aggienaut: (gavel)

   In my five years of involvement in ASUCD, I have seen a lot of extremely shady antics. As I’ve mentioned before, I do not believe power corrupts, I believe power allows the already-prone-to-corruption to show themselves. There are a lot of scandals in real government, and students love to point these out – but what most people don’t realize is that its not because the people involved in our government are more prone to corruption than your average person – its that they have much greater opportunities (and are under much much greater scrutiny, thus revealing every indiscretion).
   That said, I believe what ASUCD does is show us how badly your average ambitious person behaves when given a little bit of power. Or at least, when not behaving downright badly, it really exhibits how much their perspectives change to what is convenient for them.


The Good List
   Unfortunately, those with exemplary good ethical standards don’t necessarily stand out the way bad ethics do. I would like to start on a good note however, by mentioning those who have impressed me with their ethics:

Surprisingly Admirable:
(ii) Ari Kalfayan )


(i) Nafeh Malik )


Exemplary Nonstudents:
(ii) Don Dudley, SJA & CJB )
(i) Mark Champagne )


Actually Exemplary:
(5) Go Funai )
(4)
& (3) Justices Powers & Wheat )
(2) Jon Leathers )
(1) Aggie Editor-in-Chief Matty Jojola )



   It should be noted, that I cannot account for the most EFFECTIVE people in ASUCD, since I am not in a position to judge how well people are running the busses or running GASC etc etc. The above is a list of those who have had the opportunity to show exemplary ethics (or at least, for the group above that, have more value than people give them credit for). And below, below is a list of the most lacking in ethics.


ASUCD’s Most Ethically Misguided

Mildly Annoying:
(iv) Paul Harms )
(iii) Kalen Gallagher )
(ii-i) Sara Henry & Paloma Perez )

Ethically Dysfunctional:
(22) Thomas Lloyd )
(21) Anyone who, during their term, abandoned or defected from the platform they were elected on )
(20) Jamie Ackerman )
(19) Chris Goran )
(18) Mary Vasquez )
(17) Aggie Reporter Talia Kennedy )
(16) Aggie Reporter Aimee Theron )
(15-11) Aggie Editor-in-Chiefs Vo, Whelan, Fuller, Stone & Hamilton )
(10) Andrew Peake )
(9) Kai Savaree-Ruess )
(8-6) The Unqualified Candidates )
(5) Rob Roy )
(4) Kristen Birdsall )
(3) Chief Justice Turner )
(2) Vice President Beaman )
(1) Tiqula Bledsoe )
(BONUS) Bonus! )



   And now… I probably have significantly more enemies. It should be noted that I think many of the people mentioned above are very nice people in general. In particular I feel a bit torn about the “Unqualified Candidates” themselves because they all turned out to be pretty nice people and kept themselves out of any further shadiness that I know of, but it would be hard to justify not including them on the list.
   Anyway, my hope in posting this is that people who are just becoming involved in ASUCD will read it and keep in mind what NOT to do in the future.

aggienaut: (soldiers)
Political Update

   As regards last week's crisis in the ASUCD basement, it appears that Editor-in-Chief Peter Hamilton and Campus Editor Talia Kennedy will not be resigning but will become non-functional (administrative-leave) for the little remaining time of their terms, with Managing Editor Marion Everidge as acting Editor-in-Chief. Incidently, both of them have been drawing pay for two positions, (Hamilton as E-in-C and Online Editor, Kennedy as Campus and Features Editor). Their departure has been marked by much juvenile behaviour such as the staff being locked out of the webpage (for some time after the drama the webpage didn't update, making it look from down here like maybe the Aggie really had ground to a halt) and the Editor-in-Chiefs office, and moreover very extensive edit wars by Peter Hamilton operating under the sockpuppet TravisBrown simply trying to delete all information about the ongoing drama from the wiki. Disagree by deletion = quality journalism!!

   And the fired Editor-in-Chief-to-be has been reinstated. It had come to light that the plagiarism he had been accused of was merely from a press release which was his only source of the story. While its still disappointing, it is worlds different than plagiarizing ostensibly original journalism -- the latter is fraudulent and dishonest, while the present case is merely lazy. On top of this of course, 31 staff members attest that Lee was "set up to fail" by Hamilton by being given unmeetable deadlines. This further diminishes the gravity of his lapse, and it is of course completely overshadowed by the several different indictments of Hamilton & Talie themselves.


   In other news, regarding the Chief Justice of Pakistan: A registrar of the Supreme Court (of Pakistan of course) has been murdered in his home, he was a kew witness for Chief Justice Chaundhry; and the Supreme Court has ordered the Supreme Judicial Council (different body) to halt its proceedings pending challenges filed with the SC. As far as I can tell the SJC would be trying the Chief Justice, but the challenges are decided by the SC. It appears to me that the SJC at least has had its membership tampered with by President Musharraf.


28 Weaks Later & Revenge of the Taco Tuesday (yes I mean to write "weak")
Spoiler-Warning: I am about to spoilerize this terrible movie )


   Short version -- It failed to meet the low expectations I had for it, AND they are already planning a third installment, 28 Months Later.


   Anyway, after that Alex and instituted a brilliant revenge plan against her ex-boyfriend (who is now dating one of her (former) good friends) -- Taco Revenge! We invited a bunch of people over (four of Alex's friends, and Eric Talevich) to be having a home-made taco tuesday dinner party when her ex showed up to bring her some of her stuff. It was a pleasant little adventure.


Cameras
   As you may have noticed, I haven't had a camera for awhile. Anyway, yesterday I took a break from the Eternal Jobhunt to try to wade through the mind-boggling amount of digital cameras out there and select the one I want. I think I've narrowed it down to:
(1) Kodak C875
(2) Canon Powershot A560
(3) Sony Cyber-shot DSC-W55
   If you have any thoughts on these or other cameras you recommend I look into, please share. Price ceiling is in the area of $200.


30 in 30 IV!!! (Starts June 1st!)
   Yes its that time of the year again! When the bold and intrepid embark on the epic blogathon of 30 in 30! This being my fourth year, and to address the concerns of those who think it'll distract me from the Eternal Jobsearch, I promise to kind of half-ass it. But I would like to once again put out the call to those who haven't yet participated in the primier event that seperates the blogtastic from the blogweak! So who's in?

   Coming in June, 30 in 30 has traditionally marked the change from my audience demographic from the UC Davis oriented to the greater blogosphere for summer. Currently, I don't think I really have a clear demographic.. hopefully I'll resolve that through the course of June. Some highlights may include: (1) many have speculated as to who the most ethically depraved ASUCD politician, in my opinion, has been, and I have thus far largely refused to name names. I am thinking, especially if you are all really good little boys and girls, of actually naming names, rocking the boat, and bashing heads, to create an epic list of the worst (and best) ASUCD politicians in my experience, going back at least to early 2001. (2) I have always avoided expressing opinions on the national political policy disputes in the United States, leading to widespread speculation and people seriously publicly accusing me of being a member of the Green, Republican, Communist, or Libertarian party at various times. During 30 in 30 I've traditionally made at least one "controversial political opinion" post, which notgonnalie is usually a big letdown once you get past the lj-cut. I'm going to try to actually commit to saying something controversial this time. PS: I still think the Estate Tax should be maintained at at least 50%.


   Okay now I have to find a way to print, since Yellowstone National Park only accepts job applications via postal mail, and I need to get ready to go up to UCLA where I'll be hanging out with Matt Wilkerson this evening and joining a Phi Alpha Delta UC Davis delegation on a tour of USC tomorrow morning.

aggienaut: (nuke)

   I've been trying to resist blogging about this particular scandal for days, but as it continues to erupt I can no longer resist.

   Recently, the UC Davis Campus Media Board1 appointed the new California Aggie Editor-in-Chief for the 2007-2008 year: Sports Writer Eddie Lee.
   Current Editor-in-Chief Peter Hamilton shortly fired sports writer Eddie Lee. The charge was plagerism. Presently, despite currently fired status, Lee is still lined up to become the next Editor-in-Chief.
   Today a letter surfaced signed by 31 staff members of the California Aggie. It alleges that current E-in-C Hamilton fired Lee because he wanted Campus Editor / Features Editor Talia Kennedy (whom he is having a thinly disguised secret relationship with) to become the next E-in-C.
   Additionally, in the letter, the staff demanded an explanation for over a thousand dollars that are unaccounted for from Peter & Talia's trip to the California College Media Association awards banquet, calling it "tantamount to embezzlement."
   In response, Hamilton has asked for the resignation of all 31 signees of the letter.


   Talia Kennedy is also noted as, while the Aggie reporter assigned to cover ASUCD, having allegedly mated with ASUCD Senator Darnell Holloway. ASUCD history repeats itself.


   Incidently, the E-in-C previous to this, Matty Jojola, is the only one in known memory to have not been involved in a major shame filled scandal. Gold star for you Matty.
   The unfortunate history of Aggie Editor-in-Chiefs is recounted by the illustrious former Chief Justice Fricke in the Case 29 Opinion:

"Currently the Aggie Editor-in-Chief poses a more significant threat to the Aggie than the ASUCD government does -- As highlighted by the recent resignation of Editor-in-Chief Stone over allegations of abuse of power, the near mutiny of editors against last year’s Editor-in-Chief Fuller, the loss of lawsuits by the previous year’s Editor-in-Chief Vo, etc etc." Laabs vs California Aggie ASUCD Supreme Court, Case 29, 02/21/06 (p8)

   In the opinion, the ASUCD Supreme Court noted that the current set-up in effect resulted in ASUCD passing the buck of authority unto the Media Board, who thereupon passed the buck to the Editor-in-Chief, leaving the E-in-C essentially unchecked and free to make the basement a kingdom unto himself (/herself).

   While it wasn't the Courts place to recommend a solution to that problem, it did seem to be that a good solution would be to make the Editor-in-Chief share authority with the two most senior other editors. This way they would be prevented from firing people on a whim, getting into bad contracts that no one besides themselves think are a good idea, and the numerous other hijinks Editor-in-Chiefs have gotten themselves into lately. On any account if the Media Board had bothered to read the Court opinion I'd like to think it might have occured to them that the system needed some kind of fix.


1 The Media Board is a board of miscellenious persons from University Administration or student media organizations, to which the ASUCD government has delegated governing authority for the ASUCD-run media units (KDVS & the Aggie) in order to provide some separation between the sordid politics of ASUCD, and the sordid politics of campus media.


See Also
The "Budget Hearing Scandal" - What began with mere accusations of people attending budget hearings while high eventually expanded to exposing intricate plots involving dirty secrets and sex.

April 2025

S M T W T F S
  123 45
6 7 89101112
13141516171819
20 212223242526
27282930   

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 9th, 2025 09:49 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios