<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Gavel endorses Witmer-Dower for UGBC</title>
	<atom:link href="http://bcgavel.com/2010/02/17/the-gavel-endorses-witmer-dower-for-ugbc/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://bcgavel.com/2010/02/17/the-gavel-endorses-witmer-dower-for-ugbc/</link>
	<description>Progressive News Source of Boston College</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 18:10:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rich</title>
		<link>http://bcgavel.com/2010/02/17/the-gavel-endorses-witmer-dower-for-ugbc/comment-page-1/#comment-958</link>
		<dc:creator>Rich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 17:00:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bcgavel.com/?p=967#comment-958</guid>
		<description>It saddens me this article seems to judge the candidates based just on the campaign they ran and is not inclusive of the work they have done. If the teams were also judged on what they&#039;ve done, and not just what they say now, this would have probably turned out differently. 

Also, as someone active in the AHANA/GLBTQ community, I find the commentary on these issues quite strange. For one, the Mabida-Raab campaign is judged on a supposed lack of engagement with the GLBT community, while Witmer-Dower are conversely absolved of complete absence within the AHANA community. Moreover, this year has not seen the benefits of a Witmer Chief of Staff in either of these issues, so how will next year be different?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It saddens me this article seems to judge the candidates based just on the campaign they ran and is not inclusive of the work they have done. If the teams were also judged on what they&#8217;ve done, and not just what they say now, this would have probably turned out differently. </p>
<p>Also, as someone active in the AHANA/GLBTQ community, I find the commentary on these issues quite strange. For one, the Mabida-Raab campaign is judged on a supposed lack of engagement with the GLBT community, while Witmer-Dower are conversely absolved of complete absence within the AHANA community. Moreover, this year has not seen the benefits of a Witmer Chief of Staff in either of these issues, so how will next year be different?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick</title>
		<link>http://bcgavel.com/2010/02/17/the-gavel-endorses-witmer-dower-for-ugbc/comment-page-1/#comment-956</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:34:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bcgavel.com/?p=967#comment-956</guid>
		<description>Sam raises a good point, the lack of casted votes this past year really weakens the strength behind the efforts to support the sexual health movement.  Although the campaign teams do all that is in their power to encourage people to vote for THEM, there are not enough people advocating voting in general.  I believe it is the elections committee&#039;s job to produce a higher vote count.  This past primary approximately 1,700 people of th 8,700 Undergraduates voted.  That is under 20%! The elections committee should not just be there to regulate the rules of the campaign but should establish voting stations, send out more emails, or at the bare minimum create a Facebook event.  If they need more man power to do so, then go out and get more man power.  If they need more resources then ask UGBC for more money, or put in a resolution to Senate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sam raises a good point, the lack of casted votes this past year really weakens the strength behind the efforts to support the sexual health movement.  Although the campaign teams do all that is in their power to encourage people to vote for THEM, there are not enough people advocating voting in general.  I believe it is the elections committee&#8217;s job to produce a higher vote count.  This past primary approximately 1,700 people of th 8,700 Undergraduates voted.  That is under 20%! The elections committee should not just be there to regulate the rules of the campaign but should establish voting stations, send out more emails, or at the bare minimum create a Facebook event.  If they need more man power to do so, then go out and get more man power.  If they need more resources then ask UGBC for more money, or put in a resolution to Senate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sam</title>
		<link>http://bcgavel.com/2010/02/17/the-gavel-endorses-witmer-dower-for-ugbc/comment-page-1/#comment-951</link>
		<dc:creator>Sam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 05:27:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://bcgavel.com/?p=967#comment-951</guid>
		<description>I hope you realize that the referendum receiving 89% of the vote means 89% OF THE STUDENTS WHO VOTED agreed that sexual health resources at BC are lacking. Less than half of the student body voted. UGBC must still work within the confines of the administration, and can do little to lower costs of testing or increase the availability of contraceptives if the administration is not willing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hope you realize that the referendum receiving 89% of the vote means 89% OF THE STUDENTS WHO VOTED agreed that sexual health resources at BC are lacking. Less than half of the student body voted. UGBC must still work within the confines of the administration, and can do little to lower costs of testing or increase the availability of contraceptives if the administration is not willing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

