[1161] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
UA
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Morgoth)
Thu Mar 14 04:35:24 2002
Message-ID: <200203140932.EAA11422@mass-toolpike.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 04:32:26 -0500
From: Morgoth <morgoth@MIT.EDU>
To: MIT-Talk@MIT.EDU
I've only been at mit for 8 years - a youngster by mit-talk
standards i guess. Although i'm a grad student now, the lack
of connection between the UA and the student body is as
apparent to me now as it was when i was an undergrad. The UA
takes on many issues (mental health, i-campus, whatever) but
it seems like these issues either 1. don't matter to most
students, or 2. suffer from a lack of student input. In either
case, the UA does not effectively represent students.
I wonder if a better system could be devised. most issues on
this campus center on living groups, due to the fact that students
live in the same place for all 4 years (as opposed to the system
at other schools). What would be the effect of, say, eliminating
the UA and distributing its money to Dormcon and the IFC based on
the number of students represented by these groups? Something could
be worked out for the other ILG's and sorority members who live
in dorms. Retain the class councils and ASA in some form.
Sure, a few things might fall by the wayside. "Redistricting
Cambridge so MIT Students Can Vote in Kresge" might not happen.
However, I'd argue that the issues that matter most to students are
much more easily addressed by their living groups' representatives.
The few joint Dormcon/IFC events (such as spring weekend) can be run
by joint committees.
I mean, think about it - even if this system only addressed a few
issues, but addressed them better, wouldn't it be better than what's
in place now?
Just an idea,
Kevin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Documentation on the use of the mailing lists mit-talk, all-talk,
mit-news, housing-talk, and the mit-talk Zephyr class is available at:
http://web.mit.edu/institvte/talk/
