NEWS EDITOR Katherine DeClerq | news@thefulcrum.ca | (613) 562 5260
5
Twitterable moments @iShowerNekked: No food sighted at the ballot counting table! No explanation available at this time. #sfuoelxn @thomastremblay: Such a low turnout, yet so much time to count the ballots. Could the #SFUOelxn resources support a 32,630 undergrad population? Doubtful @JulienPaquette: RT @iShowerNekked: Maybe the ballot counters should call it quits for the night. The probability of human error related accidents rises with fatigue#sfuoelxn @thomastremblay: Sad day for democracy at #uOttawa. The #SFUOelxn are once again punctuated by controversy and alleged unethical practices. @AlexSmyth: What a load of bull RT @ The_Fulcrum: Benovoy: Counting is getting slower, as volunteers are getting tired. #sfuoelxn photo by Alex Smyth
At 3:03 a.m. on Friday Feb. 18, student volunteers continued to count SFUO election votes at Tabaret Hall. Results were initially projected to be released by midnight.
The bar is closed, the candidates have gone home Election hopefuls and students frustrated as election results go unannounced Katherine DeClerq | Fulcrum Staff
STUDENTS CALLED IT quits around three in the morning on Feb. 18 when they were told that the Student Federation of the University of Ottawa (SFUO) election results would be pushed back another few hours. Candidates arrived at undergraduate bar 1848 around 11 p.m. to have a round of beers with their campaign volunteers and friends. However, due to the fact that the results, which were supposed to be announced around midnight, were continuously postponed, candidates eventually decided to head home for the night.
Some candidates were frustrated, but understood why the process took so long. “I just want it to be fi nished. I just want it to be over. I wish the results were coming right now. I feel like [tonight’s process] was a little bit slow, but I guess that means that there [are] some ballots to contest,” explained Logan Ouellette, candidate for vp communications. “We’re all getting more anxious and anxious as the minutes go by. We just want our results [so] we can go home and sleep,” said Terry Morin, candidate for vp social. With a voting turnout estimate of just over 10 per cent, Jason Benovoy, CEO of the SFUO elections office, explained
that each contested position—that of the executive, and arts and social sciences Board of Administration seats—has to be counted by hand. “It’s paper ballots, it takes a long time because we triple count the ballots to make sure everything is as accurate as possible. It is what it is—there are thousands of voting ballots,” he explained. Amalia Savva, presidential candidate in the SFUO elections, agreed that all students could do was be patient. “I have confidence they are doing the best they can, but it is obviously frustrating for us waiting. But they are doing the best they can. As we say last year, e-vot-
ing didn’t work out for the best, so paper ballots are the most legitimate thing to do during elections,” said Savva. Not everyone was so understanding, however. Savva’s opponent presidential candidate, Nathan Boivin, expressed dissatisfaction with the late results and before leaving campus, took the opportunity to explain why the SFUO electoral system is not functioning as well as it should. “Th is is the exact issue that we have with the SFUO. It comes down to organization,” he explained. “Whoever wins tonight I hope that we are able to change elections, so that the results are actually on time. We had
a great crowd out here … who all came to watch the elections. It’s two hours past due, it’s a Thursday night, and people have exams still. They already put those exams aside. So this is when we have to say enough is enough. We want to change these procedures for next year.” All candidates except for Tristan Dénommée, Terry Morin, and Logan Ouellette left campus between three and four in the morning under the impression that the results wouldn’t be released until the following day. At press time, 5: 30 a.m. on Feb. 18, results were still unavailable. “I am anxious. I can’t wait to figure out how it goes,” said Ouellette. f
See thefulcrum.ca for election results. Check out pages 6 and 7 for photos of candidates and students waiting and waiting and waiting for early-morning results that didn’t come.
UOLeaks takes over campus Student-run blog inspires election discussion and debate Briana Hill | Fulcrum Staff
THE #SFUOELXN HASHTAG began buzzing Feb. 10 as the word spread about controversial uoleaks.com. The blog-style site is run by “a small team of volunteers who simply want to keep the [Student Federation of the University of Ottawa] (SFUO) and the University of Ottawa’s administration accountable.” “The site took about an hour to go from concept to reality. The idea was to create a platform where students and
whistle blowers could contribute anonymously to keep the SFUO accountable,” explained the UOLeaks team in an email to the Fulcrum. Contributors to the site may send in tips, or they may post anonymously to the homepage. There had been concern from some students, however, that the blog could transform into a forum for negative commentary. “I think anytime you’re on the Internet, and especially with the anonymity that that provides, you’re going to get
people that just put their most outlandish remarks possible and they’re going to use foul language. That being said, I think if this is going to be a democratic representation ... you have to hear all the voices,” said Michelle Legault, vp communications of the Criminology Students Association and avid reader of uoleaks.com. The site is unique in that it allows for a multidirectional flow of information. The ability to comment on posts allows rebuttal, debate, and discussion among students. Some posts have reached up to 134 comments from various students debating the topic. “Having that two-way discussion is important, because ... it’s always been
one way. It’s always been the SFUO dictating to the student body,” said Legault. Jean-Thomas Tremblay, a political science and communications student, agreed that the forum for discussion provided by the website is needed, but fi nds the name misleading. “I don’t endorse it 100 per cent because I think some elements should be changed. I don’t like the name ... A forum or agora would have been more accurate, because that’s what it is—it brings back the element of discussion,” explained Tremblay. Not only are commentators permitted anonymity, but the creators of UOLeaks also remain unnamed. Tremblay doesn’t
see a problem with this, as long as readers are cautious. “Is it less legitimate because we don’t know who’s moderating it? No, as long as we know that it’s students moderating it and that therefore we shouldn’t take everything for granted.” The website claims to be “raw SFUO and uOttawa news” that leaves room for doubt about it’s overall accuracy. “Is Wikipedia wrong simply because it’s crowdsourced? No, but you still wouldn’t want to quote it academically. Same goes for us; our small team of volunteers makes every effort to support our articles with facts and quotes, but we’re mostly here to make you think,” said the UOLeaks team. f