Current GM and candidate Michael Zwack has written some comments, in which he says:

Together we need to identify issues so we can positively address them.

Oddly enough, we did that already. We’ve already been through the process of violations and sanctions, just last year, with the same candidates. There was a general consensus that the election rules were the problem. One Senator even said, “What were we thinking when we approved them?”

The issues were identified, but no one “positively addressed” anything, and last year’s rules were copied and pasted into this year’s handbook. Same equations, same initial conditions. No one should be surprised by the same results.

The election process needs to be redesigned from scratch, keeping these facts at the center:

1. The point of elections is to discern the will of the students.
2. The point of rules is to ensure fairness.
3. The point of sanctions is to correct unfairness.

This implies that there should be no sanctions for something that does not create an unfair advantage. It implies that sanctions are not primarily punishments or political tools. It implies that they should be proportionate.

It also implies that election results should not be nullified unless there has been massive deception of the student body. Like, say, a candidate who is really an inflatable whale, or something.

The current rules prohibit too many things which do not cause unfair advantages, and they allow sanctions which simply add another layer of unfairness. RNE can issue any penalty it likes for any infraction. You can get all your posters torn down for using your campaign manager’s contact information instead of your own. (That happened two years ago.) You can lose postering rights, which are granted to everyone by the Student Rights and Responsibilities, for postering on the footbridge, which is not even RPI property. You can get your spending quota reduced for putting multiple candidate names on the same poster (though that rule appears and disappears.)

Study the election system carefully, and then ask: is this really a process for discovering the will of the student body? Is the victor its legitimate representative?

At the very least, it’s reasonable to answer “Not entirely.” There has to be something wrong with a system that produces results like “4 < 2″.

Student government has known about this for fifteen years. It is what brought the IOP into being. The problems it causes are obvious. Just look around: there are election posters when you should be studying for finals. And still no one has made elections fair and just.

I’m not even going to explain why this means you should vote for Arthur.

Please come and celebrate the 144th Grand Marshal of RPI : Arthur Galpin.

Various signs will be available to carry for all who want them, or bring your own!

There will be a brief meet ‘n greet with Arthur at 12:45 at the commons fountain where he will down the GM tophat. The parade starts at 1pm and will follow the route shown in the picture posted below. It will end outside the union, where we hope to have music and free food and drinks.

Please RSVP on Facebook (http://is.gd/bGVa6) and spread the word!

I am debating whether to :

1. Organize a massive iop. postering campaign to totally dominate Zwack’s retarded posters with awesome iop. posters.

2. Let things run their course and not waste my time with this nonsense.

3. Sneak into Zwack’s office and sneak iop. propaganda into all his files.

4. Some other devious scheme. I am sick of hearing about these so-called “Zwacktions”. As Ben Hunt said recently “I don’t even know why he’s running again”. What audacity to think he deserves to be the first GM in RPI history to serve a second term.

In anycase I may soon be reaching a breaking point. Something needs to be done to end this nonsense.

*note: someone pointed out that his campaign finances are supposed to be in the public record. According to that record, he’s spent hundreds, not thousands.

First, I was impressed by the high level of organization and professionalism in the debate operation. Brian Zaik was a very slick moderator and RPI TV was on top of things.

However, I quickly found myself bored by the candidates answers. There was little debate on issues, and the issues were mostly related to internal affairs of student government and not things which effect voters.  The viewers were left to make judgments based on the manner in which the responses were given, since the candidates agreed on almost everything. I think often the candidate who is the most relaxed appears the most confident. To that end, Zwack and Spitz seemed the most relaxed. However, I think Spitz got a bit too lazy at times. Niedhart acted as the experienced professional, and Hunt tried to be more relaxed and “cool”, empasizing all the lofty positions he has held in his 4+ years on campus.

Essentially it boiled down to a huge popularity contest between the candidates.

In last week’s Poly , Ashlee Giacalone wrote an article for the College Republicans. I thought it was a really, really lame article, but she made one good point: the student government is a mock up of real government.

I think its great that students can play pretend government if they want. Just don’t pretend you can make radical changes to campus. The closest thing we see in Student Government to making important decisions is the E-board, which has substantial control over cash flow to clubs. However, I am not sure I like the idea of a few people in a closed room deciding how my activity fee is spent.  Still, I also recognize the need for this system as opposed to a more free-market approach. There is also some potential for new programs I suppose, and I think the only tangible result I have seen is the web technologies group.

The whole discussion about “Committees” was rather hilarious. Seriously, what do these commites do? Organize other committes? I have no idea but I imagine they sit around and talk about what could be done or discuss internal affairs. I also found the fact that student government has a dance hilarious. I believe it was Hunt who talked about how the student government is so big and bloated that the hand is not aware what the foot is doing and vice versa. The dance somehow served to “unify’ the government. I think he just wanted another dance because he likes dances. Excellent use of institute resources. Whatever.

I also find it funny that a Greek endorsement means an almost guaranteed win when most greeks are rarely on campus and don’t deal with many of the issues on-campus students face.  The idea that student government can protect student’s rights, including greek rights, is also laughable. RPI is a private institution and technically we don’t really have any rights and never had any rights. The “rights” we have are fairly artificial and can be changed by the RPI administration. We are also never told what  “rights” student governemnt wants to save. The right to have a fork in commons? Free speech? (lol, good luck on that) The term “student’s rights” is mainly a catchphrase which sounds good in debate

I also have some remarks on the whole RNE fiasco. There is no doubt the RNE has too much power concentrated on a small group of people. The sanctions imposed on Hunt were too harsh and they should have forseen that he would attempt an appeal. His statements were not libelous and I feel that canidates should be able to point out weaknesses of other candidates as long as they do not resort to personal attacks or other nonsense.  I also felt the statement that “that Zwack has a twitter account that no one follows” should have carried more weight because that is patently false. Zwack has 228 followers on twitter and he prides himself in updating it every 10 minutes.

So, on Monday I  heard that he was forbidden to campaign and all his signs must be torn down, and then the next day during the afternoon I saw tons of big red Hunt posters all over campus, much to my confusion.  I’ll admit, I ripped one of his posters and tore another one mostly down. In this cell of the iop. we only tear down posters if they are in violation (vigilantes FTW). I met Askew in the union and he was wondering if iop had torn any of his posters down, since some were missing. I certainly didn’t and I don’t know anyone else involved in iop. who would have. I know one person (not involved with iop) who tears down Zwack posters for fun, and I am certain there are many other parties on campus tearing down posters. It’s a problem inherent in the postering system, especially when they become an eyesore on campus.

I personally am worried the RNE has conflicts of interest and I think this is inevitable when you have only a small group of people dedicated to running it. Therefore, the group’s power should be limited and major decisions should be checked by 3rd party figures such as the Rick Hart and union staff.

In conclusion, mock the vote and write in Arthur Galpin, Alby 4 PU. Send a message to student government that they that are taking things too seriously and you are tired of hearing all the drama and long winded rhetoric. Arthur is dependable, hes always there to listen and he will never waste your money on pet projects or internal affairs. The principle is simple: inanimate objects have no conflicts of interst, they have no selfish motives. If the student government is a mock up government, the iop is a mock up anarchist organization. With inanimate objects in power, power is returned to the people. Thus we can restore peace to the 3rd floor of the union , end the drama and all move on to more important things.

Also, make sure to write in Arthur Galpin for MMOC. I meant to get him on the ballot this year. Maybe we can at least make the top 10.

-AKira

“I had thoughts of entering public life once myself,” remarked the Duck; “there are so many things that need reforming. Indeed, I took the chair at a meeting some time ago, and we passed resolutions condemning everything that we did not like. However, they did not seem to have much effect.”

Sounds like RPI politics. If a duck can do it, why not an inflatable whale?
The Rocket from that story is an interesting character who ought to run for Student Senate next year. Or maybe he’d fit in with RNE.

*even an office as pointless as Vice-President.

-Akira

I have decided the time has come for a new manifesto – a call to arms for my next generation of supporters. First, here is a little history:

My earliest campaigns in 1997 fought against the uselessness of student government and the tyranny of the RPI administration. We protested the lack of student gov. involvement in things that matter and we protested the mandatory laptop program. We protested the uselessness and outright silliness of student elections and the GM position. We protested for freedom – freedom from oppression, freedom to have our voices heard, and freedom to choose the computer and operating systems we wanted.

Upon the arrival of Dr. Jackson in 1999, we protested the “Ren-suh-leer Plan” and the powerplays which shifted focus away from engineering and redirected massive amounts of funding to pet projects. We protested the way the grad students got screwed and the increased workloads on TAs. We protested the way laptop based classes ruined our education. We protested the lack of parking, increased tuition, the apathy of the student body and the continued uselessness of student government. We battled the wind, the rain and the RNE. We stood strong in the face of the naysayers and the idealists.

In 2007, we protested the disbanding of the faculty senate and in 2008 we continued to protest with ioperatives participating in a sit-in along with disgruntled faculty and peers. In 2009 we participated in the Uprise at 5! and protested layoffs, fiscal mismanagement, lack of fiscal transparency, the screwing of the RAs, the ridiculousness of the CLASS Initiative, and the free-speech fiasco with Wafaa Bilal.

Today, we have new things to protest: the destruction of the foreign language department and Dr. Jackson’s new feudal mansion. And we continue to campaign for student gov’t.  But we need renewed help and support.

There seems to be some confusion about what iop. is and what it stands for. First of all, it’s important to realize that I alone do not have complete control over the iop. While I am the main candidate and figurehead and am able to rally supporters and control many aspects of campus life, I do not and cannot control what the ioperatives do. But this is all part of my master plan. The iop is sometimes referred to as having a “cellular” organization structure. Each cell is run independently by a different group of ioperatives. The structure I am involved in is perhaps the most “official” but not necessarily the only one. The cellular structure is part of my plan because it means that if one cell disbands the organization will still carry on in other cells.

Here are the three important goals of iop today:

Fight the oppressors! The iop. can be thought of as an anarchist or minarchist organization. The iop believes inanimate objects can do a better job then people and we stand by that.

Hack! We like to hack and pull off awesome publicity stunts.

Be absurd! Even with all our serious plans and philosophizing, the iop. remains and should remain an absurdest organization.

I am looking for people to join the iop!!

If you are interested in joining please email arthur (at ) inflatablewhale.org

Ioperatives will be planning and organizing my 2010 campaign.

Notably unstable,

Arthur Galpin

Future Grand Marshall and De-Facto Emperor of RPI.

It was nice to see students being so welcoming to the potential students. First impressions are really important and a good social experience can win over students who may be undecided. I just really hope that RPI student’s will stay as polite and friendly as they were today in the coming months and years. Some RPI clubs have a reputation of being closeted and clique-y, but today it seemed everyone who was interested was welcome.  In the past, I’ve heard students warning a lot about the ratio and a lot of loathing about problems on campus to the accepted students.  It’s good for potential students to know the problems and issues, but many of these students have already decided to come to RPI, and such complaining is not a good way to start them off. People should start off with a positive attitude and feel they are coming somewhere where people are friendly and generally happy.. even if it’s not exactly true, starting people off with a good mentality will help things change. Maybe I am just imagining it, but it seem that over the years the amount of “school spirit” has increased and now people are showing genuine support for RPI and RPI’s  “nerd culture” in all its various forms.   And, with regard to the number of girls I saw among the visitors, I was impressed!

LONG LIVE THE WHALE!

- Akira

Lets consider an example — the “Trayless Tuesday’s” fiasco last year mandated by RPI’s “environazis”. A small band of environmentalists thought that they could go into the dinning halls and take control of the use of trays. Of course, anything that goes under the banner of “helping the environment” is considered a public good. Furthermore, this could save the university waste food and energy costs, so they went along. It is debatable whether the action helped keep students from taking too much food. As most students usually only use one plate, the effect is small at at best.  And lets face it, its always hard to gauge how much food we will want to eat. I am all for conserving food. It saves the institute money (my tuition dollars) which can go towards more useful things. But I am not a waste Nazi. I can tolerate a bit of waste. Anyways, as far as I can tell the effect on food waste was negligible at best. Lets face it, food is cheap in America and we pride ourselves in our excess. It’s the American way and its here to stay.

Another, more prevalent argument was that it would conserve “precious water” used during the washing of trays. In fact, some of the “environmentalists” here think we must conserve water at all costs. I once asked someone in Ecologic about this. The flustered environmentalist explained there is a desperate water shortage in this region. “Huh”, I thought, “if that is true, then why haven’t we heard anything about it? Why is this not in the news?” I told her I was skeptical and had never heard of such a thing. She looked at me, somewhat aghast and for a second, unsure of what to say. She then responded, “Well, I’m a civil engineer and there are lot of problems with delivering water to people. You really don’t have any clue.” And with that, she began to walk off. She was obviously a bit embarrassed about not being able to answer my question about the water shortage more directly, so I didn’t press her on the matter. But the point she made was a good one. I really don’t know much about the difficulties of delivering and maintaining a supply of freshwater to thousands of people. It always amazes me how reliably we can keep our water supplies clean and accessible and I commend the civil engineers for having figured out how to do this. I do not see any evidence of a water shortage in this area, but let us suppose there was a water shortage in the Troy, NY area. What is the best response? Is it to tell people to “stop using as much water”? I don’t think this is the best response, and here are some reasons:

1. How much water do people actually “waste”? Lets face it, most people are not wasting water. Sure, once and a while someone leaves their hose on, or leaves a dripping sink unfixed for an extended period of time. However, most people are fairly conservative in the amount of water they use, because they are paying for it in one way or another. People aren’t leaving their sink on just for the hell of it. They are either paying a usage rate per gallon or a tax to their local government to pay for their water. People know that water isn’t free and that wasting hurts themselves and their local community. So, if we tell people to stop using as much water, we are essentially inconveniencing them, and practically speaking, they will not be able to cut down much.

2. Psychologically, we are making people worry and stress about what is “waste” and what qualifies as legitimate use. I almost think all this worry about “waste” and recycling mugs and fussing about whether to leave the faucet on while brushing one’s teach actually makes everyone less productive. Additionally, while I’m on the subject, I hate how they keep the buildings at RPI so damn cold. I assume its to save money, not to help the environment. I think it makes people less productive. We need a warm, well lit environment to work. Not some dimly lit, “energy saving” environment. Many of these crazed environmentalists are trying to save some mythological “natural environment” in the middle of nowhere that only tree hugging hippies would ever want to visit and making our man-made environments miserable for the rest of us.

3. A solution by reducing use is only a temporary solution. Lets face it, there will always be inevitable growth in population and water use. Reducing each person’s use only delays the grow in overall use. Eventually, we will have to confront the problem head on. A much better solution would be proactive—something along the lines of building a new water treatment facility or improving existing facilities. The new “Eco-Hall Challenge” at RPI is an example of retroactive environmentalism. A recent poly article described the challenge as an “eight-week competition designed to educate students on life-long habits that reduce energy consumption.” I think this is a lame attempt by the RPI administration to cut energy costs because they have poor fiscal responsibility. Just like they decided to make our winter break longer to cut down on heating costs and came up with come some other excuse, now they are trying to make students use less electricity and calling it a “pro environment initiative”. You might even win free pizza!

Lets get something straight: fundamentally the administration here doesn’t really care about the environment. Like any major private corporation, all they care about one thing: keeping the profits coming in. But of course, this includes maintaining a good public image, and reducing energy costs. So, they are all for putting solar panels on the Houston Field House, as long as they get heavy subsidies from the federal gov’t so its economically effective, and as long as it looks good to potential students and other parties involved in the university. But what about a solar panel to power computers in the VCC? The administration decided it was an eyesore and tore it down. The whole SSTF is largely supported by the RPI administration as part of the profit agenda.

While I’m on the subject of environmentalism there is one last thing I want to point out – a lot of people this year are remarking on how much paper is being wasted by candidates during this year’s campaign. Many candidates have even taken pains to recycle paper for their posters. However, the mantra of “save paper, save a tree” is largely false. Increased demand for paper leads to more tree farms and more trees. Here’s what Edward L. Glashier, professor of economics at Harvard university has to say: “Our paper recycling programs cost time and money and do little to protect first-growth woodlands and rain forests. The trees used by paper mills are a renewable resource. When people use more paper, suppliers plant more trees. If we want bigger commercial forests, then we should use more paper not less. Our policies should directly protect important wildlife habitats, not try to reduce our demand for paper.” You can read more about the economic issues here. The number of trees in the US has grown by close to 400% since 1920 due to increased demands for tree based products. According to the website for International Paper : “In the next 30 years the U.S. could lose 44 million acres of forest to development.*  (*According to USDA estimates.) When you use paper, you help keep trees growing.  ”

When it comes down to the need to campaign, I have no qualms about the IOP printing out a large number of posters and dominating campus with them. So far, we’ve printed out around 650, and of those perhaps 300-400 have been posted. Of course, they are being torn down all the time. Of course, other candidate’s posters are being torn down or taken out by rain and wind (if you pay close attention to the posters from day to day, so you begin to see there is literally a poster war going on). Judging by the number of posters I see, I think the amount of paper being used by iop is currently below that of many of the animate candidates. I would like for that to change.

-Akira

Anyways, the iop. interviewed Paul to hear what he had to say about the now infamous Hand Party:

> What is the mission of the Hand Party?
— The mission of the Hand Party is to support and encourage people who have hands and are willing to use them.

> How did you come up with the name?
— I came up with the name Hand Party November 5th 1955.  I was hanging a clock when I slipped and hit my head on the sink.

> Is anyone else running on the Hand Party ticket?
—- As of this moment, no other candidates are running under our illustrious banner.

> The Hand party website is very satirical.. Are you worried it has become too satirical and people will not take it seriously? Or do you > think that it the humor has worked to your advantage so far .. and that people are tired of the uncreative posters and normal rhetoric?
—- Our internets are not satirical.  Putting your blind faith in my empty promises is all I ask.  Love is blind, and a promise is simply an emptiness to be later filled.  Blind faith in my empty promises defeats terrorism.  You don’t support terrorists do you?  I didn’t think so.  So you have to support me.  I’m anti-terrorist…

Now, while Calhoun has really gotten his name out there, due to some policy violations, heavy-handed (pun?) dealings of the RNE  have now limited his campaign, so that he is no longer able to poster on Freshman Hill or the CII/ DCC corridor.  I was considering to ask Arthur for an official iop. endorsement of  his campaign, however Arthur would never endorse an animate candidate, and the iop. needs to stand firm behind it’s proposition that inanimate objects would do a better job at governing than students. However, as Grand Poo-Bah and de-facto leader of iop., I am making a personal endorsement of Calhoun’s campaign.  In a sense, I am sacrificing matters of principle for matters of practicality. If this is confusing, so be it.  As far as I know, an full-fledged endorsement has only been done once in the past, and in that case it was an endorsement for an iop. candidate, who served as a surrogate for Arthur.  (That was an unusual circumstance, and just to be clear, Calhoun is not an iop candidate).  Also, note that I am only endorsing Calhoun, and not the Hand-Party or any other Candidates that may choice to run under it.

The reasons I endorse him:

– He made witty posters that challenged the status-quo
– I enjoyed reading his blog and he is clearly very intelligent and a true nerd. I don’t think he is the kind of person who would run merely to gain social standing or for the resume line. Rather, I feel he could represent the nerd populace well and bring creative ideas (not sure what they could actually do, but whatever) to student-gov. I don’t really know why he wants the position, actually, probably as a naive freshmen he thinks that student government actually does interesting things.
– Due to the notoriety of Arthur, this endorsement will probably hurt as well as help him, and in the balance will have negligible effects.
– His accopella videos on YouTube are really cool.
– This is mainly to spite RNE for placing such harsh sanctions on his campaign.
– His absurdism is follows the iop. spirit.

Of course, Arthur is still running for Class of 2013 President as well (along with all other positions) and you can still vote for him there.

-Akira, current Grand Pooh-Bah and de-facto leader of the iop.