‘Wankergate’: The Empire (a group of people hiding behind pseudonyms) strikes back…
Given the amount of ‘feedback’ that my last article generated, I think it is only fair that I clear up some of the niggling ‘inaccuracies’ that are said to be in my article. However, I am straight away going to say that the article was in no way intended as a personal attack on Castle or their JCR as a whole, but rather at their college officers for not giving the university community enough retribution for the attacks taken by the ‘EPC’ (what does this stand for anyway? ‘Extremely Pathetic Children?’) – The subsequent JCR meeting in opposition to the little action that was taken simply appears to position those present in support of the ‘lads’. I have since been made aware of the way in which those fired only found about about their dismissals at the same time as the rest of their college, via email, which is by no means professional. Anyway, I thought this would be easier to treat all of the comments separately (even if they have already been covered in the comments section of the last article):
Donnchadh: (Sorry for putting your name in inverted commas unnecessarily) – the events in our bar took place very shortly after opening time, at about 8.30pm – those that I served were (as I said in the article) sober and well-mannered, though I guess I was wrong about the latter! The only time that I dealt with the one person throwing up in the toilet was when he emerged after the incidents – I had not seen him in the bar prior to this.
‘A spectator’: Do you have a name? Anyway, I appreciate that I maybe was not entirely clear with my article, but the sacking of the Bar Chair for not training his staff properly WAS due to them selling alcohol to absurdly inebriated students, so saying that he was fired for serving drunken students was not as incorrect as you had hoped.
Donnchadh: I agree that the Castle JCR did appear to hold the meeting without full knowledge of exactly what went on that night – I also appreciate your willingness to use your name in this debate!
‘An observer’: If the Bar Chair is the only elected person to be in charge of the bar, whether he is a ‘glorified supervisor’ or ‘figurehead’ is irrelevant - He must surely still be the licensee? If he is not responsible for the training and licensing of the bar then who is?!
‘Curious’: As stated above, I did not deal with the person throwing up in the toilet until after the incidents – I was not even aware he was in there (our toilets are outside of the bar)
‘Concerned’: I refer you to Nicole’s comment below – “To condone their behaviour by saying that other groups behave in similar ways is absolutely disgusting. Yes sport socials may get drunk and do stupid things, for which alcohol is no excuse but I have not heard of them committing crimes such as sexual harassment or trashing bars to the extent that the offending group did that night. In my opinion damaging your own liver is up to you. And though I did not personally witness the events that took place, if anybody had shoved their genitals in my direction, being asked to forgive and forget is the last thing that I would expect to hear. As stated by Johnny, it is a criminal offence and I don’t hear the courts saying “Come on guys, let’s just forgive eachother and forget this ever happened.” The waste of police time if investigations really are still going on is a crime in itself. If the event had not occured they would be left to get on with solving real crimes and would not be disciplining drunken show offs. Lastly, as previously pointed out this ridiculous behaviour does not only affect those who took part, witnessed events or even just the members of Castle JCR. It is part of a much wider debate on the freedom of students to drink what they like. The university is already clamping down on sponsorship from bars which will negatively affect the experience of generations of students at Durham university, and this is a nasty example of a few people ruining things for everyone, the university will use it as proof for treating us all like children.”
Furthermore, are you saying that we should continue to just ‘shrug off’ this type of behaviour because it is all part of being a ‘lad’?! Good luck in the real world! And yes, you do seem to condone their actions when stating that they WILL be found innocent – The point that I was making about your ‘innocent until proven guilty comment’ was that you are interpreting it as ‘innocent and will not be proven guilty’. Obviously, from what I saw some of them must be guilty.
Derek Tbar: Nice use of ‘brain dead animals’. However, we are all allowed to exercise our right to contribute an opinion, which is why none of the comments have been removed!
Thom Addinall-Biddulph: “Of course it’s impossible for anyone not there from start to finish of the event to be completely sure what happened, but Jonny clearly knows what happened in Trev’s (on its own completely unacceptable, criminal and incredibly juvenile). For that alone the ‘boys’ should have been thrown out of the university, as they would have been in any other organisation” - Finally someone who has managed to put the series of events into a proper perspective (Not a university one) – In the real world such actions simply would not be tolerated
Andy C: I actually agree with you here, now that any window of opportunity has been lost. The police investigation will (hopefully) get to the bottom of the events of that night. However, when that is done the university HAS TO TAKE ACTION. In my opinion, those responsible for sexual assault should either be fined, have their honours taken away from them, or even thrown out of the university (regardless of how many phone calls it receives with offers of money from ‘concerned’ parents). What action against the Bar Chair has obviously not been overturned, so I think the best thing now is just to let the matter lie down. i.e. Do not hold meetings in response to the police findings.
This is clearly an incredibly emotive issue. On the one side, Castle has unfortunately and unjustifiably become synonymous with the EPC and their actions that night (although one person from Castle who commented on the previous article does state that they have a lot of support from the college). The firing of the Bar Chair may have been unfortunate, but he and some of the servers are the only people that the university was able to find immediate fault with, so their dismissal is not completely unfounded. On the other side, the rest of the university have yet to see any remorse from those involved or any action taken by the university against them directly – the Bar Chair was after all an indirect means of addressing the issue. Surely it is not completely inconceivable to understand why this second group are aggravated over the fact that by now we should have seen some sort of recompense, or else the matter should have been dealt with in private. The JCR meeting is actually what did most to publicise the events. I sympathise with both parties, and do think that, as the university has, we have no choice but to leave the issue in the hands of the police.
Jonathan Dixon
Clearly John, there can be only one solution – RAISE the average tuition fee. Now I’m not wanting to pull up the ladder from whence I came but it seems to me that we ARE becoming a social club rather than a top level uni that has consistently found itself among the best universities in the North East.
Are students spending too long in bar meetings, drama rehearsals or crawling round the Provost? I think we can all agree on that one! The fact remains that the priority has to be attainment in academia and on the rugby field. A slight ramping up of the fees would serve to remind us all that we “want to get our money’s worth” and before you know it the problem of the JCRC will naturally disappear.
I’ve got to agree with you totally Johnny. Those involved must either be found innocent or have to pay a small sum to the college (whether from parents or your own ‘spenders’). The fee you’re looking at should cover the cost of the furniture, and perhaps enough leftover to buy a couple of drinks for the other party (in order to say no hard feelings!)
I’m not totally against raising tuition fees, and must say that doing so might actually start to raise the value of a Durham Degree which is quickly becoming eclipsed by even former poly’s.
Tim and Dellis.
Where do the two of you draw evidence from to support the claim: raising tution fees will increase the value of the Durham degree and/or make students more likely to appreicate it?!
I have to break it to you; spending more than three thousand pounds a year on my degree (ignoring other costs) is no trivial matter – are you suggesting that for most people it is?
Aren’t you forgetting that lots of people have to take jobs to afford the current cost of university? – or is it just that you are implicitly assuming that rich people (I assume you are aware that there are people rich enough to be undeterred from university if there was a hike in tution fees) make better students academically?
Might I suggest that anyone stupid enough to pay three thousand pounds a year in tution fees for an extended gap-year/social is not likely to change their mind, give up the social and ‘get their money’s worth’ if fees are increased.
Oh, and remind me how you get better value for money by increasing the price of something – am I missing something?
Thanks for that Tim, it seems I’ve been banging my head against a brick wall on this issue for some time now. A nudge in FEES would enable us to boost investment in the KEY areas of IT, staffing and rugby facilities as well as provide an allowance for minority sports and hobbies such as drama and female athletics. An increase in investment in these areas would mean more students’ talents are catered for rather than leaving a bored, uninteresting mass at the mercy of the JCRC.
Spot on Dan. If we’re going to raise tuition fees, even just by £1500-2000 pounds a year, then those students who can’t afford it will have to work harder during holidays etc. Those tootling along on easy degrees, spending hours at JCR meetings, WILL NOT be able to afford it unless they knuckle down and work. It’s this ‘work hard-play hard’ ethos that made Durham what it was, and would eventually force up the standard once again.
Thanks for that Tim, I guess it’s a bit early to be deciding on how much the tweak to the annual fees should be although given recent news articles I don’t think you’re far off. I also have to be realistic with this and appreciate the point that Dan is making, I know as well as the next man that getting extra cash of a student is like getting a light off a local outside Klute!
Dan
‘rich people make better students academically’. I’m not so sure I agree with this fella. I think that Durham is currently about a 50:50 split between the rich and poor, but of the latter at least 30% come away with a 2:1 and in some cases even better.
Of course there’s the old adage that ‘money can’t buy you love’, but it can certainly buy you one hell of an education! In that sense I suppose I have to agree with you fella.
Total and utter codswallop! where on earth are you getting these so called statistics from? I’m one of the so called ‘poor’ members of this Uni, and i can guarantee my education has been perfectly fine so far. It sickens me to see people like Dan, Dellis and ‘Lee Anchovy’, talkin down their nose at the poor. Grow up you bunch of morons.
One small point: I’ve no doubt that the majority of those involved in the events of that night were ‘rich’ – it’s these people that have everything handed to them on a plate by their parents that behave like children. The rest of us work hard because we’re luckier to be here. Raising the tuition fees would only have a detrimental effect on the quality of student in my opinion
Jonny, I have to say that I am a tad disappointed with this comment but it does show the bias and prejudiced nature of the original article. Am I to imply that your crusade against the Castle lads is more to do with you being miffed about the “cards you have been dealt” rather than the actual events that night?
I say get that chip off your shoulder and focus on the positive sides of this uni.
Ryan and Lee, I’ll think you’ll find Dan was criticising other comments for implying that rich students make better ones. Please have the respect to read his whole comment and not to quote him out of context.
Dellis, regardless of Jonny having a “chip on his shoulder” or not his crusade against the Castle Lads seemed, from his original piece, more concerned with the girl with a “cock in her face”. Their actions are indefensible regardless of their social background, or the social background of those who witnessed it. To try and undermine Jonny’s piece in this way in not constructive.
The castle “lads” involved should only be excused by being found innocent through independent police/internal JCR investigations – not because a critic has been dismissed for being biased.
Finally, while yes there are positive things about this Uni it does not mean acts of sexual assault and vandalism should go unpunished.
Dellis, having re-read this briefly I do agree that Jonny’s post about the wealth of those involved was not needed, and damaging to his position which I have defended up until this point. I apologise if my comment does not reflect this.
Jonny, the social background of those involved shouldn’t matter, nor their subsequent attitude to university life. They should be judged by their conduct – which was appalling.
I can’t help but feel this should not be a debate about tuition fees or class divides within Durham.
I can remember when Durham21 was a magazine, and not some trite message board.
Bring back student journalism.
Alex: Which is unfounded. What would constitute student journalism? Given that the article follows on from a story about students, written by a student, edited by students and put on a student website (by students). You’re also writing off all the other articles on d21 without any basis for doing so – are they also trite message boards?
So tell me, what sort of student journalism did you have in mind? Maybe you could bring it back with your next article, or your next trite blog post perhaps?
Alex, I can remember when durham 21 was written on papyrus! with dog sh*t for ink. If you want to have a debate about the ethics of 18th century tapestry and cutlery go and log onto http://www.dullasadullasaurus.dull.com
A comment from the previous article: “Palatinate wasn’t allowed to publish what it knew because, frankly, DSU was shitting itself about getting sued.” -Anonymous
Until Palatinate secures funding from sources other than DSU and becomes a stand-alone entity it has absolutely no right to bitch about censorship. I’d like to see the editors print their ‘we-know-the-full-story’ shite if they, and they alone, were responsible for any legal repercussions.
Durham21, even in its current state, pisses all over Palatinate and then shakes the last few drops into it’s bloodshot eyes and quivering lips. Jonny Dixon, I salute you.
In my experience there are people who are perhaps more likely to cause trouble as well as people who wouldn’t hurt and fly amongst students from all social and economic backgrounds and cannot believe that this is even being discussed in this thread.
This is about students who did something that has to be considered unacceptable, who could be from any and most likely a variety of backgrounds.
Tuition fees are a seperate issue entirely.
*hurt a fly
Some guys got drunk, made some incredibly silly choices and should stand accountable for their actions. I hope they are made to. Nothing more nothing less. If I was paying £20,000 a year for my degree I would still engage in extra curricular activity, including indulging in an alcoholic beverage from time to time.
To quote an insightful comment made earlier by Tim: “Those tootling along on easy degrees, spending hours at JCR meetings, WILL NOT be able to afford it unless they knuckle down and work. It’s this ‘work hard-play hard’ ethos that made Durham what it was, and would eventually force up the standard once again.”
Im currently sitting on a decent first in Economics and haven’t missed a JCR meeting this year…
Oh and sometimes I even play sports. Get a grip.
Long live student democracy.
Leave your response!