I really liked the idea of having new clubs under probation or a "temporary" status because it might persuade leg council reps to be more lenient on passing new clubs. In this scenario, I think it should be called a "provisional" status. In terms of the 2 routes to disbandment, I think probation is an appropriate term.
I was really confused on what the probation would do to the club other than giving them a big strike. I think that giving them a consequence would cause clubs to try not to get a probation. For example don't allow them to go on trips if they don't meet requirements. Though this might be harsh, they got themselves into it. But this is a great idea, Keep it up clubs!!
I actually really like the idea of "probation" or two routes to disbandment, particularly because a lot of the clubs ARE illegitimate. Especially because the "three strikes rule" resets every semester, the restrictions set on clubs should be stricter since it is fairly easy to avoid disbandment through the three strikes. I think the actual threat of disbandment should be enough to get the club going (or at least attempting to), but only if the periods of probation are shortened (i.e. one leg meeting presentation after one or two semester, instead of an overall process spanning two years). I don't think restricting the club in what it can do will help the club's legitimacy improve, for example if they aren't allowed to participate in club food day or go on events, people might view the club as even less legitimate and instead be turned off and more unwilling to join.
a lot of clubs aer indeed illegitimate and this makes sure that the only clubs that stay on campus are the ones that have a purpose and a good amount of membership and interest.
I think probation is the most fair but a lot of exceptions will have to be made to let certain clubs go on trips and conferences that are very important to the club and their organization.
I think it is definitely quality over quantity which can be really hard. If getting leadership students to help with club visitations is what it will take, then I think it is worth it. In addition, I think it is important to have hard rules like mandatory advisers, etc.
I really liked the idea of having new clubs under probation or a "temporary" status because it might persuade leg council reps to be more lenient on passing new clubs. In this scenario, I think it should be called a "provisional" status. In terms of the 2 routes to disbandment, I think probation is an appropriate term.
ReplyDeleteI was really confused on what the probation would do to the club other than giving them a big strike. I think that giving them a consequence would cause clubs to try not to get a probation. For example don't allow them to go on trips if they don't meet requirements. Though this might be harsh, they got themselves into it.
ReplyDeleteBut this is a great idea,
Keep it up clubs!!
I actually really like the idea of "probation" or two routes to disbandment, particularly because a lot of the clubs ARE illegitimate. Especially because the "three strikes rule" resets every semester, the restrictions set on clubs should be stricter since it is fairly easy to avoid disbandment through the three strikes. I think the actual threat of disbandment should be enough to get the club going (or at least attempting to), but only if the periods of probation are shortened (i.e. one leg meeting presentation after one or two semester, instead of an overall process spanning two years). I don't think restricting the club in what it can do will help the club's legitimacy improve, for example if they aren't allowed to participate in club food day or go on events, people might view the club as even less legitimate and instead be turned off and more unwilling to join.
ReplyDeletetwo routes of disbandment = YES!!
ReplyDeletea lot of clubs aer indeed illegitimate and this makes sure that the only clubs that stay on campus are the ones that have a purpose and a good amount of membership and interest.
I think probation is the most fair but a lot of exceptions will have to be made to let certain clubs go on trips and conferences that are very important to the club and their organization.
I think it is definitely quality over quantity which can be really hard. If getting leadership students to help with club visitations is what it will take, then I think it is worth it. In addition, I think it is important to have hard rules like mandatory advisers, etc.
ReplyDelete