Mon 19 Feb 2018
- The award-winning student news website of Imperial College

Know something you shouldn't? Tell us, using our quick, 100% anonymous tip-off form!


ICU Elections descend into farce

The comments below are unmoderated submissions by Live! readers. The Editor accepts no liability for their content, nor for any offence caused by them. Any complaints should be directed to the Editor.
Feb 27 2001 22:59

American style shambles as favourite is disqualified.

Feb 28 2001 08:55

And to think only a month ago we were laughing at the Americans for not being able to elect a president!

Feb 28 2001 15:43

Unfortunately there was no medic block vote otherwise the election results would not be in doubt. The figures actually show the medics voted far less than any other department and the increase in voting turnout across campus was due to departmental list not the now defunked block vote.

Mar 02 2001 13:28

Given the anti-medic sentiments in Mish Mash columns, I'd be surprised if the Medics didn't block vote.

Mar 02 2001 16:42

To set the record straight the Medic union hacks did attempt to lead a block vote, unfortunately for them all the 'old' medics who took part in these block votes are now in the latter clinical part of their course and only a few true Imperial Medics could be bothered to vote. A total of 49 from all the Medic Campuses. Whether these did try to block vote we will never know as these small numbers will be swallowed entirely by the rest of Imperial's votes.

Lots of love


Mar 05 2001 18:22

Talk of a "block vote" by anyone is irrelevent if not to say an inflation of the ICSMSU's self-importance. They can't even get people to turn up for cheap beer - what hope for influencing a multi-campus ballot?

The question of Mr Taylor's disqualification, too, is absurd. The original transgression of the rules was so minor as to be laughable - show me an election candidate who has *kept* to the rules in the 3 years I've been here. The appeals have been deeply flawed and the whole system needs overhauling to prevent the victimisation of candidates unpopular with t a particular previous female president in the future.

Mar 05 2001 18:30

I will respond to the three points on which the elections committee have disqualified me:

*None of my posters were ever in breech of the six meter rule.

*None of my posters were ever on open brickwork.

*I did have posters in places other than permitted places.

In the early hours of Monday morning, my posters were attached to trees, signage and litter-bins along Imperial College Road and in Princes' Gardens. Many posters had been removed by the morning, and by 0900 there were few, if any still up.

As there were few, if any posters still up during college hours I believe that my antics in the early hours of Monday morning could not have had a significant effect on the election.

Mar 05 2001 18:43

I'm afraid that for the first time in my life I'm going to have to side with Ritchie on this one. It reflects badly on the whole union to have the FIRST EVER candidate to be disqualified for such an insignificant breach of regulations.

Closed This discussion is closed.

Please contact the Live! Editor if you would like this discussion topic re-opened.