The Student Room Logo
This thread is closed

Oxford Gossip...

Scroll to see replies

Reply 240
Not quite "Oriel Historian" - the reason is that my archive site of reports is dead and I can't be arsed to resurrect it. Sorry to disappoint!

"H" (or, as he once was, Unsound)
x

PS - to be fair, there have been professional barristers involved before, and (as I understand it) Charlotte didn't pay the chap. Mind you, last time I beat the barrister. This time, the panel ignored my eloquent submissions :smile:
The Cherwell24 website has been down a lot the last couple of days, but you can still get to their full report via www.cherwell.larrytech.com
Reply 242
The Union's tribunal report has been taken down from the Facebook group because non-members might see it, and apparently that's against the rules. But I nabbed a copy before it was taken down...
hackloon
Not quite "Oriel Historian" - the reason is that my archive site of reports is dead and I can't be arsed to resurrect it. Sorry to disappoint!

"H" (or, as he once was, Unsound)
x

PS - to be fair, there have been professional barristers involved before, and (as I understand it) Charlotte didn't pay the chap. Mind you, last time I beat the barrister. This time, the panel ignored my eloquent submissions :smile:


Ahh but H, all things considered being equal you probably would have beaten him! Shame your site's died, made fascinating reading during late night essay writing :frown: Hehe, shall have to find an alternative hacking hobby now.

OH
Any news on the final report (Cherwell says it was out on the 3rd)?
Well, I mean in terms of eligible candidates, anyway.

No apologies for bumping this, all the other threads are crap.
AFAIK, Only Charlotte will be eligible to run in re-poll following the failure of the appeal. If she doesn't run, then Ed will become President-Elect and Librarian.
I love this from the Cherwell:

"Alex Priest, Returning Officer of the Union, said, “I am aware that in the past there have been slates but they're bad for the Union because they mean the wealthy and the popular but not necessarily hard-working get ahead…They're inherently unfair."

When Mr RO himself isn't exactly a poor man, and this verdict (plus if Fischer gets to be President basically by default) just reinforces the stereotype that rich little Unionites who don't get what they want can just stamp their feet, have a tantrum, and throw money at the proceedings to get their way. The wealthy getting ahead indeed.
I don't really see the big deal about it. He broke the rules, quite blatantly, and got pulled up on it. The only defence I've seen so far is "everyone else does it too", which is probably true but not really the best line of argument. Having Fischer as the only eligible candidate is a bit silly, but if Omkar broke the rules during the election I don't see why he wouldn't be disqualified.
Reply 249
tbtommyb
Having Fischer as the only eligible candidate is a bit silly, but if Omkar broke the rules during the election I don't see why he wouldn't be disqualified.

Yes, but he wasn't banned for life for breaking the rules, it was because they said they "found him to be an arrogant character" :rolleyes:. Pretty sure that's not illegal. Irony is the original panel had a guy who had won by running a slate :p:. I don't see there being an election at the beginning of term.
Reply 250
While I agree with you thomasjtl I think there's a difference between disqualifying him from THIS election for being an idiot, and banning him FOR LIFE when he won the presidency by the largest majority EVER!
Bekaboo
While I agree with you thomasjtl I think there's a difference between disqualifying him from THIS election for being an idiot, and banning him FOR LIFE when he won the presidency by the largest majority EVER!

Umm...Boo it wasn't Jonathan that posted that! It was tbtommyb not thomasjtl! :p:
Reply 252
:eek: oops so it was *hangs head* I read things fast, associate thomas with jonathan and then remember I'm meant to use TSR names :frown:
Gault
No: I was antrastan.


How many antrastans are around in this forum?
Reply 254
How many antrastans are around in this forum?


twenteen.



can anyone beat?
Well personally, I feel that banning for life was a little harsh, but it's their decision. Was the heavy punishment not because he'd basically treated the whole thing as a joke? More than being just arrogant lying to the tribunal and all that.
Reply 256
tbtommyb
I don't really see the big deal about it. He broke the rules, quite blatantly, and got pulled up on it. The only defence I've seen so far is "everyone else does it too", which is probably true but not really the best line of argument. Having Fischer as the only eligible candidate is a bit silly, but if Omkar broke the rules during the election I don't see why he wouldn't be disqualified.

But it's not just an argument of "everyone else does it", it's an argument of "in order to get elected, you have to do it". We have a rule that means everyone who ever gets president has automatically broken it. It makes it so ludicrously silly.
Reply 257
Drogue
But it's not just an argument of "everyone else does it", it's an argument of "in order to get elected, you have to do it". We have a rule that means everyone who ever gets president has automatically broken it. It makes it so ludicrously silly.


Basically, I'm not going to go back and read the rest of the thread, and I'm going to ask the rest of you to do it for me. Could someone summarise what happened in paragraph please? Who broke the rules, and which ones?

Or I'll get the Cherwell tomorrow, whatever.
Alive
Basically, I'm not going to go back and read the rest of the thread, and I'm going to ask the rest of you to do it for me. Could someone summarise what happened in paragraph please? Who broke the rules, and which ones?

Or I'll get the Cherwell tomorrow, whatever.


Like this?

http://cherwell.larrytech.com/index.php?mode=print&news=1929
Reply 259
Ta. That's all completely ridunkulous, the union is a joke.

Is anyone here entering pool cuppers?

Latest

Latest