The Agrinautica

A Right to Shadiness?
   Yesterday in the ASUCD Internal Affairs Commission, a member of the public tried to videotape the proceedings. Several various ASUCD officers got extremely upset, with Paul Harms even threatening to call the police and/or sue the individual. The commission's chairman ended up adjourning the meeting without addressing any business, rather than submit to videorecording.

   The reason given was that all people in the room had not given consent to be vidoed. However, the people who "didn't give consent" had absolutely no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in a public meeting in which public minutes are taken, and therefore have no right to, well, expect privacy. But another issue, which is more important to me, is that as a public meeting of a public governing board the public have an absolute right to government transparency which includes recording the proceedings.

   The video of yesterday's IAC incident is already on youtube. The outspoken lad is Paul "I Love the Status Quo" Harms, sitting next to him is Andrew "ACLU" Peake. You would think Mr ACLU would be more sensitive to people's rights for government transparency.


   I've always seen ASUCD as a sort of crucible, which shows people's true character. Its easy to criticize the American government when you can't be faulted for anything similar yourself. We all know college students love to criticize the government, but what happens when you give them a government of their own? Now don't get me wrong, there's good people in ASUCD, but I think ASUCD also shows us how many people who walk among us would make absolutely terrible leaders.
   People say they believe in people's rights versus the government, and they'll certainly maintain that they feel that way not because they aren't in government but because they are rightious like that. But you give these same people a government-like position and they do not hesitate to squash the rights of others to government transparency (and many other topics).
   And that is why I find it so interesting to follow ASUCD politics, and why I was so interested when the leaders of ASUC Berkeley were trying to make off with student money. Its self-rightious people showing us how badly your average person can behave if given a little bit of power.

   I do not believe that power corrupts, I believe that power enables those who are already corrupt to show themselves.


Thomas Lloyd's Legacy
   If one ever makes an edit to any page pertaining to Thomas Lloyd, one will find his all-seeing eye will immediately notice and jump into an edit-war with you. This is because Lloyd believes he has left an amazing legacy behind in ASUCD which vile detracters wish to taint. Also, he apparently believes that potential employers will look him up on Daviswiki, and presumably follow all the links to everything he ever touched, and be impressed (or not, which is his argument for eliminating anything negative about things pertainign to him). Finally, this is really creepy: it took him only an hour and a half to discover someone had created the ASUCD Legislative Clerk page despite the fact that he graduated over a year ago, and THREE MINUTES last time someone made an edit to his own page. To the right is an artist's impression of Thomas Lloyd.
   Anyway, creation of the Legislative Clerk position is one of many things that Thomas Lloyd did and still champions as another shining example of him benefitting society. Others alleged that the position is useless and Lloyd was just using it to boost his accomplishments (ie, that it was just pork). Lloyd of course immediately jumped in defending the position as highly useful, and urged detractors to take it up with the current clerk and/or their supervisor the Vice President if they thought it wasn't fulfilling its potential. ...but then the current Clerk weighed in saying he himself thought the position was just pork! Zing!!

   So reportedly newly appointed ASUCD comptroller Kai Savaree-Ruess, having completed his crusade to combine ASUCD's two massive volumes of bylaws into one hulking uber-volume of bylaws*, and having just finished with budget hearings, has now turned his attention to the Court. At the Internal Affairs Commission on Monday he made a presentation revealing his aspiration to eliminate the Court from ASUCD -- he does not believe ASUCD needs a Court.
   We all had a good laugh last year, when Darth Lloyd tried to eliminate the Court because he believed in the absolute supremacy of senate, but it was only funny once. I've got better things to do than fight the same battle against the roundheads every year.
   Sources believe Ruess's presentation Monday was intended to set the foundation for an upcoming constitutional amendment he intends to write to eliminate the Court.


   *The principal effect of combining the Senate's Standing Rules with the Government Codes (other than making it more tedious to find anything) was in forging a bold statement that the rules of order for Legislative Branch meetings are one and the same with the branch-wide guidelines -- that the Senate is the Government.


   On any account, it would have been nice of him to give someone in the Judicial Branch a heads up that he was about to propose radical changes to it.


Picture of the Day

   So on Thursday afternoon I parked at the end of Oak St --since it is the closest free parking (after five) to the Memorial Union, at a distance of about a furlong)-- to go to Senate & give them the recent case opinion.
   I'm taking Intro to Public Speaking right now. People think its tedious to make a speech on some topic of their choosing to 20 or so people in the discussion group? Well try addressing a room full of Senators & other officers on a subject that (A) is kind of tedious to explain, & (B) is something they disagree with. Not that I stressed about it, I'm used to the senate, but it was a bit awkward that I was basically telling a room full of people that they were wrong on several important points.
   Anyway, I thought the issue was pretty clear when you got down to it, but some such as former senator Darth Lloyd say "to say that i disagree is an understatement my friend," so I've been meaning to once more try to lay out the issues in easily understandable terms. (see below)

   After Senate I was to play intertube waterpolo with Lyrakeet & others, so I left as local legislation enthusiast Brent Laabs was giving a presentation about why we should secede from the union University of California Student Association (UCSA) ("Their charter says 'Student Association,' but their webpage and a number of other documents say 'students association' -- it appears they don't even know their own name").
   Next I needed to get my swimtrunks which I thought were at Kristy's place in The Colleges, about four furlongs across campus -- I could drive there to have my car with me, but since there's only ten "guest" spots for the several hundred people that live there, the odds of getting one are slim and the closest free parking spot would probably still be Oak. So I walked over there.
   Only, they weren't there! I was supposed to be at the pool in fifteen minutes, yet I was half a mile from my car and it was hot and I wear wearing a suit & tie! )=
   Lyric & Kim picked me up and we made a mad dash to my place for my togs and back to the pool.... but the other team hadn't shown up anyway so it was all for nothing.

   Friday morning I toured McGeorge Law School with Φ A Δ, and then that evening Kritsy & I went to see the Yeah Yeah Yeahs at The Warfield in SF.
   I'd never been to the Warfield before. It was pretty awesome. Looked like an Opera-house or something. Kitten-princess & I were only four rows back from the front of the balcony, which means we had an excellent view -- though Krispy Kritter would have liked to prance about on the floor.

   This morning I took a mock LSAT over at the UCD law school (BTW, I mentioned a bit ago that Sara Henry was running for president of the Law Student Assn -- well she lost). Before and after this I made an appearance at the dry run Davis MUN was doing for the upcoming conference we put on here. I started to take the "UberCAT" test (CAT = Chair Aptitude Test, but really it was megalomaniacally backronymed to be named after SG Catherine, who created them)to test out of chair training but then I had to leave for the Mock LSAT.


Picture of the Day

Bailey & Kristy slumber

Van Schoelandt v. ASUCD Senate
   Since its long and tedious to explain it in any more understandable terms than it already is in the opinion, I think I might address specific parts of the case in different entries. For now, an outline of the arguments:
   Of course the case regards a closed session that occured on 01/12/06 in the midst of a constitutional crisis. No reason for the closed session was announced, but after it was over the Senate had a Bill written to retroactively change the requirements for Senate office. The codes state that notification in various forms is to be given for closed sessions, and that these sessions can only be called for specificly listed reasons.
(1) Defence asserts the session was called as a "personnel matter." Does it fulfill the requirements for a personnel session?: (A) can a personnel closed session be called "in general" about nothing (and no one) specific? (B) Can Senators-elect be considered subject personnel? (Can the outcome of an election be considered a "Personnel Matter?")
(2) (A) Can a personnel closed session be called on people without their knowledge? (B) Can a personnel closed session be called without notifying the public?
(3) How can this situation be remedied in light of the potential privacy concerns of hypothetical subject parties who may hypothetically have been discussed?

   Once you are familiar with the discussion of these subjects, I believe you, like me, will be completely at a loss as to on what grounds Lloyd completely disagrees.


Current Music: I dedicate the song Hefner - To Hide a Little Thought to the Closed Session of 01/12/06 and everything that ensued. (= Dl it while its hot!

Previously on Emosnail
   Two Years Ago Last Wednesday: Getting Shafted By Airport Security - A chair my first PAXMUN conference down in San Diego. Mara talked me into it. This girl Swati was in my committee, two years later she's introduced to PAXMUN as a staffer for the San Diego conference 2006.
   Two Years Ago Yesterday: Day Before the Pixies Show - Which was followed by the day OF the Pixies day, incidently, which was a lot more exciting.

   Like I said, my camera is working again. This is the Yolo County Superior Courthouse, where I spend much of my time these days.

   Note the POW/MIA flag that flies in front of the Courthouse. It always seems to me that this flag must seem slightly ironic to the many who come and go from the Courthouse in chains.
   Incidently, Wikipedia doesn't have an entry on the POW/MIA flag. I've always wondered what the deal is with it.










   All in all the Courthouse is kept pretty spotless. This is the only graffiti in the restroom. Given that its in a pretty visable location and it appears that graffiti around it has been erased, I think the maintanance people have found it amusing.

   On my first day working there my supervisor Gail looked over the filing I was doing and remarked "good, it looks like you're doing it all right ... but of course if you weren't it would be my fault for improperly instructing you." This struck me as a particularly enlightened philosophy others should take note of -- that if one has subordinates and they are operating sub-par, rather than blame it all on them, the ranking individual should consider it entirely their own responsibility to ensure quality operations.


In Other News:
   (1)Contention continued throughout the day on the Rob Roy / Talk page regarding whether the wiki would include any references to his allegedly racist public statements. Thomas Lloyd repeatedly declared himself to have won the argument and deleted all references he found offending, but I wouldn't let him get away with it. Then Lloyd dropped the Libel word, which is becoming somewhat like Godwin's Law on the wiki¹ I think (the Abebnego Woods troll alleged libel the other day as well), and illustrated his point with a link that clearly damaged his own point.
   Lest you get the wrong idea, it should be noted that I have not added any of the disputed content myself, and am not saying I think he's a racist; I am standing against the suppression of unfavored viewpoints & a double-standard in reporting.

   (2)Jurists across the world were saddened the other day by the death of Slobodon Milosevic while in custody in The Hague. Slobo's death denies thousands of the justice his conviction would have brought them.

¹"As a wiki discussion grows longer, the probability of someone incorrectly alleging libel approaches 1." - Call that Kris's Second Law (The first is that if the potential for drama is enough, anyone can and will find your livejournal)

Previously on Emosnail
   Year and a Week Ago Yesterday: The Politics of Character Assassination - More on the drama in MUN: I post links to the opposing arguments. Also, the BBC calls me for an opinion on US Supreme Court Cases (true story).
   Year and a Week Ago Today: UCBMUNC 2005 - In the middle of all our MUN drama we decide to all pack into a small hotel room or two for a weekend. We survived with fairly little intrigue considering. I think I was the only one to win an award (Shemek might have as well?)
   Year Ago Last Wednesday: Classified - Classified. Sorry for the broken picture links.
   Year Ago Last Thursday: Elections & Disenfranchisement - The new ASUCD Senate is seated "ushering in an era of unprecedented diversity of affiliation on the Senate." In contrast, with the seating of this year's new Senate, the Leadite party controls 2/3rds of the Senate, the Executive Office, and has appointed all but one of the Supreme Court Justices (I was a Focus appointee).
   Year Ago Last Friday: The Emo-Agricola International - In an international development I've found reason to cite with suprising frequency in the year since, Bolivian President Carlos Mesa attempts to resign only to have his resignation rejected by the Bolivian Senate. Also, the former president of rebel Chechnya, Aslan Maskadov, meets a humble end at the hands of his own bodyguards in a basement. Also, a hawt picture of Kristy.
   Year Ago Yesterday: Senate Finds Chief Justice to Have Jedi Powers - Sen. Darth Lloyd was instrumental in convincing them that I used mind tricks to cause 9 Internal Affairs Commissioners & 12 Senators to think that a 5 line Bill meant the opposite of what it actually meant. And I would have gotten away with it too if it hadn't been for those pesky kids "your mind tricks don't work on me" Kalen the Hutt! Also the Lebanese Prime Minister tries for the second time to resign, but once again his resignation is rejected by the parliament.

   So as you may have gathered we had a bit of a debacle in Senate on Thursday. The novel-length account of the situation can be found on daviswiki, or a shorter summary can be found in someone's livejournal here (though note that the candidates are allegedly on disciplinary probation, not grade-related academic probation -- see my comment if you read the entry for further explanation).

Prologue
   Basically, though it was discovered that some candidates were on disciplinary probation (ie plead guilty before SJA for some kind of ethical or criminal lapse), once they'd been elected but before taking office, they had survived what was supposed to be a verification of disciplinary probation earlier because due to some kind of miscommunication they weren't reported as on probation. The question came to the Court to decide whether or not the verification had taken place, or should be done again.
   The seating of senators was delayed while everyone waited for the Court to hear the case, and the outgoing Senators remained in office for two additional meetings because Senate met on the last day of fall quarter and first day of winter -- and the Court needed three days notice to have a hearing. When the Court did meet, it was discovered that quorum could not be met because Justice Johnson had neglected to inform anyone that he no longer attends UC Davis. Anyway, I decided to hold the Hearing and then have Senate decide if it was legitimate before the ruling was announced. Plaintiff and Defence did not object to this arrangement prior to the hearing; both sides objected following the hearing. Which brings us to last night:

Extraordinary Session of ASUCD Senate of 12 January 2006
   The Senate rejected the legitimacy of the hearing, insisting that quorum rules are there for a reason. They then held a lengthy closed session during which they all tried to escape through the window and determined that election rules are not there for a reason, and eliminated the requirement that candidates not be on disciplinary probation. They further removed the Elections Committee Chairman from the certification process --because he didn't agree with their actions--, thereby breaking with all precedent (all political elections in the United States are certified by the elections administrater). While they were working on this bill during the closed session, however, the Court had been convened across the hall. Once the Senate read their bill (SB 36), the Court read the order they had just completed themselves:

It has been argued that Judicial Code Three Section 301 could literally be interpreted to grant quorum during the hearing. The Court rejected this as against the Spirit of the bylaws.

Senate appears now to be seriously considering overriding bylaws to accomplish the opposite of their spirit.

If the Senate does this, the Court's objection to the literal interpretation of section 301 will be overridden. Quorum will immediately and retroactively be considered to have existed during the hearing. It's opinion will immediately be official and binding.

Weekly ASUCD Report
   A bill was passed unanimously by the ASUCD Senate two weeks ago which would allow Court members to write legislation. Currently the judicial codes forbid Court members from writing legislation, making them the only nine members of ASUCD who cannot write legislation (Aggie employees can't either but thats their rule, not an ASUCD one).
   I'm told by Senator Thomas Lloyd, though independant confirmation hasn't been successful yet, that President Gallagher vetoed the legislation. Lloyd claims that I tricked everyone (all of IAC, all of the Senate) because it didn't explicitly say that Court members could only write legislation on the Judicial Codes and Article VII of the Constitution (the judicial article). I think this is preposterous considering the legislation is only like five lines. If they interpreted it to be wildly different than it actually was, its certainly not my fault they failed to read and interpret FIVE FREAKING LINES.
   Consequently, Lloyd has authored a bill which went through Internal Affairs Commission on Monday which very explicitly removes the rights of Court members to write legislation on things other than the Judicial Codes or Article VII. Incidently there is no precedent anywhere in the world outside ASUCD for abridging our ability to write legislation, nor is there any reason that holds any water. The one that continually comes up is "whats to stop them then from abusing their power and writing legislation giving them more power," to which the obvious answer is that it has to go through the entire process of IAC, Senate and President. Additionally, wouldn't that same argument make for a much more realistic reason to ban the president from writing legislation? And what about the Senate??
   If the previous legislation was really vetoed, I say the Senate should override the veto this Thursday. If one really wants to push the argument that the Court is going to go mad with power with the ability to write legislation, I urge that one at least be consistent and similarly ban the executive office from writing legislation other than for the Government Codes and Article III of the ASUCD Constitution.

   Otherwise, the new Senators were sworn in last Thursday, ushering in an era of unprecedented diversity of affiliation on the Senate. Previously dominated by the two parties, Lead and Focus, the Senate now consists of four Leadite senators, three Focite senators, three independant senators (two republicans and the president of the davis college democrats), and two Urger senators. Also IAC Chairperson Kahliah Laney has become the most recent in a string of resignations.

[Poll #451234]

Rating Elections
   Polling here has indicated that Emosnail readers consider the ASUCD Election to have had a Shadyness Rating of 9.42, with 83% of the respondants indicating a 10.0. Incidently, once the issue could no longer be appealed to us (after the Senators were sworn in), we discussed the topic on the ASUCD Supreme Court. Fortunately most of them knew little about the case, so I gave them the relevant facts while avoiding leading them to any particular conclusion. The members of the ASUCD Supreme Court all found that Roy's actions did not constitute falsification, and furthermore, finding so after having verified the information oneself sounds suspiciously like one is "gunning for him." I would concur: what is listed are possible examples of falsification, but that does not mean they are in all occurances falsification. Clearly, the information was not falsified. Also if they found on the high end of their discretion in this case, what the crap would constitute less severe falsification??

   The MUN election occurred today. In lieu of rumours that there had been intended elections fraud, Dana Davies-Shaw, former ASUCD Senate candidate, Campus Judicial Board member, and Canadian, was brought in to observe the ballot counting.
However, former Secretary-General Catherine Myung (who appears to still be planning everything two weeks after resigning) instructed those wishing to cast their ballots via email to email them to her. I pointed out to her that they ought to be instructed to at least cc these to Davies-Shaw as well. Her response as "I was just planning on printing out all the email ballots, and have them mixed into with the regular ballots. But if Dana is okay having ballot's cc'ed to him, I will send out another email about it. Or I could forward all the ballots to him as well." She never sent out another email. We are therefore depending entirely on Myung's word alone that she faithfully forwarded all the emailed ballots and didn't make any up. I don't mean to say that she did use the opportunity to conduct elections fraud, but its just a huge blow to the legitimacy of the election.

   I've never really understood people who boycott elections, like the Shiites in the recent Iraqi election. Aren't you mainly just screwing yourself over? However, I found myself not voting in the MUN election. It wasn't a boycott in the same way -- I didn't publicize my abstention to any of the relevant parties as a political statement. Rather, it was more for myself. I couldn't in good conscience participate in this election -- any candidate that the current leadership didn't like had been intimidated out of running (I myself would have considered running I think if I didn't feel it would just result in a concerted slander campaign against me and being the victim of completely unfair and fraudulent tactics just like last time). I couldn't grant it the credence of legitimacy without making myself feel sick, so I abstained from participating.

   The amendment to the MUN bylaws I wrote last week to eliminate the Secretariat's ability to expel people from the club without consulting the membership was not voted on today because it was placed sixth our of seven agenda items, and by that point in the meeting we had lost quorum. I have written another amendment that will require amendments to the bylaws to be considered first on the agenda, because otherwise they could be put off indefinitely, as regularly a good third of the members present at the beginning of a meeting are gone by the end.


Shady Quote of the Day
amazonjedimaster: you have no morals of any sort to hold you back
amazonjedimaster: ^_^
PrzemekP: ha! I do
PrzemekP: I have morals, they're just weird and skewed

Previously on Emosnail
   Two Years Ago Today: Another Party on Loyola - and one next door, to which I believe Shemek showed up.
   Year Ago Today: Dancing in the Kitchen - Four months for Kristy and I. Today it has been 16 months of the strongest sauce and heartred.