[1291] in UA Senate
Re: Laptops
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jessica Chen)
Sun Apr 24 13:38:42 2011
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1104241323420.18820@lunatique.mit.edu>
From: Jessica Chen <jessicachen.dbhs@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 13:37:59 -0400
To: Geoffrey Thomas <geofft@mit.edu>
Cc: Karan Takhar <kstakhar4691@gmail.com>,
Michael E Plasmeier <theplaz@mit.edu>,
Timothy E Robertson <tim_r@mit.edu>, Jonte Craighead <jontec@mit.edu>,
"ua-senate@mit.edu" <ua-senate@mit.edu>
--000e0cd5734ab36bae04a1ad8fb8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi hi
With the Online Group, I agree with what was said above, that they need to
explain to our constituents why we can't disclose any information to them.
Also Jonte, I understand that some people using laptops is as a distraction
and they completely sign out of Senate but it's a pain to take hand-written
notes especially since it means we have to retype them up later. It's easie=
r
and prettier to just have it typed and indented and such already. (at least
my perspective :) please and thank you!)
Sincerely,
~Jessica Chen
MIT 2014
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Geoffrey Thomas <geofft@mit.edu> wrote:
> It's not. That way you can say "We asked them to come to Senate and prese=
nt
> and they didn't / lied to us / concealed information", instead of "We ask=
ed
> them to come to Senate and present and they did, and we didn't do anythin=
g
> with the information because we thought we weren't supposed to". The latt=
er
> puts the responsibility of failure of communication with students on Sena=
te
> instead of the body presenting to Senate.
>
> While BRDC still failed in many miserable ways, things started changing f=
or
> the better after 40 UAS 6.4, which said that student reps to BRDC must be
> able to report back to the government they represent. It's not so much ab=
out
> the immediate effect of the meeting as the environment and attitude aroun=
d
> it.
>
> Again, I'm not saying MIT-Online will do this, it's just a thing that I'v=
e
> run into in the past that has caused problems, and it's worth Senate not
> blindly accepting this.
>
>
> --
> Geoffrey Thomas
> geofft@mit.edu
>
> On Sun, 24 Apr 2011, Karan Takhar wrote:
>
> There is also the possibility that we keep this on the record and
>> subsequently get none or very little relevant information pertaining to
>> the
>> activities of the study group. I am not advocating for off the record by
>> any
>> means, just pointing out that on the record with no information shared i=
s
>> a
>> similar outcome to off the record without being able to act on any
>> information.
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Geoffrey Thomas <geofft@mit.edu> wrote:
>> Sure, quite possible. But you should ask this explicitly. If
>> they mean that the information is public to the MIT community, I
>> would like senators to be taking notes.
>>
>> --
>> Geoffrey Thomas
>> geofft@mit.edu
>>
>> On Sun, 24 Apr 2011, Michael E Plasmeier wrote:
>>
>>
>> It seems to me that =93off the record=94 means that they do
>> not want this to
>> appear in the Boston Globe, NYT, etc before they are ready
>> to announce
>> something. Going before a body as large as Senate means
>> that this is not
>> highly classified. It seems that they are trying to get
>> MIT community
>> feedback without having this leak to the outside world.
>>
>>
>>
>> I could be incorrect, so I agree with Tim=92s suggestion to
>> ask the study
>> group to explain what they are trying to protect.
>>
>>
>>
>> -Michael
>>
>>
>>
>> From: timorob@gmail.com [mailto:timorob@gmail.com] On
>> Behalf Of Timothy
>> Robertson
>> Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2011 1:13 PM
>> To: Geoffrey G Thomas
>> Cc: Jonte Craighead; ua-senate@mit.edu
>> Subject: Re: Laptops
>>
>>
>>
>> I do not believe it is reasonable for us to remain off the
>> record. I am not
>> opposed to closed discussions, but I believe the Study
>> Group should be
>> accountable to what they bring to the UA body.
>> Additionally, if we stay off
>> the record, I would like the Study Group to provide, at
>> the minimum, a
>> public explanation of this request.
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Geoffrey Thomas
>> <geofft@mit.edu> wrote:
>>
>> What does "off the record" mean? As a constituennt, can I
>> ask my senator
>> what happened and expect them to be able to reply in good
>> conscience?
>>
>> I have bad memories of Blue Ribbon insisting its meetings
>> were off the
>> record, and preventng me as a Dormcon member from having
>> any idea of what
>> was going on (until the leaks and 40 UAS 6.4 and all that
>> fun stuff).
>> MIT-Online is certainly more preliminary than BRDC was at
>> that stage, but
>> also way more important. Is there some summary of the
>> discussion they're
>> willing to approve? Can senators take persnal notes not on
>> laptops?
>>
>> This is what affects a body's ability to be
>> representative. Whether you punt
>> on your computers past the Speaker's bedtime is just a
>> question of time
>> management competence and respect, not representation.
>>
>> --
>> Geoffrey Thomas
>> geofft@mit.edu
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 24 Apr 2011, William Steadman wrote:
>>
>> If every representative were to make motions to: close
>> discussion,
>> postpone, etc whenever they felt it was appropriate then
>> you don't have
>> a meeting, you have 30 arguing about procedure.
>>
>> I don't walk into Senate trying to gauge the progress of a
>> discussion
>> because that is not my job. My job as Chairman of Space
>> Planning is to
>> provide appropriate info in that area. Gauging the
>> progress of a
>> discussion is in fact the Speaker's job.
>>
>> I recommend the Speaker move to end discussion or even
>> better call for a
>> motion from the assembly whenever he thinks discussion is
>> not useful.
>> There is a reason he controls the length of debate time.
>> Yet despite the
>> length of all of our meetings it has only been invoked
>> once this year.
>>
>> On Sun, 2011-04-24 at 04:16 -0400, Jont=E9 Craighead (UA
>> Speaker) wrote:
>>
>> Hi, guys:
>>
>> This is meant to be a notice for Monday's meeting.
>>
>> tl;dr: No laptops during the guest speaker and no laptops
>> after
>> 11:00pm.
>>
>> The MIT-Online Faculty Study Group has asked that the
>> entire session
>> at Monday's meeting take place off the record. Because of
>> this, and
>> the fact that this group will be our guest, laptops must
>> not be open.
>>
>> Furthermore, I am going to request that laptops also be
>> closed during
>> any business that takes place after 11:00pm. If you have
>> noticed
>> anything this year, it's that, usually, fewer than half of
>> you are
>> paying attention to the discussion at once past about this
>> time. If
>> the discussion on the floor is not interesting or useful,
>> you should
>> do something about it (i.e. move to close discussion,
>> postpone, etc.).
>> This is your Senate, you should own it. Otherwise, we run
>> into
>> situations where a small number of participants are the
>> only ones
>> driving the discussions (and effectively acting as the
>> only student
>> representatives).
>>
>> Instituting this rule is not fun, but I feel it's
>> necessary to keep
>> people engaged, or at the very least, ensure that our last
>> three
>> meetings aren't also our longest.
>>
>> I would be happy to answer any questions here, but if you
>> have
>> comments or want to start a discussion, please move this
>> e-mail to
>> ua-senate@.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jont=E9 Craighead
>>
>> Speaker of the Senate
>> MIT Undergraduate Association
>> Course 1C: Class of 2013
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Tim Robertson II
>> MIT 2011
>> Mechanical Engineering
>> UA Senate Office Hours:
>> EC-B515 Sunday 5-8pm
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
--000e0cd5734ab36bae04a1ad8fb8
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi hi<br><br>With the Online Group, I agree with what was said above, that =
they need to explain to our constituents why we can't disclose any info=
rmation to them. Also Jonte, I understand that some people using laptops is=
as a distraction and they completely sign out of Senate but it's a pai=
n to take hand-written notes especially since it means we have to retype th=
em up later. It's easier and prettier to just have it typed and indente=
d and such already. (at least my perspective :) please and thank you!)<br>
<br><br><br clear=3D"all">Sincerely,<br>~Jessica Chen<br>MIT 2014<br>
<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Geoffre=
y Thomas <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:geofft@mit.edu">geofft@mit=
.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"ma=
rgin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding=
-left: 1ex;">
It's not. That way you can say "We asked them to come to Senate an=
d present and they didn't / lied to us / concealed information", i=
nstead of "We asked them to come to Senate and present and they did, a=
nd we didn't do anything with the information because we thought we wer=
en't supposed to". The latter puts the responsibility of failure o=
f communication with students on Senate instead of the body presenting to S=
enate.<br>
<br>
While BRDC still failed in many miserable ways, things started changing for=
the better after 40 UAS 6.4, which said that student reps to BRDC must be =
able to report back to the government they represent. It's not so much =
about the immediate effect of the meeting as the environment and attitude a=
round it.<br>
<br>
Again, I'm not saying MIT-Online will do this, it's just a thing th=
at I've run into in the past that has caused problems, and it's wor=
th Senate not blindly accepting this.<div class=3D"im"><br>
<br>
-- <br>
Geoffrey Thomas<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:geofft@mit.edu" target=3D"_blank">geofft@mit.edu</a><br>
<br></div><div><div></div><div class=3D"h5">
On Sun, 24 Apr 2011, Karan Takhar wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; borde=
r-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
=A0=A0 There is also the possibility that we keep this on the record and<br=
>
subsequently get none or very little relevant information pertaining to the=
<br>
activities of the study group. I am not advocating for off the record by an=
y<br>
means, just pointing out that on the record with no information shared is a=
<br>
similar outcome to off the record without being able to act on any<br>
information.<br>
<br>
On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Geoffrey Thomas <<a href=3D"mailto:geof=
ft@mit.edu" target=3D"_blank">geofft@mit.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Sure, quite possible. But you should ask this explicitly. If<br=
>
=A0 =A0 =A0they mean that the information is public to the MIT community, =
I<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0would like senators to be taking notes.<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0--<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Geoffrey Thomas<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0<a href=3D"mailto:geofft@mit.edu" target=3D"_blank">geofft@mit.=
edu</a><br>
<br>
On Sun, 24 Apr 2011, Michael E Plasmeier wrote:<br>
<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0It seems to me that =93off the record=94 means that they do<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0not want this to<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0appear in the Boston Globe, NYT, etc before they are ready<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0to announce<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0something.=A0 Going before a body as large as Senate means<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0that this is not<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0highly classified. It seems that they are trying to get<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0MIT community<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0feedback without having this leak to the outside world.<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0=A0<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0I could be incorrect, so I agree with Tim=92s suggestion to<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0ask the study<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0group to explain what they are trying to protect.<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0=A0<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0-Michael<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0=A0<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0From: <a href=3D"mailto:timorob@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">ti=
morob@gmail.com</a> [mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:timorob@gmail.com" target=3D"=
_blank">timorob@gmail.com</a>] On<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Behalf Of Timothy<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Robertson<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2011 1:13 PM<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0To: Geoffrey G Thomas<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Cc: Jonte Craighead; <a href=3D"mailto:ua-senate@mit.edu" targe=
t=3D"_blank">ua-senate@mit.edu</a><br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Subject: Re: Laptops<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0=A0<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0I do not believe it is reasonable for us to remain off the<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0record. I am not<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0opposed to closed discussions, but I believe the Study<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Group should be<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0accountable to what they bring to the UA body.<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Additionally, if we stay off<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0the record, I would like the Study Group to provide, at<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0the minimum, a<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0public explanation of this request.<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Geoffrey Thomas<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0<<a href=3D"mailto:geofft@mit.edu" target=3D"_blank">geofft@=
mit.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0What does "off the record" mean? As a constituennt, c=
an I<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0ask my senator<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0what happened and expect them to be able to reply in good<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0conscience?<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0I have bad memories of Blue Ribbon insisting its meetings<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0were off the<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0record, and preventng me as a Dormcon member from having<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0any idea of what<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0was going on (until the leaks and 40 UAS 6.4 and all that<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0fun stuff).<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0MIT-Online is certainly more preliminary than BRDC was at<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0that stage, but<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0also way more important. Is there some summary of the<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0discussion they're<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0willing to approve? Can senators take persnal notes not on<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0laptops?<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0This is what affects a body's ability to be<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0representative. Whether you punt<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0on your computers past the Speaker's bedtime is just a<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0question of time<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0management competence and respect, not representation.<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0--<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Geoffrey Thomas<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0<a href=3D"mailto:geofft@mit.edu" target=3D"_blank">geofft@mit.=
edu</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0On Sun, 24 Apr 2011, William Steadman wrote:<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0If every representative were to make motions to: close<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0discussion,<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0postpone, etc whenever they felt it was appropriate then<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0you don't have<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0a meeting, you have 30 arguing about procedure.<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0I don't walk into Senate trying to gauge the progress of a<=
br>
=A0 =A0 =A0discussion<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0because that is not my job. My job as Chairman of Space<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Planning is to<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0provide appropriate info in that area. Gauging the<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0progress of a<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0discussion is in fact the Speaker's job.<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0I recommend the Speaker move to end discussion or even<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0better call for a<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0motion from the assembly whenever he thinks discussion is<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0not useful.<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0There is a reason he controls the length of debate time.<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Yet despite the<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0length of all of our meetings it has only been invoked<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0once this year.<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0On Sun, 2011-04-24 at 04:16 -0400, Jont=E9 Craighead (UA<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Speaker) wrote:<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Hi, guys:<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0This is meant to be a notice for Monday's meeting.<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0tl;dr: No laptops during the guest speaker and no laptops<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0after<br>
=A0 =A0 =A011:00pm.<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0The MIT-Online Faculty Study Group has asked that the<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0entire session<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0at Monday's meeting take place off the record. Because of<b=
r>
=A0 =A0 =A0this, and<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0the fact that this group will be our guest, laptops must<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0not be open.<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Furthermore, I am going to request that laptops also be<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0closed during<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0any business that takes place after 11:00pm. If you have<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0noticed<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0anything this year, it's that, usually, fewer than half of<=
br>
=A0 =A0 =A0you are<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0paying attention to the discussion at once past about this<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0time. If<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0the discussion on the floor is not interesting or useful,<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0you should<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0do something about it (i.e. move to close discussion,<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0postpone, etc.).<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0This is your Senate, you should own it. Otherwise, we run<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0into<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0situations where a small number of participants are the<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0only ones<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0driving the discussions (and effectively acting as the<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0only student<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0representatives).<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Instituting this rule is not fun, but I feel it's<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0necessary to keep<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0people engaged, or at the very least, ensure that our last<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0three<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0meetings aren't also our longest.<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0I would be happy to answer any questions here, but if you<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0have<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0comments or want to start a discussion, please move this<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0e-mail to<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0ua-senate@.<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Thanks,<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Jont=E9 Craighead<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Speaker of the Senate<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0MIT Undergraduate Association<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Course 1C: Class of 2013<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0=A0<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0--<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Tim Robertson II<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0MIT 2011<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Mechanical Engineering<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0UA Senate Office Hours:<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0EC-B515 Sunday 5-8pm<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>
--000e0cd5734ab36bae04a1ad8fb8--
