|
|
| Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User
|
|
| Support uws |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: Jin Choi on Saturday, October 09 2004 @ 06:56 PM CDT |
Hello all. My name is Jin Choi, and I was the treasurer of ESA last year from fall to winter. I admit I do not have full knowledge of every little bit of information surrounding this controversy, but I will speak what I know and hopefully that will shed a light into ESA's position.
It is probably true that ESA did not follow some of the procedures. Also, it may be true that the Embassy doesn't exactly fit the description of a campus club. However, there is a good reason that ESA feels that they are victimized by the Feds. The issue is primarily around communication.
ESA is a fairly new club on campus. There weren't a lot of execs before mine, and I admit communication between the previous exec and next exec have been poor. It takes time to figure out how we're going to do all of that, afterall. For myself, it helped that I was the treasurer of WCF for w terms before, and that helped me be aware of the numerous procedures regarding Feds procedures. But I know that for the others, there still involved a steep learning curve as they learn a lot of the stuff through trial and error. You can criticize us for this if you wish, but those are the growth pains of the clubs.
There are a fair number of procedures regarding the government of a club. It should therefore come to no surprise that sometimes, ESA is unaware that they are breaching a particular set of procedures, especially when the new exec has barely come into existence.
In light of all this, think of the Feds requests from the ESA exec's point of view. September 10th, during frosh week, the Feds suddenly cancels the first Embassy meeting. Then when the ESA exec's still dazed and confused, they are given a set of procedures that they must follow for the week following. They try their best but lo and behold, they are informed they're breaching other sets of procedures. Rather than being given the chance to rectify the situation, they have been summarily shut down without a chance to defend themselves or to enforce further change. It also seems the Feds went out of their way to do this, violating their own procedures to suspend ESA in the process.
And here's another point. Had the Feds asked ESA to shape up in a certain way, I think they would have. This is not just regarding procedures. I know from my experience that ESA was probably willing to change in a more fundamental sense, had the Feds arituculated it. Instead, the Feds have called out violations and have not given us a chance to come into some sort of agreement.
Bottom line is that had the Feds given ESA a real chance, I think the issues raised now - procedural or not, would have been resolved peacefully.[ Parent ]
|
| |
|
