[ProgSoc] Fwd: ProgSoc AGM 2019

Tomislav Bozic tomchristmas at progsoc.org
Wed Oct 16 17:29:12 AEDT 2019

 > For the benefit of the no-doubt-innumerable legions following the list:

a.k.a. "the silent majority" or, as ScoMo likes to call them, "the quiet 

 > discussion on Discord

Yes. Most online ProgSoc discussion takes place on a DISCORD server 
these days. Get in touch with president at progsoc.activateuts.com.au if 
you want an invite.

Anyway, thanks for the summary, Raz :-)

I would like to clarify the "transcript thing". It does not 
automatically appear on your transcript. It's a thing you have to apply 
for once you are elected to the Exec. I believe it's an ongoing 
professional development-type programme you undertake during your time 
of service. You basically have to prove that you've been doing stuff as 
an Exec. If you meet the requirements of the programme then, at 
graduation, you are formally recognised. That's my understanding.

I still think it's a wonderful thing that the university is now formally 
recognising the immense educational value of running a student society. 
Something which a lot of us knew to be true for a long time. I myself 
learnt more from ProgSoc than anything else relating to my course work.

As for the proposed amendments themselves, I don't really have a strong 
opinion on them, one way or another. I trust the judgment of the current 
Exec, who have been doing a stellar job of keeping ProgSoc going this 
year and who have a better idea of whether or not having these roles 
would be beneficial.

I do wish Activate were more hands-off and trusted the clubs in their 
care more, though. But that's another topic of discussion.


On 16/10/19 13:46, Roland Turner wrote:
> For the benefit of the no-doubt-innumerable legions following the list: 
> although the transcript thing is a potential concern, a discussion on 
> Discord reveals that the larger ones are:
>   * Execs rely on various privileges (room-booking etc.) that Activate
>     will apparently only grant to holders of offices defined in the club
>     constitution and elected at AGMs/SGM. This is rather more formalised
>     than was the case decades ago. (About all that we needed was an
>     elected exec and affiliation paperwork and that was enough to get
>     access to occasional funds. Everything else was conducted
>     independently of the Union.)
>   * Unelected officer appointments by the exec are not extended any
>     formal recognition by Activate.
>   * There is currently an established two-tier norm in UTS clubs generally:
>       o constitutionally-defined, elected execs who are responsible for
>         getting things done; and
>       o unelected officers (liaisons, etc.) who turn up on a casual
>         basis on request to help during events etc., but do not
>         otherwise take on any responsibilities.
>   * It is therefore considered normal for clubs to update the
>     list/definition of offices in their constitution any time it changes.
> This does mean that the exec can't determine at any time by itself, or 
> by its perception of member consensus, the need for an additional 
> officer and appoint someone, but also that a proposal to do so can't 
> arise at the same AGM that the officer(s) is/are elected. It is 
> necessary - as in this case - that the proposal be announced in advance 
> of the AGM, or that an SGM be held some weeks later. This loss of 
> flexibility feels unfortunate, but the higher level of organisation for 
> clubs generally perhaps warrants this. I don't have the impression that 
> we've relied on the "propose, create, and fill an office during the same 
> AGM" more than a few times.
> - Raz
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> On 14/10/19 3:24 pm, Tomislav Bozic wrote:
>> On 14/10/19 17:36, Roland Turner wrote:
>>>   * What is the rationale for still more messing with the
>>>     constitution? The exec is currently a sensible odd number (five),
>>>     meaning that there can be no split votes (absences and
>>>     abstentions notwithstanding), and there is already explicit
>>>     support for appointing as many liaison officers as the exec
>>>     considers appropriate.
>> I would be inclined to agree in general, although I have expressed the 
>> sentiment in the past that I don't mind amendments that edit executive 
>> roles as much as other amendments.
>> I've been told that other societies have these roles on their execs. 
>> Whether or not that means such roles are appropriate for ProgSoc is 
>> certainly up for debate.
>> A somewhat recent development (last few years): if a current student 
>> serves on an Executive Committee at UTS, it will appear on their 
>> transcript that they have done so. Importantly, only execs get this 
>> privilege, not liaison officers. While they don't get course credit, 
>> nonetheless, it is still official and permanent recognition by the 
>> university -- something that you and I sadly never received for our 
>> endeavours. Perhaps this is a motivating factor behind the proposals. 
>> More opportunities to get recognition.
>> It would be worth asking the current Exec to publish an official 
>> rationale behind their proposed amendments in any case.
>>>   * Is discussion turned off on the Facebook event intentionally?
>> I believe so. Feel free to petition the exec to turn it on.
>> Tom
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> On 14/10/19 2:10 pm, Tomislav Bozic wrote:
>>>> From the ProgSoc Secretary...
>>>> Cap off this year of Programming by coming to the 2019 AGM for ProgSoc!
>>>> Date: 29th October, 2019
>>>> Time: 6pm
>>>> Location: UTS iHub (CB11.05.400)
>>>> We'll be having a summary of the year's events, looking at our plans 
>>>> for 2020 and holding nominations and voting for the executive team. 
>>>> We also have amendments to the constitution, specifically on 
>>>> introducing two new executive roles. Below are the proposed amendments:
>>>> *Proposed amendment 1: *
>>>> Append clause 5.1.1 "Consist of President, Vice-President, 
>>>> Secretary, Treasurer, Computer Systems Officer (CSO)" with ", Events 
>>>> Coordinator"
>>>> And add clause 5.5.6:
>>>> Events Coordinator. The Events Coordinator shall coordinate the 
>>>> timeline and planning of Society events.
>>>> *Proposed amendment 2: *
>>>> Append clause 5.1.1 "Consist of President, Vice-President, 
>>>> Secretary, Treasurer, Computer Systems Officer (CSO)" with ", 
>>>> Marketing Director"
>>>> And add clause 5.5.7:
>>>> Marketing Director. The Marketing Director shall manage and moderate 
>>>> all Society social media platforms, and shall provide and distribute 
>>>> Society marketing material.
>>>> This meeting is open to all paying members. If you have any 
>>>> questions, feel free to email secretary at progsoc.activateuts.com.au 
>>>> with the subject line: AGM Question
>>>> /Copyright © 2019 ProgSoc, All rights reserved./
>>>> You are receiving this email because you were either automatically 
>>>> added or you manually subscribed to progsoc at progsoc.org some time ago.
>>>> *Our mailing address is:*
>>>> ProgSoc
>>>> 81 Broadway
>>>> Ultimo, Nsw 2007
>>>> Australia
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Progsoc mailing list
>>>> Progsoc at progsoc.org
>>>> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Progsoc mailing list
>>> Progsoc at progsoc.org
>>> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc
>> -- 
>> -----------------------------------------------------
>> To judiciously use split infinitives is fine by me...
> _______________________________________________
> Progsoc mailing list
> Progsoc at progsoc.org
> http://progsoc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/progsoc


To judiciously use split infinitives is fine by me...

More information about the Progsoc mailing list