—___ <<<

Se

ERR ENE I PR ee Set eee Ri le BET

| know if ir is deliberate or if it was an error.

 

 

the

Bile Press

Volume 22 + Issue 17 -February 11 1998
Room 1020-700 Royal Avenue
New Westminster, BC V3L 5B2
general@op.douglas.bc.ca

Phone 525.3542

Fax 527.5095 or 525.3505
David Lam Office

Room A3107

Phone 527.5805

he Other Press is Douglas
College's autonomous student
newspaper, :

We've been publishing since 1976. The
Other Press is run as an anarcho-syndicalist
commune. We take turns acting as sort of an
executive officer for the week, but all the
decisions of this officer must be ratified at a
special bi-weekly meeting, by a simple majority
in the case of purely internal affairs, but by a two
thirds majority in the case of...

The OP is published weekly during the fall
and winter semesters and monthly [as a
magazine] during the summer.

The Other Press is made by Douglas College
students. All DC students are welcome to join.
(Bored, Lonely, creatively repressed, need
something on your resume, or??? Come down to
room 1020. We're usually friendly and we have
lots of toys. No experience required.)

We receive our funding from a student levy
collected every semester at registration, and from
local and national advertising revenue.

The Other Press is a member of the
Canadian University Press (CUP), a cooperative
of student newspapers from across Canada. We,
generally speaking, adhere to CUP’s Statement
of Common Principles and Code of Ethics,

The Other Press reserves the right to
choose what to publish; however, we'll print
most things, unless they're racist, sexist,
homophobic, or really illegal.

All opinions appearing in the Other Press
are the responsibility of their creators and are
not necessarily the opinions of all members
of the Other Press. We try to believe in the
freedom of the press.

‘We want you to be part of the publishing
process, so when you submit a letter or article to
us, include a way we can contact you. We realize
that you've already spent a good deal of time
preparing a submission, but typos happen,
tenses change, participles dangle; we need to

Phone numbers are not published and
pseudonyms are accepted. Everyone has an
opinion, and we'd like to make sure yours is
clear.

Letters may be proofread, but are not edited
except for length, Keep in mind that if you don't
submit it on disk, some poor soul will have to
type it for you.

Athletics ~ Hamish Knox
sports@op.douglas.bc.ca
Arts & Entertainment - Elijah Bak
a&e@op.douglas.be.ca
Coquitlam - Lorenzo Sai, acting
cogq_coordinator@op.douglas.bc.ca
Creative - Gweny Wong, acting
general@op.douglas. be.ca
CUP Liaison ~ Johnson Tai
cup @op.douglas.bc.ca
Distribution - Geoff McDonald
advertising@op.douglas. bc.ca
Features - Monique Tamminga, acting
features@op.douglas. bc.ca
News - Jim Chliboyko
news@op.douglas.bc.ca
Opinion/Editorial - Tom Laws
opinions @op. douglas. be.ca
Photography - David Tam
photo@op. douglas. be.ca
Production - Susanna Kong, acting
production_co@op.douglas.bc.ca
Systems Operator ~ Michael Pierre
op_web@op.douglas. bc.ca

Johnson Tai, Trevor Hargreaves,
Kevin Sallows, Omar Tapia
Liebowitz, Homan Sanaie, Jason
Wan Lim, Kristina Holtz. Why so
few? Hello? Anyone?

Advertising - John Morash
ad@op.douglas. be.ca
Bookkeeping - John Morash
Production Resource - Trent Ernst
production@op.douglas. be.ca
Editorial Resource - Corene McKay

ed_res@op.douglas.bc.ca

All materials appearing in the Orher Press are copyright
their creators and may not be reproduced in any form
without their creators’ express written consent,

 

 

The Wels e ConsPipacy

     
   
    
   
 

   

  

Letters

Facts vs. opinions

Upon reading the headline “Fired for
blowing the whistle” in your February

4th issue, I was dismayed to see that, in
the opinion section of the Other Press at

least, accusation is more effective than
evidence. In wondering how well their
Student Society is working, I hate to
think of the number of students who
read this headline, or the accusatory
article that follows it, and swallow the

strong claims without demanding much

evidential support; allowing them to
somehow seem to represent reasonable
conclusions, though without any
reasonable evidence.

There are presently several female
instructors from the Linguistics
Department with long histories of

serious sexual misconduct at the college.
While there is absolutely nothing behind
this claim (I made it up, department and
‘ all) it would stand a very good chance of
maturing to live the full life of a ‘scandal’

if it was: 1) interesting enough to be
repeated by several people through the

college; 2) was made to seem real by an
actual investigation into the actions of

one instructor; 3) made all the more
suspect (and juicy) by some kind of
confidentiality; and (this is the one to
note) 4) politically advantageous to
some person or some group to fan the
accusatory flames.

In my eyes (and foundational to a

liberal democracy), there is a burden of

SKALLY mM

THAT THE MONE
DIVERTED ee

The Troth ts Out there!

Y Sourc€s

FOR UFO RESEARCH

opinions @op.douglas.be.ca

proof required to move any accusation
in the direction of truth. Without taking
on the dozens of accusations made in
these past weeks (rumours, letters, and
even a petition making claims varying
from misleading to completely wild), I
will address a few points which are
particularly relevant to my role as
Speaker for the DCSS Representative
Committee. Being Speaker essentially
means that after being elected to the
Student Society Representative Commit-
tee, I have been elected by my fellow
representatives to chair their meetings,
ensuring that the decisions made there
are made properly (by the majority, etc.).
In a memo distributed by the previous
Business Manager of the Society, was a
claim, since reprinted in the Other Press,
implying that all current DCSS
executives have, at one time or another,
signed the seemingly improper cheques:
“,..these cheques have all at one time or
another been signed by one of the
existing executive members.” This
statement has had powerful implications
by widening the seeming impropriety to
include every executive member. This is
the scope of ‘scandal’ that nearly stopped
any of Student Society’s money coming
forth from the College to the Student
Society, and which has supported the
idea of the ‘deeply corrupt’ environment
the Business Manager was dealing with.
This statement is misleading in the
extreme, and the scope of implication is

simply false. It shows itself to be false
most easily because, as Society Speaker, I
hold an executive position in the society,
and I have not (indeed do not even have
that authority) signed any Student
Society cheque of any sort. While the
special audit is still ongoing, there is
reason to think I was not the only one
who did not even mistakenly sign a
possibly bad cheque.

Consider, without evidence, the worst
accusations of widespread thievery are
completely true. If all sorts of people on
the executive of the representative
committee had signed improper cheques
(the evidence of that has not come
forth), the ‘automatic’ implication is that
the signers were, of course, cashing in.
But there is no reason to think so. Since
when has signing a cheque which one
may have every good reason to believe is
just a regular, valid cheque, when one’s
job including signing such cheques, been
worth the accusation of stealing? The
teller who cashes,a bunk cheque which
he has reason to believe is valid is no less
sinister.

Any accusations claiming that any
single representative, or even a handful
made the decision to dismiss the
Society's business manager cannot
contain any truth. Every student society
decision of any real size is made by the
entire committee. Executives have
meetings where they discuss how to best
do their jobs (e.g. reach out to the ©

membership, have effective meetings,
run the building) but no group,
executive or otherwise, made the
decision to take action on the business
manager’ role in dealing with financial

irregularities. The ‘executive’ cannot,

does not, and did not make any such
decisions. The representative committee .
as a whole does, and these decisions are
made through at least an agreeing
majority. Rarely do all representatives
agree, but the decisions are still made
and upheld.

As far as I can see, the most effective
way for those who disagree with a
democratically made decision with
which they personally: disagree, is to prey
on the average DC student's lack of
interest and therefore information about
what is happening in the running of
their Society, i.e. to smear, to misinform,
and thereby disrupt the effectiveness of
the rest of the committee. The amount
of student-positive energy forcibly
redirected into replying to blatantly
untrue accusations, is a massive loss for
students at this college.

I understand that people want answers
to the wide and wild scandal they are
being told exists, but why is there such
an attack on the calm notion of relying
on a special audit (which has been
insisted upon by the Society’s President)
and police investigation which is
underway, for responsible and timely

 

 

 

 

Renaissance Jooks

Buy « Sell « Trade

Show your DC
student card and
get 15% off

Over 50,000 gently read books
covering most subjects.
Largest sci-fi selection in town

525-4566
804 —12th Street
New Westminster

 

 

Me

the —'

 

Board Chair Monique Tamminga.

The position, which will occupy 15 hours a week
of the lucky candidate’s time, is open to all Douglas

students.

“We are looking for someone with experience in
payroll remittances, receivables and payables, audits
and internal controls. Applicants must be bondable
and reliable and have excellent communication skills.

“You can submit your resumes to the Other
Publications Board in room 1020,” says Tamminga. Cgn you fill her...shoes?

tier Press:

11, 1998 Hiring people since 1976 Volu

The Other
Press is Hiring!

“The Other Press is now accepting resumes for th
position of bookkeeper,” says Other Publications:

 
 
    
   
  

age 10

 

 

 

2 February 11, 1998 The Other Press