A comment on CKMS from a BoD member
This post was just made by synaesthetik to emperorbokassa's topic from February. I'm repeating his comments here so they don't go unnoticed by those who would be very interested in them.

synaesthetik's post:

I'm a member of the current CKMS Board of Directors, and a long-time (13 years in May) programmer at CKMS.



The climate during the referendum was such that none of us felt we could speak without it coming back to revisit the No committee in the form of punishment. I am, however, a Canadian with a right to free speech, and I want to air my PERSONAL opinions here. I will reiterate, what I say here is MY OPINION, not an official CKMS stance.

I felt the adjudication during the committee was biased toward the Yes committee, and that the adjudicator was not an impartial judge.

A few points that drove me crazy, yet I couldn't talk about them during the campaign period...The No committee was sanctioned for "campaigning outside the campaign period." Yet the Yes side set up a facebook group, Join the Yes Committee, and the first member signed up on January 14th--a full 15 days before the campaign started. If the dictionary definition of campaigning is information designed to sway opinion on an issue, it's not a leap of logic to assume that when they sent out facebook invitations, they provided information. Thus, the Yes committee was ALSO guilty of campaigning outside the referendum campaign period. No one noticed.

The so-called "proof" that the Yes committee cites on their website as "fact" (in itself problematic, because the document consists mostly of OPINIONS stated as FACTS), was written by a NON-STUDENT. Since the document is clearly designed to sway opinion, it can be considered "campaigning by a non-student," and therefore should have been ENTIRELY INADMISSIBLE through the campaign. This, too, was ignored.

There are a number of statements made in that document, but I won't address it except to say that Jeff Aho has stated that much of his so-called proof is "anecdotal." That's hearsay, and should ALSO be questioned. And much of the information presented as "fact" is also 3-5 YEARS out of date. There's a reason for that, but you'd have to talk to CKMS directly about it.

My personal opinion, as well (and this is ABSOLUTELY my opinion) is that the campaign was short-sighted. I feel that the Federation of Students, rather than asking 100 of their friends what they thought of CKMS (not a fair cross-section of the 20000 student population), then calling a referendum at a meeting (which was technically legal), should have first approached CKMS with a mediator. If they'd told us what the issues were, worked out a reasonable action plan (instead of griping to each other), and set a budget and timely schedule, maybe some of the issues could have been resolved. Or at the very least, we could work toward a resolution. The next logical step would have been to start a petition, to raise awareness of the issues (and allow CKMS more participation). THEN if nothing happened, with 2500 or so signatures on the petition, call a referendum.

I particularly like that Aho uses "mismanagement" and the goings-on at the Board meetings as some kind of proof of their claims. Yet, interestingly enough, I have been to EVERY meeting this year, and not once have I seen Jeff Aho at any of them.

Broken down, the CKMS fee is $5.50 per term per student, $11 over a two-term year (fall and winter). That works out to $1.38 a month, the cost of a cup of coffee. While my personal sentiment echoes that of Lawrence Tierney in Reservoir Dogs ("cough up a buck, ya cheap bastuhd"), I believe that the approach itself was wrong. If I walked up to anyone and said "Do you want to pay $5.50 for something you don't know about, don't use, and may not having anything to do with?" of course the answer will be "No. give me my money back."

But I don't believe that was the right question to ask. I believe that CKMS is a lively, thriving community that supports the arts and independent music, as well as grassroots politics and journalism--they need all the help we can give. I also believe that students live in a little self-contained island on campus, and that there's a real disconnect between the students and the rest of the community at large. CKMS helps to bridge that gap, by providing multicultural programming (where else can a Cantonese or Spanish-speaking student hear programming in their own language, for free?) and opportunities that you don't get anywhere else. Independent musicians can have their records played on-air, and the opportunity to perform (in a city where live gigs are dwindling) in our Live To Air concerts and various showcases such as every other Friday at the Boathouse.

The Feds' Mission Statement says the following about its "Vision."

Our Vision:
• A united and empowered student community where students pursue both learning and personal fulfillment
• A campus with diverse and numerable opportunities for pleasurable and meaningful life experiences

How is it that college radio DOESN'T fit into this "vision?"

Someone asked why it still matters...Well, I think (again, this is my opinion) that it sets precedent. If the Federation of Students can decide to pull funding (by fair means or foul) from one student organization, what's to stop them from deciding to question every other organization's fees? Who's next? Imprint ("I don't read it so I shouldn't have to pay for it")? Sports ("I don't play them so I shouldn't have to pay for them")? Operations ("I don't use the dorms so I shouldn't have to pay for them to be cleaned") University employees' salaries ("Well, I didn't take that class, so why should I pay that prof's salary?") Slippery slope argument or not, if you're part of a community and you pay fees to that community, that money goes back to the community. You start chipping away at that funding and eventually, you don't have anything. In particular, I think that by pulling funding from CKMS, the Federation of Students is going against THEIR OWN MISSION STATEMENT.

What kind of campus do you want? And is it worth the price of a cup of coffee?