Talk:May 2010 FiCom Opinion Poll

"cutting stipends to council officers"

Please mind the politics and correct that statement. I know what you mean by it, but it's libelous. I think you meant "cutting stipends to council and committee officers". (Rob 04:57, 3 September 2010 (UTC))


 * Please stop trying to pick a fight over every little thing bodies that aren't Community Council try to do. It's tiresome, and counterproductive to actually working together seamlessly. Given the new semester and new members of Council, perhaps it's time to make an actual effort to bury the colloquial hatchet and quit taking every abbreviation or error personally (for the record, the actual survey mentions both council and committee officers, and has done so since its creation). Also, check your dictionary -- I'm not sure "libelous" means what you think it does. ~ madeleine 06:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I think it does. A written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression. (One that council officers are the only officers to receive a stipend.)


 * It's counterproductive to this organization as a whole when FiCom is constantly trying to assert an executive role over other committees. It does not hold that position because it is not elected by the community at large to do so. And as long as it acts like it is, I will fight that. There is nothing personal about this.(Rob 19:16, 3 September 2010 (UTC))


 * By assuming the worst of FiCom, you create a counterproductive relationship. You interpreted a careless oversight as an act of libel, which was far, far from what we had intended. Please cease assuming that FiCom is "constantly trying to assert an executive role over other committees." That is incorrect. Our role is overseeing the SAF, with the understanding that Council has the ability to overturn decisions when necessary. In general, I would hope Council has much more important work to do than micromanaging FiCom. Agv07 21:44, 3 September 2010 (UTC)