Open Call to Anybody Losing Money on the Eclectic House Hosting Restriction

This post is a call for information about anybody who is losing student group money due to contracting issues and the Eclectic House Hosting Restriction.

There has been a severe lack of balanced information regarding this whole controversy; the only public statements are being issued by members of the Eclectic society, while the SJB are most likely bound by confidentiality restrictions and are thus unable to respond to Eclectic’s accusations. While I don’t want to call Eclectic a bunch of liars, there is evidence that Eclectic may be misrepresenting their case.

This is mostly due to a comment by Anna W on Aural Wes post Free Eclectic (and one of the few actual pieces of information from the Administration):

Here is the notice Eclectic’s house manager received in his mailbox yesterday, explaining what it would mean for Eclectic to be on “disciplinary probation”:

“200 High Street as a venue for performances, gatherings, parties or any events is restricted through April 30, 2009. This restriction will be lifted to allow the previously contracted event to occur at 200 High Street during accepted candidates’ weekend.”

We’re relaying the information as it is relayed to us. More as it comes in.

The wording of this letter strongly implies that the ban is being lifted on Wesfest is due to “previous contracting,” as opposed to the idea that (as Eclectic has been asserting) “selling the school to prospective students is more of a priority than maintaining a thriving student culture.”

However, as I mentioned earlier, I do not want to unduly accuse anybody of intentionally misleading the student body. What’s more, “strongly implies” by no means “proves” that this is the case. Still, there is enough room for doubt in the situation that it is important for the full story to be available to the students, as the House Hosting Restriction affects us all.

Thus, I am calling for anybody who has actually contracted a band to play and actually lost student group money due to the house hosting restriction to come forward and prove that the lifting of the house hosting restriction for Wesfest is a result of the administration’s desire to woo admitted students, rather than uphold previously contracted agreements.

If the information does come to light, I will be the first to call the administration on its bullshit and support Eclectic against the administration’s decision. However, if this doesn’t happen, then we, as the student body, have reason to believe that Eclectic is intentionally distorting the facts of the situation in order to appear sympathetic. I personally hope the former is true, but we, as critically minded students, cannot blind ourselves to the possibility of the latter.

62 thoughts on “Open Call to Anybody Losing Money on the Eclectic House Hosting Restriction

  1. Anonymous

    Go Adam.Don’t let people attacking you personally for your perfectly sound argument get you down.

  2. Anonymous

    Go Adam.
    Don’t let people attacking you personally for your perfectly sound argument get you down.

  3. Anonymous

    Wow Adam really sucks, stop wasting peoples time, you are way too self-important. Nobody cares about your nit picking or your bullshit investigative journalism. you suck

  4. Anonymous

    Wow Adam really sucks, stop wasting peoples time, you are way too self-important. Nobody cares about your nit picking or your bullshit investigative journalism. you suck

  5. Adam

    Let me break this down into simple bullet points for you.1. Eclectic states that the lifting of the restriction during wesfest is a despicable and hypocritical move by the administration to woo prefrosh. I have provided links to these accusations. 2. The post on Anna Weiner’s blog could indicate that the administration is lifting the ban for wesfest because those events were previously contracted, rather than a result of the administration attempting to woo prefrosh. 3. One can discount the interpretation in #2, if any single other person stated that they had lost money due to previously contracted (rather than simply planned to have) an artist to play at Eclectic.4. However, if #3 does not happen, then the interpretation in point #2 would be true, and Eclectic would be accusing the administration of being hypocritical and arbitrary when they themselves knew this to be untrue. This would show that they were intentionally misleading the student population by distorting the facts to make themselves seem more sympathetic.If you’d like further clarification of my line of reasoning, you are welcome to post further. But as it stands, that was what I was trying to say by my post.

  6. Adam

    Let me break this down into simple bullet points for you.

    1. Eclectic states that the lifting of the restriction during wesfest is a despicable and hypocritical move by the administration to woo prefrosh. I have provided links to these accusations.

    2. The post on Anna Weiner’s blog could indicate that the administration is lifting the ban for wesfest because those events were previously contracted, rather than a result of the administration attempting to woo prefrosh.

    3. One can discount the interpretation in #2, if any single other person stated that they had lost money due to previously contracted (rather than simply planned to have) an artist to play at Eclectic.

    4. However, if #3 does not happen, then the interpretation in point #2 would be true, and Eclectic would be accusing the administration of being hypocritical and arbitrary when they themselves knew this to be untrue. This would show that they were intentionally misleading the student population by distorting the facts to make themselves seem more sympathetic.

    If you’d like further clarification of my line of reasoning, you are welcome to post further. But as it stands, that was what I was trying to say by my post.

  7. Anonymous

    really though … this post doesn’t make sense … i’m so confused by what you think is reason and i see as utter randomness.

  8. Anonymous

    really though … this post doesn’t make sense … i’m so confused by what you think is reason and i see as utter randomness.

  9. Anonymous

    adam, you are being a sensationalist cunt who is trying to exert himself as a voice worth listening to via a student blog. get over yourself and fashion a coherent argument.

  10. Anonymous

    adam, you are being a sensationalist cunt who is trying to exert himself as a voice worth listening to via a student blog. get over yourself and fashion a coherent argument.

  11. Anonymous

    1:46 pm:The Wesfest event was allowed to continue because it was the only event this semester in which a contract had actually been signed. If it had been canceled, money would have been lost.All the other events at Eclectic were planned, but not yet contracted, so no money would have been lost. This is why the Wesfest show at Eclectic was the only event allowed to happen, there’s no SJB/administration conspiracy to dishonestly woo prefrosh, or whatever.And no, I’m not in the administration. I’m a student who enjoys Eclectic shows and thinks this ban is stupid, but am getting annoyed at the misrepresentation of facts.

  12. Anonymous

    1:46 pm:

    The Wesfest event was allowed to continue because it was the only event this semester in which a contract had actually been signed. If it had been canceled, money would have been lost.

    All the other events at Eclectic were planned, but not yet contracted, so no money would have been lost.

    This is why the Wesfest show at Eclectic was the only event allowed to happen, there’s no SJB/administration conspiracy to dishonestly woo prefrosh, or whatever.

    And no, I’m not in the administration. I’m a student who enjoys Eclectic shows and thinks this ban is stupid, but am getting annoyed at the misrepresentation of facts.

  13. Anonymous

    Adam, this doesn’t make any sense.If you actually think Scott Backer sat around thinking to himself “I wish I could cancel this promotional event for wesfest, but unfortunately it is the only event scheduled this year in which the bands are party to a contract. Damn you Eclectic!” then I don’t know what to do for you.Also, I don’t believe that the letter you quote implies anything (strongly or otherwise) about why the wesfest was allowed to continue. It says that the event was previously contracted, probably as a way of legitimizing the decision, but does not make any assertations as to why that event was allowed to continue. I appreciate your disclaimer stating that “strongly implies” is different from “proves,” but I think your particular reading of that letter is still very unlikely, making your post somewhat out of line.I really wish you would edit, remove, or further qualify this post, since it has an extremely accusatory tone (especially with the bold-face text) and seems to be based on an illogical assumption, even if you admit it is an assumption.Thanks.

  14. Anonymous

    Adam, this doesn’t make any sense.

    If you actually think Scott Backer sat around thinking to himself “I wish I could cancel this promotional event for wesfest, but unfortunately it is the only event scheduled this year in which the bands are party to a contract. Damn you Eclectic!” then I don’t know what to do for you.

    Also, I don’t believe that the letter you quote implies anything (strongly or otherwise) about why the wesfest was allowed to continue. It says that the event was previously contracted, probably as a way of legitimizing the decision, but does not make any assertations as to why that event was allowed to continue. I appreciate your disclaimer stating that “strongly implies” is different from “proves,” but I think your particular reading of that letter is still very unlikely, making your post somewhat out of line.

    I really wish you would edit, remove, or further qualify this post, since it has an extremely accusatory tone (especially with the bold-face text) and seems to be based on an illogical assumption, even if you admit it is an assumption.

    Thanks.

  15. Anonymous

    I’ve seen more information to the case than the Eclectic Society has revealed to the student body. This wasn’t over just a single event. For my own confidentiality I can’t divulge what this information is, but I urge the society to come clean and admit everything they’ve been charged of to the student body before this information comes out of the mouth of the administration.

  16. Anonymous

    I’ve seen more information to the case than the Eclectic Society has revealed to the student body. This wasn’t over just a single event. For my own confidentiality I can’t divulge what this information is, but I urge the society to come clean and admit everything they’ve been charged of to the student body before this information comes out of the mouth of the administration.

  17. Andrea

    12:40: The SJB didn’t do an “investigation”, and there’s no “little paper” that we can sign. We have not been given or even shown the notes from the SJB’s closed deliberation on our case.

  18. Andrea

    12:40: The SJB didn’t do an “investigation”, and there’s no “little paper” that we can sign. We have not been given or even shown the notes from the SJB’s closed deliberation on our case.

  19. Anonymous

    THERE IS NO “LITTLE PAPER” have you ever been SJBed before? it’s not a investigation, it’s a reading of your crime and then a subsequent punishment. There are no detectives working on the beat to reveal what ‘really’ happened. You just get charged for what they caught you doing and you try to defend yourself. That’s it.

  20. Anonymous

    THERE IS NO “LITTLE PAPER” have you ever been SJBed before? it’s not a investigation, it’s a reading of your crime and then a subsequent punishment. There are no detectives working on the beat to reveal what ‘really’ happened. You just get charged for what they caught you doing and you try to defend yourself. That’s it.

  21. Anonymous

    Eclectic – Why don’t you just sign the little paper and let the SJB publicize their investigation if you wan’t full transparency?

  22. Anonymous

    Eclectic – Why don’t you just sign the little paper and let the SJB publicize their investigation if you wan’t full transparency?

  23. Anonymous

    @ 11:30I think we can agree that colloqially “lost” money means paying for services (giving money to bands), when the services are not rendered (no one gets to hear the band). chill.

  24. Anonymous

    @ 11:30
    I think we can agree that colloqially “lost” money means paying for services (giving money to bands), when the services are not rendered (no one gets to hear the band).

    chill.

  25. Anonymous

    You people obvious didn’t read this properly. Basically the wesfest show was finalized “contracted” before the ban and everything was already booked/paid for. It just happens that wesfest is the weekend that show on. Eclectic claims it is because the admin wants events on wesfest. maybe there is more to it than this.So what he is asking for is info on any other shows that were already finalized and are now canceled (and people will lose money on, which is what eclectic asserted). I for one, want to know if any finalized contracts are being terminated by the ban…

  26. Anonymous

    You people obvious didn’t read this properly.

    Basically the wesfest show was finalized “contracted” before the ban and everything was already booked/paid for. It just happens that wesfest is the weekend that show on. Eclectic claims it is because the admin wants events on wesfest. maybe there is more to it than this.

    So what he is asking for is info on any other shows that were already finalized and are now canceled (and people will lose money on, which is what eclectic asserted). I for one, want to know if any finalized contracts are being terminated by the ban…

  27. Anonymous

    Don’t take it down, lets just edit to read “GIVE US THE GODDAMN FACTS”I think what I, and the rest of the student population want to know, is what the hell is going on here? Why haven’t we been given the full story?

  28. Anonymous

    Don’t take it down, lets just edit to read “GIVE US THE GODDAMN FACTS”

    I think what I, and the rest of the student population want to know, is what the hell is going on here? Why haven’t we been given the full story?

  29. Anonymous

    yeah honestly this post should be taken down. it’s irrelevant and makes no sense. how is eclectic “tricking” anyone. the reality is, the school is letting the wesfest event go on. yes, there was a previous contract in writing and no, eclectic did not assert otherwise. people just made their own conclusions. wesleying writers need to stop conspiracy theorizing until they have all the facts.

  30. Anonymous

    yeah honestly this post should be taken down. it’s irrelevant and makes no sense. how is eclectic “tricking” anyone. the reality is, the school is letting the wesfest event go on. yes, there was a previous contract in writing and no, eclectic did not assert otherwise. people just made their own conclusions. wesleying writers need to stop conspiracy theorizing until they have all the facts.

  31. Anonymous

    You are dumb. No money is “lost.” The issue is that contracted bands won’t be able to play without a space to play in. Since they’re contracted, the bands will get paid, but the students will get nothing (no show). How does your “call for anybody who has actually contracted a band to play” prove ANYTHING?

  32. Anonymous

    You are dumb. No money is “lost.” The issue is that contracted bands won’t be able to play without a space to play in. Since they’re contracted, the bands will get paid, but the students will get nothing (no show).

    How does your “call for anybody who has actually contracted a band to play” prove ANYTHING?

  33. Jenn

    Thank you. This is a good call, both for the people who might be losing money and the rest of the campus who would like to know the truth of the situation.

  34. Jenn

    Thank you. This is a good call, both for the people who might be losing money and the rest of the campus who would like to know the truth of the situation.

Comments are closed.