What a huge mistake! This predominantly inexperienced incoming UA will soon realize that their "gamble" was in fact a blunder of sizeable portions. Webley is just another overacheiver who believes the UA serves a higher purpose than it actually does. One would imagine after six hours of deliberating they would at least reach the correct decision...

I just don't get it. Doesn't experience and composure mean anything? All I can say is that I'm glad to be graduating...

CEC is spot on. Byer is one of the most charismatic and pragmatic members to have run for the Chair position in recent years. Apparently, his ideas weren't groundbreaking enough to open the heavens and usher in those glorious angels to unite student, professor and administrator under a new happier, Undergraduate Assembly. Fret not, my friends, the Messiah is here! For those unaware of the UA bylaws, a student can only serve in the Chair position for one term. Do you honestly think Webley is going to be content with accepting a subordinate position his senior year? For those who know him (which clearly couldn't include the incoming UA), this is like asking Bill Clinton to shut his mouth. Ain't going to happen.

Zac Byer definitely deserved the spot. Experience *used* to mean something, but not anymore. Just as we elected an unprecedentedly inexperienced, American-Idol-figure to the U.S. Presidency, the same happened here. And Byer's having been former chair of the Penn College Republicans probably didn't help. Nothing makes an insecure Penn student feel more self-assured and self-validated than blind hatred for the GOP.

Last night's results weren't the least bit surprising and also not the least bit good. Personally, I support the mantra that desperate times call for desperate measures. This was definitely a desperate measure but certainly not warranted by any desperate times. Alec has admitted in the past that his role model was former UA Chair Brett Thalmann. Fine, I can live with that. However, Thalmann had at least served on UA Exec the year he ran for Chair. Oh wait, can someone please remind me what position was that? The same one Zac Byer had when he ran last night. As it stands now, the UA executive board will not have one continuing member from the previous year's executive board. While this may be a flaw in the system, it certainly does not bode well for a UA chair that plans to work from within the system to issue external change. A message to Mr. Byer: your time for success has still yet to come.

Fortunately this was not a Democrat-Republican vote, since everyone involved in this election knew Zac had the support of many respected Penn Democrats leaders and Obama supporters, past and present. Instead, this was a self-important vote of a group of people who all enjoy hearing themselves talk more than accomplishing anything for the student body; a vote of a group of people who care more about how a position will look on their resume than on what is best for Penn students. This is evident in the fact that Zac was not nominated for any other executive board position despite his clearly superior leadership skills. It's amazing one Huntsman room fit all the UA egos. Penn has lost an incredibly talented, dedicated, professional leader in Zac Byer, and I would certainly not blame him if he quit UA altogether.

Alec is going to be a great UA chair. In the UA meetings I've been to, he is easily the most informed person in the room, and clearly knows the ins and outs of the system. Even though he was younger than most board members, every time a question comes up, the whole room automatically looked to him. He is capable, has the right priorities, and will hopefully turn the UA into something other than child's play that deals with silly issues.

Although Alec is "easily the most informed person in the room, and clearly knows the ins and outs of the system" this is not what makes a good UA chair. The chair is a moderator who should be able to compose himself with administrators, student leaders, and the general student body. Alec's erratic, off putting, and over the top antics are not what we need from the UA, and will cripple his term as Chair. It is clear that the UA did not have the student's interest in mind when they made this decision--one which they will soon regret as Alec's inability to bring people together to "care" about the Undergraduate Assembly is made apparent. The UA has lost what little credibility it once had.

[QUOTE id="c486e5fc-a252-4d16-aca1-9a73107740b7"]Although Alec is "easily the most informed person in the room, and clearly knows the ins and outs of the system" this is not what makes a good UA chair. The chair is a moderator who should be able to compose himself with administrators, student leaders, and the general student body. Alec's erratic, off putting, and over the top antics are not what we need from the UA, and will cripple his term as Chair. It is clear that the UA did not have the student's interest in mind when they made this decision--one which they will soon regret as Alec's inability to bring people together to "care" about the Undergraduate Assembly is made apparent. The UA has lost what little credibility it once had.[/QUOTE] I find it interesting that so much of this criticism consists of petulant personal attacks. Alec can, indeed, bring people together--in fact, he brought 16 together for an overwhelming win. I am thrilled to have a UA chair who aspires to a dynamic, effective organization that does more than the bare minimum. He has demonstrated his commitment and ability to get things done. It's time to move on and stop the personal attacks. The only credibility being hurt is your own.

That's change I can believe in.

Jay Rodrigues had the best solution, but you were all too childish to think this through. It's too bad that Zac wasn't elected. He is a devoted member of the Penn community. It is your loss...

Do you think that a margin of 16 to 8 indicates a poor decision after a 6 hour long deliberation? UA members have got to be pretty doped up to elect a completely inexperienced, incompetent, and inferior candidate, if what you all said is true . Can you really be that skeptical of the democratic process in place at Penn? Or are you just bitter?

Freshman year I quickly wrote off the UA as a group of predominantly narcissistic, self-righteous individuals who love to hear themselves talk about "issues" which nobody else cared. Turns out, I was (partially) wrong---bodies like SPEC, SCUE, SAC, NEC and UA really can do great things for the Penn student body. It's funny though, feeling this way about the UA and much of Stud Gov has let me remain remarkable objective over the years. So, now, as an outgoing senior, I am troubled by some of what I watched at the UA Chair vote. There was a lot of talk in Alec's speech and answers to UA/Community questions about the UA's role here at Penn and trying to raise it to some mythical new level. First, pushing a truly open democratic process is not how to get more things done, but rather become mired in tedious non-issues. I look to the hours of debate spent on something like the Casino project. Aside from 1 DP article, I can't (nor could most Penn kids) tell you what the project is or why they should care. The reality is that, no matter what decision (if any) was made, it will mean squat to anyone outside the UA (fine...Penn). It makes me remember why I was so quick to write off the UA as a freshman and why people will continue to do so in the future. Zac Byer recognized this. If last night's election is the democratic process Penn can look forward to, then I am even more troubled. Anyone in the room last night with a truly unbiased mind, cannot in good conscious say that the vote should have been as lopsided as it was for the amount of time that the election took. I'm left to believe that people clearly had their minds and votes made up when they walked in the door. Nevertheless, the formality of democratic process caused the election to last for nearly 5 hours, right? I recall Zac also mentioned this would happen too. Lastly, the UA's role in budget allocations is and should remain its principle duty. The UA budgets funds, the other branches of PSG carry out and utilize the monies for their assigned purposes. It is not the UA's place to use their power of the purse as a reason for imposing its wants and oversight. Fine, the UA is the only elected body is PSG. But, that fact cannot nor should not give it the right to tell ("advise") another branch or group with years of experience and best practices how to do their job. It will only cause division, fracture, as well as unnecessary emails and meetings. Again, Zac Byer recognized this. Maybe I�?m just na•ve, but I wholeheartedly trust a group like SPEC Fling to run and produce Fling year in and year out, employ best practices, and make the necessary changes more than I trust the UA. I imagine Alec would lecture me nonstop for a half hour telling me otherwise if given the chance; yet, I still left the public discussion feeling that this sort of unnecessary hindrance will become the norm. Alliteration aside, while not "petulant personal attack", Alec's election as UA chair scares the hell out of me when I think about the future of Penn Student Government. Glad I'm not here to have to suffer through the repercussions of the UA�?s asinine decision. See ya'll for Homecoming in the Fall :-)

I wonder how much "bobbing" for votes Alec did amongst the members of the homosexual syndicate that have taken over campus and the UA. I think we need to examine if trading votes for favors is an ethical process that the UA wants to endorse.

For the three hours I suffered through the UA chair election deliberations on Wednesday evening, I listened to the general body Ð the group that prides themselves on being directly elected by the student body Ð bemoan the fact that their constituents on the whole could not care less about what they do. In the amount of time I found myself capable of listening to these people, I head it asked repeatedly of the prospective chairs Zac Byer and Alec Webley Ð how do we get people to care? I don�?t know why they were asking the people in the front of the room, because I Ð along with a great many of the other non-UA members that packed the room to witness what turned out to be a joke of a proceeding Ð could have answered it for them: start doing the exact opposite of what you�?re doing. I still need to work out the specifics, but I think I have a good start. Time after time, the UA passed motions to extend the time for questions and answers. They made it seem like a kind gesture to those in the audience whose questions had been unanswered, but they really just wasted all our time. When I heard the breakdown of votes in favor of Mr. Webley, I must profess I was unsurprised, but even more taken aback. Had the front two rows of Huntsman 260 been in the same dimension the back two rows existed in? While Mr. Byer spoke to the room, to the people he will work with outside the UA next year, and to the �?laymen�? that vote him in, Mr. Webley talked over all our heads in unabashed fashion Ð and the UA members ate it up. My thoughts and prayers to all those groups on campus next year who will have to work with Mr. Webley and the rest of the UA�?s empty rhetoric and brimming egos next year. In one of the central points to his platform, Mr. Webley promised to cut meeting length down by 50% next year Ð and many people liked this idea in theory. But based on the sheer length and arduous nature of Wednesday�?s election just for UA chair, this plan will be impossible to execute. During one motion to vote, a girl in favor of unduly extending our evenings further exclaimed, �?Come on guys, this is our entire next year!�? But who is the �?our�? in this clause? It most certainly is not the student body, the people the UA so proudly �?serve.�? If it was the election would have gone much differently in concern to length and results. No, Wednesday was the �?UA Show�? Ð all and only about their year. So how are you going to get students interested, UA? Shut up. Stop acting like your group is the best thing to come to Penn since Benjamin Franklin. And start doing something. Start using the UA as a platform to have the students hear your voice, rather than using it just for the sake of hearing yourselves talk.

This will be the first student government that every student everywhere will care about, he said. "We can change student government." Is this person serious? Did the members of the UA really believe this load of shit? They've been brainwashed. All of them. I am in shock that people found this kind of blathering, self-important rhetoric to be true. Can anyone advise on the impeachment proceedings? It's going to be a long year ahead of us...

f places that were most revered: churches, cathedrals and chapels. Many of these magnificent pieces of art were made with the multiple purposes of decorating, controlling light and telling a story. It requires great skill and craftsmanship to create a stained glass window, as it must fit into the sp

chesbring about not bobup duck the commonsupreme emolument documentation becausethe exclusive watches, alsoconsequently they pledge producefeeble replaced if theyare lost, stolen, ordoomed. image watches area superior larger stylisticallyalso financially. Advantages of buying model Watches