Old ec-inform@mit.edu email digests

From ECWiki

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "==Feb 17, 2017== Subject: introducing ec-inform: the newest platform for nonessential discourse Hi EC- Part of my job as president is to act as a liaison between EC and other ...")
Line 2: Line 2:
Subject: introducing ec-inform: the newest platform for nonessential discourse
Subject: introducing ec-inform: the newest platform for nonessential discourse
 +
Hi EC-
Hi EC-
Line 10: Line 11:
Now for the good stuff:
Now for the good stuff:
 +
'''In East Campus'''
'''In East Campus'''
Line 43: Line 45:
Allie
Allie
 +
 +
 +
==March 6, 2017==
 +
 +
Subject: EC inform vol.2: electric boogaloo
 +
 +
 +
Hi all-
 +
 +
 +
Welcome to ec-inform! We've moved to this list, so people on ec-residents@ who haven't added themselves won't get these emails anymore. The content of these emails is not secret and I am totally fine with non-EC people being on this list. However, I would like to clarify that anything I write here will naturally be a bit biased in one way or another and out of respect for that and for the issues that I will talk about I ask that nothing I say on this list be published in the Tech, especially without my permission. That sounds juicier than it really is- I don't have a problem with the Tech, I just don't wan't to step on any toes by yelling from the rooftops about ongoing projects that involve more people than just me.
 +
 +
 +
'''In East Campus'''
 +
 +
EC and Senior Haus exec along with several reps from smoking halls met again with the Committee on Student Life about smoking halls. My own feeling was that this meeting went really well and the members of the CSL heard our side of the story. Two things that I think really resonated with them were that many people actually come to MIT as smokers and quit while they are here and that upperclassmen on smoking halls will actively discourage others from picking up smoking. Something that we tried to emphasize is that effective change in places like EC and SH has to come from the inside, and if we (meaning students and admin) were to all agree that smoking should be phased out from the dorms, that the people on the smoking halls would have to be the ones to come up with and implement that decision rather than it being a ban from above. I'm personally happy with the level of understanding that we reached at that meeting, but there still hasn't been a decision made about smoking and we will meet at least once more this semester.
 +
 +
Senior Haus had their optional drug and alcohol screening last Thursday, and from my conversations with Sabrina Madera (one of their presidents) it went really well. There was a large turnout and it sounds like everyone was satisfied with how their information was handled. With that knowledge, it sounds like this would be a good thing to also do in EC- we'll talk about it at Housecomm on Wednesday.
 +
 +
The last thing is that we have our mostly-definitive list of New House transfers to EC, and Henry and I are in contact with them to talk about what their needs are. We have one small group and several individuals. Right now the plan is to put the individuals through hall rush with the freshmen if they are interested. The only problem with this is that they would need to be here before the regular return date to do that, so I am trying to work with DSL and DormCon to give them all early returns that don't count towards EC's quota.
 +
 +
 +
'''In the UA Council'''
 +
 +
The UA Council didn't meet last week, so there isn't a whole lot of news there. UA elections will likely be pushed back due to logistical issues within the UA elections commission, but campaigning should be starting relatively soon.
 +
 +
 +
'''In DormCon'''
 +
 +
Something that has been in the works for the last year or two is the REX-Rush agreement, which would be a contract between the dorms and IFC/PanHel regarding practices during REX and greek rush and promoting more cooperation. There are definitely dorms that suffer a lot more from dirty rushing practices than we do and I'm sympathetic to them, but I'm not super happy with the things that IFC wants from us in return. As it stands, here are some of the desires from both sides:
 +
 +
Dorms want:
 +
* no wearing letters to REX events
 +
* no taking freshmen from REX events
 +
* no trash-talking dorms
 +
* accountability with early returns: if you get one from your dorm, your first obligation is to your dorm, not your frat or sorority
 +
 +
Frats (and sororities, but mostly frats) want:
 +
* no wearing dorm REX shirts to rush events
 +
* no taking freshmen from rush events
 +
* no trash-talking frats or sororities
 +
* no events with alcohol during frat rush (eg EC parties)
 +
* no 'mandatory' events held during times that frats have rush events (most hall bonding falls under this)
 +
 +
I'm down with the idea of a REX-Rush agreement, but the last two points are complete non-starters for me and I have no intention of signing EC on to this agreement if they won't give them up. Having a good relationship with IFC and PanHel is nice and I want to be supportive of other dorms who might have more to gain from this than we do, but not at the expense of all of the things that we do during that week that are really important to halls individually and EC as a whole. I also think that we could achieve most of our goals without this agreement if we needed to. I'm definitely not the only one who feels this way and this negotiation is still very much ongoing, so if we do reach an agreement I don't think it will look like the one above.
 +
 +
Another cool thing that DormCon is working on is improving our approach to Gender Inclusive Housing. The way that it is now, the GIH-related questions on the housing forms are not very clear and don't give a great idea of what the point is, which is to make sure that residents of all gender identities are placed in an environment and with a roommate that they are comfortable with. The DormCon i3/RAC chairs are working with Abigail Francis from the Rainbow Lounge on this, and we're hoping to figure out something that will make GIH simpler and clearer for everyone.
 +
 +
 +
'''Secret Bonus Section!'''
 +
 +
Many of you may be aware of Trump's recent rollback of Obama's recommendations of protections for transgender or gender non-conforming students. This likely would not have affected MIT anyways, but Suzy Nelson did (an interview)[http://news.mit.edu/2017/3q-suzy-nelson-protections-transgender-students-0227] with MIT news reaffirming MIT's commitment to protecting transgender students and community members. It's a good read if you are interested, and I think it's pretty clear that MIT wants to do all it can to step up when necessary.
 +
 +
 +
Feel free to discuss here or let me know privately if you have any thoughts or questions!

Revision as of 00:57, 20 September 2017

Feb 17, 2017

Subject: introducing ec-inform: the newest platform for nonessential discourse


Hi EC-

Part of my job as president is to act as a liaison between EC and other student government organizations like the UA and DormCon. However, there is a lot of information that I get during those extraneous meetings that is not necessarily high enough priority to bring to housecomm, but that you guys might still want to know about. That's where this swanky new email list comes in- about every two weeks (which is how often UA council and DormCon meetings happen) I will send out a sort of digest of things that are happening with EC exec and around MIT in general that I won't necessarily bring to housecomm because they are either lower priority or don't affect EC directly.

This will be the first installment of these emails, and I am sending it out to ec-residents. If you want to continue getting these emails, you should subscribe to ec-inform@mit.edu. Feel free to discuss the content of ec-inform emails on the same thread or on the list (or email me directly), but for this one please make sure you reply to ec-inform and not ec-residents.

Now for the good stuff:


In East Campus Meetings with the CSL about smoking halls in EC and Senior Haus will resume next week. You'll probably hear about this at housecomm if anything interesting happens.

I've contacted the manager of parking at MIT about designating some motorcycle parking spaces either in or near the EC courtyard to replace the not legitimate spots that our motorcycle-driving residents were just kicked out of. I don't know if this is possible or if it will actually happen, but the guy said that he would get back to me after he looks into what the options are.


In the UA Council What is the UA council? Well, Sophia Liu (the UA president) explained it as sort of the legislative branch of the UA, which is the representative and governing body of all undergraduates. The Council is a group of dorm representatives (usually presidents) as well as reps from the IFC, PanHel, and the ILGs. We discuss things that the UA exec brings to the table and sometimes vote on them. Meetings are biweekly in W20-400 and open to any undergraduate; for meeting times and agenda items you should add yourself to ua-council-listeners@mit.edu.

We voted to approve a joint statement with the GSC (graduate student council) and PDA (postdoctoral association) that Sophia signed on behalf of the UA regarding the executive order on travel and immigration. This statement, which I can't find online but I imagine will appear eventually, basically condemns the executive order on the grounds that it directly interferes with the ability of some MIT students and postdocs to study here and it negatively impacts MIT's ability to function as an institution. We had a bit of a discussion about how to approach these issues in the future- in what circumstances, if any, is it okay for the UA to make a statement on political issues? This conversation is still ongoing, but we left thinking that it is probably more okay for the UA to make a statement if a political event has a direct and measurable impact on MIT undergrads than it would be otherwise. The GSC has a policy platform (found here) that outlines the things that the GSC is permitted to make political statements about. The UA will probably begin working on writing one of those, so if you have opinions about what things should or shouldn't be on there (and if it should even exist), please let me know. I'm personally kind of uncomfortable with the idea of the UA Public Affairs Committee (which is not directly elected) making statements about political issues on behalf of all undergrads, but we agreed that the UA Council should have amendment and approval power over any statements released, which I feel a bit better about.

There was also a rundown of some of the ongoing issues that the UA committees will be working on this semester. Here are some of the ones that I found most interesting:

  • Implementing a shuttle system where you can call a shuttle to take you between any two points within a defined perimeter
  • Working with the Chancellor and the various deans of education to improve advising
  • Starting a system for S^3 where students could submit and also view evaluations for S^3 staff members to increase transparency and accountability and, hopefully, student satisfaction with S^3 services


In DormCon What is Dormcon? It's kind of like the UA, but only for dorms. DormCon takes care of CPW/REX, funding for dorm events, facilities and security issues, party registration issues, and so on. DormCon is made up of the exec board and the dorm presidents, but only the dorm presidents are voting members. DormCon meetings are also approximately biweekly and open to all undergrad dorm residents. The meeting location rotates between the dorms; for meeting places and times, you should add yourself to dormcon-announce@mit.edu.

We had a visitor from the MIT Water Club, which is working to install more efficient shower heads from a startup called Nebia on campus. It sounds like they are in the process of putting some in the Z center and hope to expand to some dorms eventually, but I have doubts about whether or not they will be compatible with EC's showers.

Party registration is complicated and annoying so the Risk Management chairs are trying to make it better, but it turns out that parties are different in each dorm and it's hard to be realistic and also legal at the same time when it comes to alcohol consumption by undergrads. The ideal outcome is that we end up with a party registration system that is simple and doesn't punish large events by imposing expensive fees and unnecessary police details but also maintains some accountability if anything at an event goes wrong.

Allied Barton, which is the company that MIT contracts with for security personnel, has a new supervisor- the old guy (Felipe) was replaced with a new guy (Jensen). This doesn't affect EC at all because we don't have Allied Barton security, but if you spend a lot of time at other dorms you might notice.

Lastly, we approved the budget for the spring semester, which includes $10,000 for dorm events (this is part of how Bad Ideas, Steer Roast, and Fred Fest get funded, btw) and $500 per dorm for CPW.


That's all I have for the last two weeks or so. Stay tuned for more!

Allie


March 6, 2017

Subject: EC inform vol.2: electric boogaloo


Hi all-


Welcome to ec-inform! We've moved to this list, so people on ec-residents@ who haven't added themselves won't get these emails anymore. The content of these emails is not secret and I am totally fine with non-EC people being on this list. However, I would like to clarify that anything I write here will naturally be a bit biased in one way or another and out of respect for that and for the issues that I will talk about I ask that nothing I say on this list be published in the Tech, especially without my permission. That sounds juicier than it really is- I don't have a problem with the Tech, I just don't wan't to step on any toes by yelling from the rooftops about ongoing projects that involve more people than just me.


In East Campus

EC and Senior Haus exec along with several reps from smoking halls met again with the Committee on Student Life about smoking halls. My own feeling was that this meeting went really well and the members of the CSL heard our side of the story. Two things that I think really resonated with them were that many people actually come to MIT as smokers and quit while they are here and that upperclassmen on smoking halls will actively discourage others from picking up smoking. Something that we tried to emphasize is that effective change in places like EC and SH has to come from the inside, and if we (meaning students and admin) were to all agree that smoking should be phased out from the dorms, that the people on the smoking halls would have to be the ones to come up with and implement that decision rather than it being a ban from above. I'm personally happy with the level of understanding that we reached at that meeting, but there still hasn't been a decision made about smoking and we will meet at least once more this semester.

Senior Haus had their optional drug and alcohol screening last Thursday, and from my conversations with Sabrina Madera (one of their presidents) it went really well. There was a large turnout and it sounds like everyone was satisfied with how their information was handled. With that knowledge, it sounds like this would be a good thing to also do in EC- we'll talk about it at Housecomm on Wednesday.

The last thing is that we have our mostly-definitive list of New House transfers to EC, and Henry and I are in contact with them to talk about what their needs are. We have one small group and several individuals. Right now the plan is to put the individuals through hall rush with the freshmen if they are interested. The only problem with this is that they would need to be here before the regular return date to do that, so I am trying to work with DSL and DormCon to give them all early returns that don't count towards EC's quota.


In the UA Council

The UA Council didn't meet last week, so there isn't a whole lot of news there. UA elections will likely be pushed back due to logistical issues within the UA elections commission, but campaigning should be starting relatively soon.


In DormCon

Something that has been in the works for the last year or two is the REX-Rush agreement, which would be a contract between the dorms and IFC/PanHel regarding practices during REX and greek rush and promoting more cooperation. There are definitely dorms that suffer a lot more from dirty rushing practices than we do and I'm sympathetic to them, but I'm not super happy with the things that IFC wants from us in return. As it stands, here are some of the desires from both sides:

Dorms want:

  • no wearing letters to REX events
  • no taking freshmen from REX events
  • no trash-talking dorms
  • accountability with early returns: if you get one from your dorm, your first obligation is to your dorm, not your frat or sorority

Frats (and sororities, but mostly frats) want:

  • no wearing dorm REX shirts to rush events
  • no taking freshmen from rush events
  • no trash-talking frats or sororities
  • no events with alcohol during frat rush (eg EC parties)
  • no 'mandatory' events held during times that frats have rush events (most hall bonding falls under this)

I'm down with the idea of a REX-Rush agreement, but the last two points are complete non-starters for me and I have no intention of signing EC on to this agreement if they won't give them up. Having a good relationship with IFC and PanHel is nice and I want to be supportive of other dorms who might have more to gain from this than we do, but not at the expense of all of the things that we do during that week that are really important to halls individually and EC as a whole. I also think that we could achieve most of our goals without this agreement if we needed to. I'm definitely not the only one who feels this way and this negotiation is still very much ongoing, so if we do reach an agreement I don't think it will look like the one above.

Another cool thing that DormCon is working on is improving our approach to Gender Inclusive Housing. The way that it is now, the GIH-related questions on the housing forms are not very clear and don't give a great idea of what the point is, which is to make sure that residents of all gender identities are placed in an environment and with a roommate that they are comfortable with. The DormCon i3/RAC chairs are working with Abigail Francis from the Rainbow Lounge on this, and we're hoping to figure out something that will make GIH simpler and clearer for everyone.


Secret Bonus Section!

Many of you may be aware of Trump's recent rollback of Obama's recommendations of protections for transgender or gender non-conforming students. This likely would not have affected MIT anyways, but Suzy Nelson did (an interview)[1] with MIT news reaffirming MIT's commitment to protecting transgender students and community members. It's a good read if you are interested, and I think it's pretty clear that MIT wants to do all it can to step up when necessary.


Feel free to discuss here or let me know privately if you have any thoughts or questions!

Personal tools
social events