Is it considered acceptable to campaign for or against a motion prior to the General Assembly?

Originally Posted by arathbon

Is it considered acceptable to campaign for or against a motion prior to the General Assembly?

No, it's no different than any other meeting in that respect. Talk, start up discussion and also come out to GA and state your points there as part of the debate.

Originally Posted by Taunton

No, it's no different than any other meeting in that respect. Talk, start up discussion and also come out to GA and state your points there as part of the debate.

I'm just trying to figure out the boundaries here in one regards. I personally would like to see a large Kin turnout at the meeting because one of the motions particular effects us. Would it be acceptable (or indeed would it be possible for someone (maybe our SRA rep if possible)) to talk to some of the Kin classes to let them know there is a motion concerning our SRA representation that will be before the general assembly?

Originally Posted by arathbon

I'm just trying to figure out the boundaries here in one regards. I personally would like to see a large Kin turnout at the meeting because one of the motions particular effects us. Would it be acceptable (or indeed would it be possible for someone (maybe our SRA rep if possible)) to talk to some of the Kin classes to let them know there is a motion concerning our SRA representation that will be before the general assembly?

Of course! That's 100% encouraged, and as much as I believe that the Kin caucus should be dissolved, I would absolutely love to see a turnout at GA to fight it!

Please, I encourage you to spread the word and get kin students out to fight the motion! Contact SRA Kin to help as well, another good idea!

Originally Posted by Taunton

Of course! That's 100% encouraged, and as much as I believe that the Kin caucus should be dissolved, I would absolutely love to see a turnout at GA to fight it!

Please, I encourage you to spread the word and get kin students out to fight the motion! Contact SRA Kin to help as well, another good idea!

Personally I'm hoping the goal is not just to get a crowd to oppose it but rather get kin students out in general to have input either way. No matter which way things turn out I don't want anyone to think it was done without adequate consultation.

Originally Posted by arathbon

Personally I'm hoping the goal is not just to get a crowd to oppose it but rather get kin students out in general to have input either way. No matter which way things turn out I don't want anyone to think it was done without adequate consultation.

Kin isn't that apathetic , check your inbox

The Kin representative, Alex Tran, can be reached at [email protected]. I would highly recommend speaking to classes about the main issues surrounding the motion, and encourage them to come out to General Assembly!

Originally Posted by Nosh

Kin isn't that apathetic

You need to prove. Obviously, you personally have, but you need to rally the faculty in ways your predecessors have not. Be the difference.

Originally Posted by rohan10

You need to prove. Obviously, you personally have, but you need to rally the faculty in ways your predecessors have not. Be the difference.

It is a good point that kin needs to show our non-apathetic side.

I think a lot of the blame comes back to that no one has really tried to get kin students involved in campus politics.

For example when the Science Society was having their elections we got visited by only one candidate. To be quite frank, I was not the only one who didn't know that we were even eligible to vote for the Science Society.

Compare these two examples to the big deal made about Kin Society elections and its no wonder Kin students care more about the Kin Society than campus politics as a whole.

Both elections (Presidential and EWB referendum), I was walking with a friend from class in IWC through DBAC to go to TSH and both times I stopped and voted, and both times my friend that was with me (different friends each election) decided to vote when I suggested they should. I think its a great example of how much latent will to participate there is. If only someone who's running would give a little push!

The finalized agenda for the General Assembly has been posted to the MSU website!

ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM THE CHAIR

• Welcome / Quorum
• Rules and Proceedings

REPORT PERIOD

• MSU President Vishal Tiwari for the Board of Directors

BUSINESS

1. Wright – MSU Campaigning

MOVED by Matt Wright, seconded by _______ that candidates for MSU student elections be allowed to campaign and have campaign materials visible in MSU space.

2. Finkle – SRA Caucus Amalgamation

MOVED by Joe Finkle, seconded by_______ that the MSU dissolve the Kinesiology caucus of the SRA.

3. Tenenbaum – MSU Constitution

MOVED by Matthew Tenenbaum, seconded by _______ that the MSU membership approve the amendments to the MSU Constitution, as circulated and presented.

4. Mestre – Vice-President Environment

MOVED by Vanessa Mestre, seconded by _______ that the MSU create a Vice-President Environment position.

5. Smyth – Smoke-Free Campus

MOVED by Fionn Smyth, seconded by _______ that the MSU lobby McMaster University for a smoke-free campus.

6. Kuntzevitsky – Fraternities and Sororities

MOVED by Victor Kuntzevitsky, seconded by Aaron Wade that the MSU recognize a Greek Life Council.

7. Boccaccio – Dental Plan

MOVED by Daniel Boccaccio, seconded by _______ that the fee for the dental plan increase by $8.38, and the total coverage of the plan reduce to $650.

8. Langille – Engineers Without Borders

MOVED by Meaghan Langille, seconded by _______ that the MSU be directed to collect a 35-cent-per-student ancillary fee for the McMaster chapter of Engineers Without Borders Canada.

9. Tsang – Solar Car Fee Change

MOVED by Adrian Tsang, seconded by _______ that the MSU revert the $1.00 Solar Car fee to Engineers Without Borders.

10. Erl – Electoral Slate

MOVED by Chris Erl, seconded by _______ that the option to form and join an officially recognized electoral slate be offered to candidates in elections to all offices of the MSU, effective May 1st, 2010.

New agenda items will be allowed at the meeting, provided that two-thirds of those present vote to consider them.

I heard it didn't make quorum. Despite that I still wish I had been there. Stupid Midterm!

To everyone who went, good on you!

Could someone update me?

What happened with kinesiology? I sure hope we didn't get dissolved... that'd be a huge disappointment.

Originally Posted by mac-gal

Could someone update me?

What happened with kinesiology? I sure hope we didn't get dissolved... that'd be a huge disappointment.

Not to worry, there was a very good turnout from Kinesiology today. We didn't reach quorum, so this was an unofficial assembly and nothing would change Kin's seats on the SRA, but the motion was shut down with a big cry from Kin students wishing to keep their voice heard on the SRA.

The rest of the results will be posted shortly I'm sure.

Hey everyone,

Here's an update from today's GA meeting. Over 300 people came out (I think 309 is the actual figure) so we didn't reach quorum (586), but we still had a much better turnout than GAs in the recent past (e.g. last year's GA turnout of 69).

Nothing could be "officially" passed, but discussion still took place and votes were taken on the motions that people wanted the SRA to follow up on.

The motions that were endorsed by those in attendance were:

• MOVED by Matt Wright, seconded by _______ that candidates for MSU student elections be allowed to campaign and have campaign materials visible in MSU space.
• MOVED by Matthew Tenenbaum, seconded by _______ that the MSU membership approve the amendments to the MSU Constitution, as circulated and presented.
• MOVED by Victor Kuntzevitsky, seconded by Aaron Wade that the MSU recognize a Greek Life Council.
• MOVED by Daniel Boccaccio, seconded by _______ that the fee for the dental plan increase by $8.38 plus tax, and the total coverage of the plan reduce to $600.
• MOVED by Meaghan Langille, seconded by _______ that the MSU be directed to collect a 35-cent-per-student ancillary fee for the McMaster chapter of Engineers Without Borders Canada.

The motions that were not endorsed were:

• MOVED by Joe Finkle, seconded by_______ that the MSU dissolve the Kinesiology caucus of the SRA.
• MOVED by Vanessa Mestre, seconded by _______ that the MSU create a Vice-President Environment position.
• MOVED by Fionn Smyth, seconded by _______ that the MSU lobby McMaster University for a smoke-free campus.
• MOVED by Chris Erl, seconded by _______ that the option to form and join an officially recognized electoral slate be offered to candidates in elections to all offices of the MSU, effective May 1st, 2010.

If you have any questions, post 'em! Thanks to everyone who came out today!

Originally Posted by emtee10

Hey everyone,

Here's an update from today's GA meeting. Over 300 people came out (I think 309 is the actual figure) so we didn't reach quorum (586)...

I don't think 309 people were there all at once, though I may be mistaken.
Two questions: 1) Speaking theoretically, if there was quorum at the beginning of the meeting (say during the Kin proposal) and many people left to write a midterm before another proposal following, would the following proposals not be able to take affect because there isn't a quorum appearing at the time of the following proposals?
2) Would you mind elaborating what becomes of the approved proposals to be sent to the SRA? What are the different approaches the SRA can take to each proposal?