Union Board Elections 2006 (1 Viewer)

[withoutaface]

Re: Question about Union elections.

Different people, but apparently both have thrush.

 

[what971]

Re: Question about Union elections.

Haha but what they did was add E to ROZ... so you'll see in some places ROZ(E)... implying that they want you to vote for Rose, not Roz.

Also, why is Roz EVERYWHERE? She's union isn't she? I'm not really following the election so I wouldn't know.

 

[cimbom]

Re: Question about Union elections.

Also, why is Roz EVERYWHERE? She's union isn't she? I'm not really following the election so I wouldn't know.

ROZ is in paint too... rather than chalk? Meh. I think the other candidates are beginning to catch up now... in everywhereness. Especially Monica.

 

[what971]

Re: Question about Union elections.

^ The footpath outside the Manning is the crazy-chalked...

 

[KeypadSDM]

Re: Union Board Elections 2006 - UPDATED 26/4

Obstructing traffic is an offence.

Can you be fined for breaking down?

 

[Phanatical]

Re: Union Board Elections 2006 - UPDATED 26/4

Theoretically, the Union can choose to have Roz essentially banned from the election, by charging her for the clean up of her campaign vandalism and therefore blowing out her budget.

In practice though, they never will. They only do that to independents and Liberals.

 

[jogad]

Re: Union Board Elections 2006 - UPDATED 26/4

i'd like to clear this up for you guys (warning: falun gong related)

1. falun gong is a cult that was dreamed up in 1992 by a dude called li hongszi. it's a mish-mash of principles and ideas ranging from buddhism, qi gong, meditation and even christianity (yes guys, that's right - li was really trying to appeal to as many as he possibly could).
to date there are some one-&-a-half thousand people who have died in relation to this cult in some way or another, through self-destruction - an idea promulgated by li as the only way of acheiving complete divinity (or some crap like that) - or through murder (many falun gong/falun dafa have murdered their loved ones in hope that they will also achieve divinity).
of course, one may consider these facts incredulous and wonder what do i have to really, really prove what i am saying... well, the following, if complicated, and brief, is what i figure:

_CONSIDER THAT THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA_

-has not banned, jailed any other qigong-school practitioners
-gladly sends out information and evidence to anyone who contacts the embassy

_CONSIDER THAT FALUN GONG_

-never discuss their precepts to which they must strictly adhere- only ever talk about the meditation that they do (which alone is useless, li hongszi himself taught)
-believe hongszi is a god, who can cure illness and who never gets ill, alter time, space and history.. who transcends ALL physical and temporal limitations (this dude is rich and living in the USA btw!)
-believe some people are "evil" and should be already dead, but through some chance abberration have lived. this is another cause of falun gong murderers - they can commit attrocities in absolute good faith!
-believe illness is essentially due to spiritual deficiency, leading many fanatics to die due to refusal of medical treatment
-are proponents of racial intolerance: they believe that racial purity is essential for higher being
-believe homosexuals are not people (yes, you read it right!!!) (and yes, there is evidence!!!)


this cult clearly exploits vulnerable people: people with psychological and psychiatric illnesses (of which there are a great many - approx 1% of our population develops schizophrenia, think of the population of china.. work it out .. now consider depression, personality disorders and the broad spectrum of psychotic disorders)

there is information if you search for it, you just have to wonder WHY the chinese govt would go to sooooo much trouble to get rid of these guys when they let a shitload of other verrry similar religions continue without any trouble.

in theory everyone should be allowed to harbour their own thoughts, but when a cult does so much evil, can we just allow it?


thankyou.

 

[withoutaface]

Re: Union Board Elections 2006 - UPDATED 26/4

Theoretically, the Union can choose to have Roz essentially banned from the election, by charging her for the clean up of her campaign vandalism and therefore blowing out her budget.

In practice though, they never will. They only do that to independents and Liberals.

Or the Trots.

 

[ujuphleg]

Re: Union Board Elections 2006 - UPDATED 26/4

Jo:

This is all very well and good. But consider this

1) You sound like Quah has spoon fed you this entire thing
2) If he hasn't, where are your links/references
3) Where is the proof that the SRC gave money to Falun Gong?

These are the three issues at hand.

Andrew keeps on saying the same thing over and over and over and over again: "the SRC funds terrorist organisations." And yet, everytime the members of this forum ask him to susbtantiate his claims, he either:
a) doesn't respond or
b) posts pictures of corpses, which for all we know could be what the CCP has done to the Falun Gong followers.

In any other place, if you were to say such things with out links/references/proof all your posts in relation to it would have been deleted and you would have been told to go away until you presented some proof.

So I'm looking at both of you - substansiate your claims or go away, because to tell the students these things without proof is just misleading and wrong.

 

[stazi]

Re: Uni prank

There is plenty of room for cost cutting with the food, and I assure you that if I am elected, I'll be working VERY closely with the catering staff to ensure that the food is not only cheaper, but higher quality.

you're a chef?

 

[gerhard]

we should connect drippers up to lecture seats
whenever you feel abit hungry mid lecture, pop a drip in your arm

i think thats going to be my platform next year

 

[jogad]

Re: Union Board Elections 2006 - UPDATED 26/4

Jo:

This is all very well and good. But consider this

1) You sound like Quah has spoon fed you this entire thing
2) If he hasn't, where are your links/references
3) Where is the proof that the SRC gave money to Falun Gong?

These are the three issues at hand.

1. Are you trying to elicit an aggressive response from me? If so, you fail.

2. Let's leave the dissertations for the historians. Suffice to say that this wicked contraption, called GOOGLE, and the method i mentioned in my previous post will open all sorts of avenues in terms of further research and the aquisition of knowledge. If you *really* want to know, look in the horses mouth; don't ask for my word on it - my word which you likely will refuse to believe. Do you see the inherent contradiction in your request?

3. I'm not the your personal assistant: go check SRC records.


Furthermore:

(...)
In any other place, if you were to say such things with out links/references/proof all your posts in relation to it would have been deleted and you would have been told to go away until you presented some proof.

So I'm looking at both of you - substansiate your claims or go away, because to tell the students these things without proof is just misleading and wrong.

Please provide me with links/references/proof that your above claims are true! To disseminate such "things without proof is misleading and wrong" (ujuphleg, 2006). It is your own responsibility as a (purportedly) educated, intelligent and, above all, interested individual to inform yourself. I can only hope to stimulate you to action.

And in addition to all that:

In 2005 ISA screened a short movie which asserted these facts. The movie was temporarily banned (pending legal outcomes) following claims that our movie was misleading and untrue. We took the case to the court, and two QCs agreed that there was not an shred of evidence to indicate that our claims were either misleading or untrue.


Now:

You try to prove to me that any of my statements are misleading or wrong.



PS. If you really, *really* are having trouble finding any truth about this issue, i will do my best to point you in the right direction. I will not, however, be submitting any page-long, footnoted & referenced essays.

 

[what971]

Re: Union Board Elections 2006 - UPDATED 26/4

Right? Wrong? Go look up Wikipedia.

PS. It says China and Falun Gong are both evil. YOU BOTH WIN. k? Good.

Lets go back on topicz.

 

[stazi]

Re: Union Board Elections 2006 - UPDATED 26/4

Jo, you need to prove that the SRC is financing the cult. If I say the Holocaust never occurred, I can't just tell you to look for proof that it occurred, but rather I need to find proof against its occurrance.

Hey guyz:
1) The SRC financed the Holocaust
2) The SRC supports Charles Manson
3) The SRC believes rapists are good for our economy

Since I'm not your personal assistant, you need to, yourself, prove that I'm wrong.
--------------------------------------

Again, Jo, we do not need to prove to YOU what you say is wrong, but you need to back up what you say.

 

[jogad]

Re: Union Board Elections 2006 - UPDATED 26/4

Jo, you need to prove that the SRC is financing the cult. If I say the Holocaust never occurred, I can't just tell you to look for proof that it occurred, but rather I need to find proof against its occurrance.

Hey guyz:
1) The SRC financed the Holocaust
2) The SRC supports Charles Manson
3) The SRC believes rapists are good for our economy

Since I'm not your personal assistant, you need to, yourself, prove that I'm wrong.

easy - i simply go and ask at the SRC.
is that too hard for you?
do i have to lead you by the hand?
do you perchance know what the purpose of a tertiary education is?


Because you clearly do not care to research this yourself (& as much as i hate to reward your haughtiness):


"The Global Solidarity Collective is a small one, and this means
we're not able to do that much in the way of activism. Lately we've
been working with Sydney University Falun Dafa in organising a
forum on the persecution of Falun Gong practitioners in China. This
forum will be held on 17 May, 2pm, Room 4, Level 5, Wentworth
Building."

"Global Solidarity meets on Tuesdays at 5pm at the SRC, in the Kevin


Gosper room."

http://usydgreens.info/comments.php?id=80_0_1_0_C


​

"Finally, the SRC understood the truth about the persecution of Falun Gong practitioners. They decided to conduct a seminar on behalf of Falun Gong. Practitioners realised that this would be a precious opportunity arranged by Master to save sentient beings.
On May 17th, 2005, a poster exhibition and a seminar about the persecution of Falun Gong in China were held in front of the university's library and SRC building. The event effectively shocked the evil."

"Although all activities were arranged by the SRC"



"After the [Student Representative's] speech, she expressed her wish to hold events on behalf of Falun Gong again."

http://www.clearharmony.net/articles/200505/26772.html


​

Also the 6th edition of this year's Honi features a full page "article" about the perils of falun gong cultists, without revealing even one of the facts that i posted before. In fact, it failed to reveal ANYTHING at all about the cult!


And here is the website of the SRC:
http://www.src.usyd.edu.au/

And here is contact information for Global Solidarity, who can help you if you require offline records:
The SRC’s 2006 Global Solidarity officers:
Sadhie 0423 517 474, Simon 0438 297 552 or Patrick
0422 028 113 or email global.solidarity@src.usyd.edu.au

 

[withoutaface]

Re: Union Board Elections 2006 - UPDATED 26/4

What the fuck does any of this have to do with Union elections? Global solidarity collective is SRC, it was the AUS that donated money to the PLO, and it was the SRC that funded anything Falun Gong related.

 

[stazi]

Re: Union Board Elections 2006 - UPDATED 26/4

By that logic, if I hold a conference about the Iraqi war, I am supporting it and raising money for it?

Also, Jo, being rude to people doesn't win you an election.

 

[ujuphleg]

Re: Union Board Elections 2006 - UPDATED 26/4

Disclaimer: Anyone reading this post will be inclined to state I don’t have a life. This is probably true. But I am sick of the ISA purporting something that may not be true and stating it as fact…

And I’m also trying to avoid an assessment task.

1. Are you trying to elicit an aggressive response from me? If so, you fail.

No I wasn't. Lecturers ask university students all the time to reference what they say, and also comment that we sound like we've been fed what we've written in essays. Do we all accuse them of trying to elicit aggressive responses?

Let's leave the dissertations for the historians.

Again, if every paper I wrote had that as a reference I'm pretty sure I'd be failing uni big time.

Call me old fashioned, but I don't see how you can state something as fact without backing it up with evidence to prove such a claim.

I'm not the your personal assistant: go check SRC records.

I have. And I can see no evidence of the SRC ever giving money to Falun Gong. So I'm still asking you and Andrew - where are you getting such information?

Please provide me with links/references/proof that your above claims are true!

For the record: my original claim was that

because to tell the students these things (about Falun Gong) without proof is just misleading and wrong.

NOTE: the (about Falun Gong) in the last quote is my addition for clarification.


I hope all of you will forgive me as citing web links for all of the following claims, as, without the proper equipment at my disposal at the present time (ie. a library with books) I have little to go on but "the wicked contraption, called GOOGLE"

fallacy: ● n. (pl. -ies 1. a mistaken belief. 2. in Logica failure in reasoning which reasoning which renders the argument invalid.

Source: Concise Oxford English Dictionary, Tenth Edition, (Oxford, Oxford University Press 1999) pg. 511

Virtually all arguments contain a fallacy of some kind. Indeed this argument probably will too. But, in the interests of fairness and accuracy (two values which I know that both you and Andrew clearly value – after all you are always seeking fairness and accuracy for the Conservatorium in your quest for power) arguments should seek to be as un-fallacious as possible, in order to make it as difficult for the counter-argument to make a case.

burden of proof: the obligation to prove an assertion

Source: Oxford Dictionary op. cit pg. 186.

You stated that

You try to prove to me that any of my statements are misleading or wrong.

That’s not my job. Its yours, as an arguer, to prove any assertion you are making. I just proved that its your job to prove, by stating the burden of proof. As far as I’m aware, this is the standard academic stance. After all, why would we have a plagiarism policy at our university of it wasn’t up to students to prove their assertions?

Using the Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. as a guide about Fallacies one could suggest that stating something is fact without providing proof is misleading and wrong is an argument ad ignoratium or the “Appeal to Ignorance” that is that:

The fallacy occurs in cases where absence of evidence is not good enough evidence of absence.

Source: Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, Appeal to Ignorance, http://www.iep.utm.edu/f/fallacies.htm#Appeal to Ignorance page visited 6th May 2006.

Suffice to say, myself saying that

You haven’t proved to me that Falun Gong is a terrorist organisation, therefore, Falun Gong is a terrorist organisation

is fallacious.

However

Falun Gong is a terrorist organisation

is also fallacious.

Indeed the latter quote is only worse, because it contains a suppressed assumption/evidence that is, an explanatory gap. This is when:

Intentionally failing to use information suspected of being relevant and significant is committing the fallacy of suppressed evidence. This fallacy usually occurs when the information counts against one's own conclusion. Perhaps the arguer is not mentioning that experts have recently objected to one of his premises.

IEP op. cit. http://www.iep.utm.edu/f/fallacies.htm#Suppressed Evidence , page visited 6th May 2006.

Apart from that fact that almost all academics and university students will agree that backing up claims with proof is fundamentally misleading, plagiarist and well, wrong the foundational basis this as being misleading is better known as selective attention:

Improperly focusing attention on certain things and ignoring others.

Source: IEP op. cit, http://www.iep.utm.edu/f/fallacies.htm#Selective Attention, page visited 6th May 2006.


Shall I continue? (actually I would, because I’m quite enjoying myself, but as aforementioned, assessment : ( )

You shouldn’t make claims without proof. There is heaps of stuff out there saying that Falun Gong is a bunch of happy, meditating people such as

http://www.falundafa.org/eng/index.htm
http://www.faluninfo.net/
http://www.falunau.org/index.jsp

Obviously, there is some stuff out there too which runs counter to this claim, and as such, when you state this, you should provide evidence. Had you or Andrew even provided this link: http://www.china-embassy.org/eng/zt/ppflg/t36582.htm in the beginning of all this, you may not have been met with such hostility within these forums every time you uttered the words that Falun Gong was an evil cult.

I can only hope to stimulate you to action.

I am, and I have researched it. But what about other people out there reading your words? It is not up to them to seek refutations for what you say, but rather, your job to prove that what you say has basis in fact. I’ve proved that by using accepted, academic, philosophical principles of arguing to prove that.


Back on topic about UNION ELECTIONS rather than SRC FUNDING:


I might vote Liberal this year, only to try and force all of them to actually do something. i.e Labor hasn’t done anything it has promised and therefore, if Liberal candidates get voted in, it may force Labor candidates to realise that promises should be kept, rather than broken.

Anyway, under a VSU model (ie, being stuck with the lot that we’ve been dished out) privatisation is a more viable “sustainability” option than protest.


EDIT: Glad to see that Jo decided to back up what she was saying

 

[jogad]

Re: Union Board Elections 2006 - UPDATED 26/4

call me crazy, but are we not on a discussion board, where we discuss things? .. because this sure doesn't look like uni to me, and there is no way that i would submit my thesis on an anonymous messaging board.. why should my particular claims (which have not been denied by falun gong OR the src (true:the absence of apparent denial does not prove actual absence of denial, insert verbal masturbation ad libitum)) be subject to the strictest of scrutiny, be deemed as insufficient (unless we provide what most people spend YEARS compiling as evidence) when we make it known that this information is freely available to all who feel like finding out about it. do you expect me to reproduce it for you and cram it into your head? .. can you see the principle that i am defending?

i think that we are both skirting the main issue- the one which nobody has had the balls to yet comment on, and that is of latent prejudice against the chinese goverment. (i won't "go there", but i'm sure you know what i mean)

i am tired and will not write much more except that i'm a very introverted and pedantic person. i don't buy much into the politics that are run at uni, and i thought (rather naievely) that there must be a few people like me who may or may not choose to vote for me. either way it does not affect me that much. the main reason i am running is so that i can try to get some bargaining power with one of the other candidates.

i realise what is a fallacious argument, and that i was not helping my "argument" by posting what i did.. but i suppose i was more annoyed that someone would argue against me WITHOUT first doing some research, and that no matter what i would present as evidence "you guys" were bound to respond unfavourably to it. (like when you called my stuff misleading.. where's your proof of that? how is it misleading?? )

another point which i think is important to raise (well, i did touch on it earlier) is the notion of credibility. which evidence do you believe? do you really think these nice meditating people are harmless, or do you really think they're evil. do you believe them or them (falun gongers or ccp)

there it is in black and white.


i am a strong believer in personal independence, and "making up your own mind" .. my campaign (if it can be called that) is strictly aimed at people who think the way that i do. i do not aspire to represent anyone who i do not agree with, and i don't intend to have to lie, cheat, or be otherwise crafty in the way i approach people.

sorry about the long-winded rambling but i think you'll get the gist of what i mean.

one last thing, would you be interested in grabbing a beer with me some day? you seem like an interesting sort.

 

[Phanatical]

Re: Union Board Elections 2006 - UPDATED 26/4

There are a couple points I want to address. Firstly, the issue of the UNION supporting Falun Gong. It's true that sometimes I get confused on the Union and the SRC, and I will sometimes attribute the acts of one to the other. But in the case of Falun Gong, the Union is just as guilty as the SRC. It disturbs me greatly to know that while societies like the Sydney Eclectic Composers' Society can no longer access Union funding whatsoever, "societies" like Falun 'Dafa' on campus can, and Do receive student funding through the Clubs and Societies program.

Secondly, I find the allegation that I force feed Jo her campaign materials offensive. I can run my own campaign, and I do not need a puppet to do it for me. As for Jo, she's more than capable, she's got her own ideas and approaches, her own priorities and - most importantly - the determination to get the job done.