[1294] in UA Senate
Re: Laptops
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Daniel Hawkins)
Sun Apr 24 18:19:31 2011
Reply-To: hwkns@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=9HcVRCjHD3jKgdEZpWj2syxh8BA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 18:19:27 -0400
From: Daniel Hawkins <hwkns@MIT.EDU>
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jont=E9_Craighead?= <jontec@mit.edu>
Cc: Jessica Chen <jessicachen.dbhs@gmail.com>,
Geoffrey Thomas <geofft@mit.edu>,
Karan Takhar <kstakhar4691@gmail.com>,
Michael E Plasmeier <theplaz@mit.edu>,
Timothy E Robertson <tim_r@mit.edu>,
"ua-senate@mit.edu" <ua-senate@mit.edu>
--0015175d0042f13bb904a1b17bb1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Also, importantly, on-the-record or off-the-record doesn't have to apply to
the entire meeting. Perhaps it would be best to start everything on the
record and remind our guests that they are free to request off-the-record
discussion at any point, and that we will decide whether it is appropriate.
Thoughts on that?
-hwkns
2011/4/24 Daniel Hawkins <hwkns@mit.edu>
> Hi all,
>
> Sorry I just saw this thread. I wanted to clear some things up, as the
> student rep to the MIT-Online Faculty Study Group. I'm glad people are
> taking interest in this, and as Jonte said, this issue of transparency vs=
.
> effectiveness is extremely important.
>
> Geoffrey you are right to question this, and to point out how it's caused
> trouble in the past. And I know that being personally involved inhibits =
my
> ability to objectively evaluate the committee's intentions (I think Mike =
and
> Noah experienced this on BRDC). But if you look at who is chairing this
> committee (Dick Yue, who also chaired the committee that created OCW abou=
t a
> decade ago, and in general is a great guy who believes MIT is becoming to=
o
> corporate these days), and the process so far (they created a separate,
> parallel student study group so it wouldn't be influenced by the faculty
> group's discussions, and made me the interface between the groups), and t=
he
> fact that we didn't invite them to Senate, they asked if they could come
> talk to us, I don't think you'll conclude that this is the next BRDC.
>
> Michael hit the nail on the head, as far as the committee's motivations f=
or
> wanting this meeting to be off the record. I'm certain they won't mind i=
f
> people take notes or talk to their constituents. In fact, they probably
> hope that you will do that much. Their goal is to get as much feedback a=
s
> they can. But these are sensitive topics. And there's nothing to stop T=
he
> Tech from reporting, "MIT is planning to do X, which will revolutionize
> education in the US and the world!" (when, in reality, no recommendations
> have been made to the Provost yet, and publicizing our best ideas at this
> stage might allow other schools to implement them before we do). To be
> clear, I'm not saying that I expect The Tech would do this, I'm saying th=
ere
> is nothing stopping them from doing it, and that is mostly what the
> committee is afraid of.
>
> Karan, you are correct; if the discussion is on the record and The Tech h=
as
> a reporter in the room, the members of the committee will be much more
> political (as they are speaking not just to students but to any newspaper=
in
> the world that wishes to quote them), and our discussion will not be as
> productive. But I'm sure we'll still be able to voice our opinions, and =
if
> this is what you guys want, I'm willing to prepare some background info f=
or
> you so we can discuss things without putting the committee in an awkward
> position.
>
> -hwkns
>
> 2011/4/24 Jont=E9 Craighead <jontec@mit.edu>
>
>> Hi, everyone:
>>
>> I am glad to see that we are finally utilizing the mailing list for the
>> purpose it was intended.
>>
>> Where is the balance between knowledge and accountability? How does
>> information or input gained off-the-record compare to that which is
>> on-the-record? These are questions that strike at heart of our role as a
>> representative body, and they deserve debate.
>>
>> I hope to work with our guests to determine a format that works best for
>> us in our role as elected representatives as well as for the Study Group=
.
>> Please keep the input coming because I cannot have this discussion witho=
ut
>> knowing where Senate stands on this issue.
>>
>> My office hours are from 8:00pm-10:00pm tonight in the UA Office, and I
>> would be happy to discuss this topic with anyone interested.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jont=E9 Craighead
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 1:37 PM, Jessica Chen <jessicachen.dbhs@gmail.co=
m
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> 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 t=
ake
>>> hand-written notes especially since it means we have to retype them up
>>> later. It's easier 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
>>>> present and they didn't / lied to us / concealed information", instead=
of
>>>> "We asked them to come to Senate and present and they did, and we didn=
't do
>>>> anything with the information because we thought we weren't supposed t=
o".
>>>> The latter puts the responsibility of failure of communication with st=
udents
>>>> on Senate instead of the body presenting to Senate.
>>>>
>>>> While BRDC still failed in many miserable ways, things started changin=
g
>>>> 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 m=
uch
>>>> about the immediate effect of the meeting as the environment and attit=
ude
>>>> around it.
>>>>
>>>> Again, I'm not saying MIT-Online will do this, it's just a thing that
>>>> I've run into in the past that has caused problems, and it's worth Sen=
ate
>>>> 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 share=
d
>>>>> is 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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
--0015175d0042f13bb904a1b17bb1
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Also, importantly, on-the-record or off-the-record doesn't have to appl=
y to the entire meeting. =A0Perhaps it would be best to start everything on=
the record and remind our guests that they are free to request off-the-rec=
ord discussion at any point, and that we will decide whether it is appropri=
ate. =A0Thoughts on that?<div>
<br></div><div>-hwkns<br><div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">2011/4/24 Dani=
el Hawkins <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:hwkns@mit.edu">hwkns@mit=
.edu</a>></span><br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 =
0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Hi all,<div><br></div><div>Sorry I just saw this thread. =A0I wanted to cle=
ar some things up, as the student rep to the MIT-Online Faculty Study Group=
. =A0I'm glad people are taking interest in this, and as Jonte said, th=
is issue of transparency vs. effectiveness is extremely important.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Geoffrey you are right to question this, and to point o=
ut how it's caused trouble in the past. =A0And I know that being person=
ally involved inhibits my ability to objectively evaluate the committee'=
;s intentions (I think Mike and Noah experienced this on BRDC). =A0But if y=
ou look at who is chairing this committee (Dick Yue, who also chaired the c=
ommittee that created OCW about a decade ago, and in general is a great guy=
who believes MIT is becoming too corporate these days), and the process so=
far (they created a separate, parallel student study group so it wouldn=
9;t be influenced by the faculty group's discussions, and made me the i=
nterface between the groups), and the fact that we didn't invite them t=
o Senate, they asked if they could come talk to us, I don't think you&#=
39;ll conclude that this is the next BRDC.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Michael hit the nail on the head, as far as the committ=
ee's motivations for wanting this meeting to be off the record. =A0I=
9;m certain they won't mind if people take notes or talk to their const=
ituents. =A0In fact, they probably hope that you will do that much. =A0Thei=
r goal is to get as much feedback as they can. =A0But these are sensitive t=
opics. =A0And there's nothing to stop The Tech from reporting, "MI=
T is planning to do X, which will revolutionize education in the US and the=
world!" (when, in reality, no recommendations have been made to the P=
rovost yet, and publicizing our best ideas at this stage might allow other =
schools to implement them before we do). =A0To be clear, I'm not saying=
that I expect The Tech would do this, I'm saying there is nothing stop=
ping them from doing it, and that is mostly what the committee is afraid of=
.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Karan, you are correct; if the discussion is on the rec=
ord and The Tech has a reporter in the room, the members of the committee w=
ill be much more political (as they are speaking not just to students but t=
o any newspaper in the world that wishes to quote them), and our discussion=
will not be as productive. =A0But I'm sure we'll still be able to =
voice our opinions, and if this is what you guys want, I'm willing to p=
repare some background info for you so we can discuss things without puttin=
g the committee in an awkward position.</div>
<div><br></div><div>-hwkns</div><div><div></div><div class=3D"h5"><div><br>=
</div><div><div class=3D"gmail_quote">2011/4/24 Jont=E9 Craighead <span dir=
=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:jontec@mit.edu" target=3D"_blank">jontec@mit=
.edu</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi, everyone:<br><br>I am glad to see that we are finally utilizing the=20
mailing list for the purpose it was intended.<br><br>Where is the=20
balance between knowledge and accountability? How does information or=20
input gained off-the-record compare to that which is on-the-record?=20
These are questions that strike at heart of our role as a representative
body, and they deserve debate.<br>
<br>I hope to work with our guests to determine a format that works best
for us in our role as elected representatives as well as for the Study=20
Group. Please keep the input coming because I cannot have this=20
discussion without knowing where Senate stands on this issue.<br>
<br>My office hours are from 8:00pm-10:00pm tonight in the UA Office,=20
and I would be happy to discuss this topic with anyone interested.<br><br c=
lear=3D"all">Thanks,<br><font color=3D"#888888">Jont=E9 Craighead</font><di=
v><div></div><div><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 a=
t 1:37 PM, Jessica Chen <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:jessicachen=
.dbhs@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">jessicachen.dbhs@gmail.com</a>></span=
> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-=
left:1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);padding-left:1ex">Hi hi<br><br>With the O=
nline 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 J=
onte, I understand that some people using laptops is as a distraction and t=
hey 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 e=
asier and prettier to just have it typed and indented and such already. (at=
least my perspective :) please and thank you!)<br>
<br><br><br clear=3D"all">Sincerely,<br><font color=3D"#888888">~Jessica Ch=
en<br>MIT 2014</font><div><div></div><div><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" target=3D"=
_blank">geofft@mit.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_=
quote" style=3D"margin: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><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>
On Sun, 24 Apr 2011, Karan Takhar wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-=
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>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>
--0015175d0042f13bb904a1b17bb1--
