January 17, 2007

Adam's Letter to the Editor

[F]or Seal to use my disciplinary record as a means of speculating on the rationale behind my actions is shortsighted and unfair. I joined the Assembly over three years ago and have served as an individual representative, an elected representative, a vice-chair and a vice president. Not once over the course of that time span have I devoted my time and energy toward promoting student interests out of personal spite or anger at an individual. To the contrary, my efforts are a reflection of the faith I have in the necessity of advocating on behalf of students to improve the quality of life for everyone here. For Seal to reduce my involvement as a result of a personal conflict I have with Andreadis only serves to make the Assembly look even more meaningless and petty than it actually is. I have worked too hard and long for Seal to make this judgment.
Tell me this, Adam:

Does being so selfless also require that you plan out your grand vision for SA in secret? Does having so much faith in "the necessity of advocating on behalf of students to improve the quality of life for everyone here" also necessitate avoiding any public exposition of your hopes and dreams for SA before your hand was forced? Does it make exclusion of other campus leadership also necessary? Have you talked to deans? Faculty? Your peers on Palaeop? Student leaders who supported Tim in the election? Have you really tried to get an idea of how this campus feels about Tim and SA? Or are you just so selfless that you can just tell?

Why did you decide to secretively hand-pick your supporters in your long march to student freedom and not just send out an open call for support? If you truly feel you are representing students' interests, why do you have to select so carefully the students in your grand campaign to right all wrongs?

You've been working in SA for more than three years, by your own admission. Why is it just now that you've decided it's broken and needs abolished? Why did that decision not come before being disciplined? Why didn't you start out with that tactic this term, at least?

You say that my actions, by "reduc[ing your] involvement as a result of a personal conflict [you] have with Andreadis only serves to make the Assembly look even more meaningless and petty than it actually is." If you think it actually isn't as meaningless and petty as I've apparently now made it look, then why the hell are you trying to abolish it?


  1. Anonymous11:18 AM

    Jeez, Seal. You call Shpeen's actions "secret" because he uses email to organize? He's been pretty public in interviews with The D and in the op-ed you quote.
    Shpeen also points out in his op-ed that up until Andreadis tried to derail his COS reforms, he didnt fully recognize the problems with SA. This happened last term.

    Did you read the whole op-ed, Seal, or just rush to where you saw your name in print? That must have been exciting!

  2. He used very closely targeted emails, and I have no idea what interviews you're referring to. Before the story broke, there was not a public word of this.
    "Shpeen also points out in his op-ed that up until Andreadis tried to derail his COS reforms, he didnt fully recognize the problems with SA."
    That's an unsubstantiated and ridiculous claim. Adam did not contact most of the deans and faculty who should have been contacted about the COS Report which garnered it zero support within the administration, SAPAs called him on the obviously harmful effects it would have, and the DFP pointed out serious procedural flaws in the way the task force was composed and the way the report was put together. That's not Tim working behind the scenes—that's Adam doing a shitty job.

  3. No he hasn't. First of all, the op-ed in question ran two weeks AFTER he began his three-week drive to get voting rights for a bunch of domers. If he actually had an interest in motivating the student body at large, he would have done so. Yeah, he "uses email to organize"- he uses it to organize his brothers in Chi Gam, various other frat guys, and probably several members of the Review.

    It was pure coalition-building: the Review doesn't like Tim for obvious reasons, and domers don't like him because he's as explicit as he can be about his distaste for them and their interests.

    Further, it's unclear how much part Tim had in "derailing" Adam's COS reforms. They were obviously going to be unacceptable to the administration from the outset, which Adam would have discovered had he spoken to anyone in the administration about them prior to composing the report. Reading it, it's clear that his problem with the disciplinary system is not so much that it is "outdated" but rather that it is DISCIPLINARY.

    I don't know what Seal did this morning, but I read the whole op-ed. It had all the earmarks of a garden-variety Shpeenin': verbosity (which he assumes will befuddle his presumably dull-witted opponents), repeated protestations of victimhood, and jarring nonspecificity regarding facts (in this case, Adam's accomplishments).

    I did enjoy the shout-out to my "special someone," though.

  4. JINX12345678910


  5. Anonymous11:39 AM

    Seal, you aren't going to save your reputation through this pedantic ranting about Spheen's implimentation of his plan to reform SA. Your claims rely on a shameful revelation of Spheen's personal records and the defense you provide is flimsy at best.

  6. My claims rely on the fact that what I said is true.

  7. Kapil Kale3:14 PM

    I am no "intellectual", but I am an exec, so here goes:

    Seal's reporting has been controversial in the way that he has sweepingly named Chi-gam and in that he did not cite sources in his initial post. Ruslan Tovbulatov is a Chi-gam but is not a "crony" of Adam. He's the treasurer of SA.

    But that does not mean that Seal's reporting is incorrect.

    As an Exec, Adam alienated other execs and members of his committee. This concerned Tim and after their confrontation with regards to the alcohol at Adam's committee meeting, Tim (in my opinion) overreacted and reported Adam. Had Adam been a better Exec and had a better relationship with the board, I don't think this would have happened.

    I did not find out about the plotting until 5 days after the first GA meeting. And I live with 2 Chi-gams.

    Adam has not returned my calls and does not seem to be interested in working together on this. I am certainly a fan of SA reform, but I haven't been able to find an "in". The purpose has changed from impeachment to reform, suddenly. Its not hard to track Adam's thought process.

    Adam knows that his ideas are preposterous. He's too smart for that. He knows impeachment would never pass: even if he brought voting members to the meeting, there are easily 20 people who would vote against it (3/4 required).

    If you look at his Op/Ed, his arguments are circumstantial: defending his motives, creating an image of a victim, and slandering the opposition.

    I think that Adam has got on a high horse and is enjoying the facetime. Too bad that facetime is meaningless if you're an idiot.

    1) Not sure whether Adam "resigned", but his tenure was already limited to Fall term.
    2) Tim never worked behind the scenes to "subvert" the COS legislation. He did not agree with the "preponderance of evidence" clause because he thought it would make discipline much more difficult in murky sexual assault situations.

  8. I just deleted a comment that had no substance other than an insult to a previous commenter, and I'm going back and deleting comments that are predicated on nothing but insulting Adam as well. I'll allow insults directed at me on this blog, but keep the comments directed toward other participants civil.

  9. Anonymous5:24 PM

    I think Seal and Shpeen need to dome each other. The loser has to shut up about this. And so does the winner. It's the honorable way to handle this.

  10. Only if we do it in the SA office in Collis. Adam can bring the beer.

  11. And, if Adam loses, he can't punch the wall.

  12. Anonymous12:55 AM

    Those plaques can go too...Punch those.

    Loosen up people.