Difference between revisions of "Special Meeting Minutes20110221"

Revision as of 19:54, 21 February 2011

• Jboning opens by explaining that the UPA provoked more uncomfortableness and exec wants the body's input on what we should do about it
• Glisson says that the KGB seems to have a good track record of listening to exec and a recommendation about moderation may be enough to keep problems limited
• Paul agrees with Glisson and says that last semester was an anomaly; the problem would be solved with a recommendation
• Kelly points out that the stripping aspect of the event was heavily emphasized before this event and that may have caused some problems
• Afalk says that if people are uncomfortable with it, it should be banned outright
• Lincoln says that it was originally a joke and was not as sexual; encourages that is okay but the sexual aspect should be limited (and that it should be clear that people don't have to remove clothing in any way)
• Mcginnis says that we should keep stripping limited to what is appropriate in 100% public
• Drew asks what kind of reputation stripping at UPA gives the KGB in the public eyes; this is the one event that could be viewed in a negative light (as opposed to CTFWS, puzzlehunt) and we should remember the image that campus will take away from it
• Naomi says there are some other events we have that might be offensive and they don't attend (like bitterness party) and we shouldn't get rid of events on those grounds; also, the negative backlash was from people who were already expecting some removal of clothing but were offended by the explicit sexual content of the auction - says that the pressure to strip is not too strong
• Tim Broman says that stripping brings in money and income would be affected - Scorri weighs in that the majority of income would not be affected; also this is not a financial decision; he noted that he (as a freshmen) was not surprised by the content - ie, that's what he had been led to expect; and that he was offended - thinks a small adjustment is a good plan if it will be sufficient
• Jboning explains the historical perspective of the UPA: it was originally a classy event for geeks without stripping. later it became a more strip-filled event based on social libertarianism
• Glisson says that there is a difference between removal of clothing and the sexual context in which it happened - he personally was not offended but that we can limit it to non-sexual stripping
• Matt points out that we are not the same organization from year to year and maybe we should decide year-to-year based on what the membership wants at that time
• Shelby suggests making a change that would require explicit recognition by all participants that there is sometimes sexual content to the UPA
• Tim rebuts that we should make as many people comfortable, not just limit our liability
• Kelly also rebuts that signing a form won't make her not be offended or make her not leave, and that the issue is that people were offended, not that they didn't know they would be offended
• Shelby points out that there is a valid liability perspective and we should make it clear that people have the right to object
• Dan says that he guesses that nobody was offended by the clothing removal but rather by the sexuality of the removing, and the fact that we're having a meeting proves we need to change something; wants to set up some specific boundary that we should not cross in the UPA
• Eric wants a ballpark figure on how many people were offended; Jboning guesses probably 12 or more
• Paul emphasizes that the important issue is the sexuality not the clothing removal; however he points out that rules-lawyering will inevitably result from any concrete boundary and will probably not solve the problem - a guideline would be better
• Afalk says we can see what people are comfortable with year-to-year; event has to change for the people, not vice versa
• Tim Broman says that in the years past, things have gone okay; we should find a model that fits the current composition of the KGB; likes the black-tie, classy approach to the UPA - says that history is a good guideline for what to do
• Clyde says he wasn't really bothered but that he felt upstaged by stripping people and wants to order people (put strippers at the end)
• Dennis says we should consider the reputation of the KGB especially w.r.t. recruiting
• Ethan wants to move from sexual stripping to non-sexual stripping; consider rule 0 as an example of a good rule that is not explicit but people still follow (try "keep it classy" to create non-sexual situations)
• Caroline encourages us to phrase everything carefully and simply, and knowing that the very fact that this meeting happened will affect the future course of the event; an explicit rule will stifle creativity and play and may well hurt the event
• Xander feels that the KGB is a safe place and that it is a good place to get away from the Hell that is CMU; if people are uncomfortable then that status is in doubt and we should change that by eliminating all stripping for now and ever, because so many people were made uncomfortable
• Naomi is concerned about having a poll every year in that it could potentially mask the problem rather than permenantly solve it, and within a few years explicit sexual content would be permitted in a cycle of approve->problem->disapprove->forget problem->approve->etc.
• Kelly says that the way the auctioneer behaves needs to be different, in that they must stop behavior which is causing a problem rather than encouraging it
• Tim Vaughan says that in general people recognize when they go to far so the solution should lie in the way we frame the event and that "keep it classy" would be a good guideline for fixing the problem, since people would stop themselves or others if they cross that line
• Matt wants to make it very clear - in a positive sense - that it is a classy event and that we should focus on classiness rather than banning things; also exec should always have the ability to stop anything that is going on at any event
• Quuxum says that multiple people other than the auctioneer and exec need to be able to gauge what is going on and have the ability to stop it; also points out that the KGB has shifted from a really sexual libertine organization to more of a geeky/nerdy organization and historical basis may not be appropriate
• Tim Broman says his major concern is with tone; and that the organization's tone has already shifted away from strongly sexual content and towards classiness; we should limit the presence of stripping in the run-up and explanation to the event to what is minimally necessary
• Glisson says that the KGB operates by gut feeling rather than by rules and that's a good thing; we can use "keep it classy" as a good guideline instead of rules
• Eforney points out that this isn't the exec who will be in charge of the next UPA; also trying to come up with concrete guidelines, which are hard:

               1) tell steiger story after the event and limit presence of stripping in run-up to event
               2) have 2 auctioneers instead of 1
               3) auctioneer cannot interact with the auctionee at all

• Naomi would like to restrict making out at all at the auction; people will usually not make out beyond a particular line of propriety and wants to ensure that propriety is maintained everywhere
• Drew asks Afalk if she hadn't heard about stripping before the event, would she have stripped; and she responds that she would have had non-stripping sexual content
• Jboning points out concern about pressure on girls to strip
• Dennis wants to de-emphasize stripping before the event
• Scorri points out the possible ramifications of the fact that the UPA is open and staff/faculty could show up and the KGB could get in a *lot* of trouble
• Tim Vaughan says that he was made most uncomfortable by the fact that the KGB was stripping/sexual acts in complete public; also we should not make the auction about the individual but rather about the organization
• Tim Broman says he would like to request a notice from exec to the public about what we decided
• Glisson says, about pressure to strip, that we should emphasize that stripping is not required and that not stripping is as/more profitable
• Quuxum says that the cooking/RPG as a draw for bidding never happened before 2008 or so and we should remember what the organization likes at any given time
• Eric wants scheduling to run non-strippers -> strippers over time, so that nobody who doesn't want to will feel pressured by coming immediately after something
• Naomi likes stripping interspersed and she likes snarling like a sexy werewolf
• Mckayla points out that there was someone who permanently left the KGB because of the raunchy content of the UPA
• Matt says we shouldn't cater to random people if they aren't interested in what the KGB wants to do; if we could get in trouble it should go, but otherwise we should find some middle ground instead
• Xander is proud to be a member of the KGB; but if it continues like this he would change his mind about being a member
• Quuxum points out that the entire basis cannot be determined beforehand
• Dan says that as long as guidelines exist, we will be okay, and we don't need to set rock-solid rules
• Eforney says that the consensus seems to be we won't ban stripping but may come up with some guidelines/rules instead