine the country’s policy”

Also quite funny that ACT, with 1.7%, probably has just as much of a mandate to govern NZ as VUWSA has to represent its entire student body.

Private property rights are the central principle of the ACT party, the principle on which all their other principles are supposedly based.

Do you think it’s ok for them to be breaching property rights so brazenly?

Gotta love VUWSA’s interpretation of democracy…
“But he’s a fuckwit… VOID!”

I second that motion.

Quorum count?