Let me clarify my statements so that you can understand clearly. I do not try to engage in interpreting isolated statements, instead I prefer to either directly ask the person what they mean by their statement or seek out potential supporting or conflicting statements to come to a conclusion of the meaning of the statement; it is what we call research. Would you write a paper with only one supporting statement? Furthermore the fact that he didn’t say it directly to me is more of a reason why I would either ask him directly or look at other statements he has made, which is not what you did, you make a blank assumption and present it as a fact. Of course I believe that you have to make assumptions about things like the economy or the weather both unlike you did, people who make those assumptions don’t take one statement or factor into account when making that assumption.

Do economist not evaluate various indicators including history
Do meteorologist and hedge fund managers not do the same? You took one statement and ran with it, congratulations you are no closer to the truth then when you started. You can stand by your word all you want, but steadfast about something doesn’t mean it is correct. Let me say it again, your assumptions are both factually and historically inaccurate, at least economist, meteorologist and hedge fund managers understand that before making an assumption you take the facts that are clear and history into account; and as I said before you should because the organization advocated on behalf of you.

And if you think this you probably think they didn’t take me seriously, if that is the case please try and prove to me how you think they didn’t take me seriously, and if you dare to do so I can’t wait to see your supporting evidence. Actually why don’t I help you out search my name on the UH website, and see what you find about my involvement in the affairs of this campus and then explain where I wasn’t taken seriously if and I do mean if you think so.

Good luck to you.

I owe you an apology. I was wrong about the administration controlling SGA.

My assumption turned out to be bad.

There isn’t a problem with the administration pulling the strings of the SGA, but a problem lies with how serious the administration takes SGA. And that has a direct link to what Mr. Reyes was talking about in Tuesday’s article.

Mr. Reyes talks about SGA not taking enough action on behalf of the students. He also points out a practice of doing legislation for legislation’s sake.

((this isn’t me saying this…please check it out if you have not already, http://thedailycougar.com/2010/03/09/sga-veteran-hopes-to-claim-student-presidency/ ))

If this is the case, why would the administration or anyone take SGA seriously?

So the biggest problem with SGA isn’t the administration, but SGA itself. ((Again, before getting upset at me for saying this, please read Mr. Reyes comments))

Samuel,

My six grade English teacher used to say, “Never assume because it makes an ASS out of U and ME”. When I was in the six grade, I believed this to be true. Now since I’m an adult, I know my teacher was wrong.

You told me, “Now I challenge you to stop making assumptions, learn the facts…”

Going through life is a stochastic process. It is impossible to know all the facts in any real-life situation. To say otherwise is 100 percent incorrect.

If you take an economics course at UH, you learn the basis of economic theory is based on assumptions on how people act in society.

Do you ever look at the weather report? The models used to predict the weather have built in assumptions about temperature, pressure, wind systems, etc.

Do you ever follow the stock market? The models that quants and hedge fund managers use have build in assumptions on how the market will react to particular situations.

Now you can argue that there are good assumptions and bad assumptions. I would say this about assumptions:

Don’t be blindsided by your assumptions
Update your understanding

And this it what I did when realizing the SGA isn’t a puppet with the administration pulling the strings.

With that said, my assessment of his statement is that, I agree with it; we all want “senators actually doing something for the students,” in fact I will go further and say we all want our student representatives, senators and execs, appointed or elected, actually doing something for the students. Who wouldn’t want that?

The goal is to be an effective advocate for your fellow students, which leads me to my next point of clarification on your other assumption that because carlos is an “insider” or “veteran” of SGA he better than anybody should know the effectiveness of the senate, and that from his words, you assume he believes the senate is not effective. I have several points of contention with your assumptions. Number one contention is the fact that you are making assumptions (refer to advice #1: no assumptions) Your assumption that because carlos is an SGA “veteran” he is the best to decide effectiveness is shortsighted; while I do think peer to peer assessments are helpful in determining effectiveness however your SGA colleagues are not the ultimate decision makers in that regard; the ultimate decision about the effectiveness of a person or group, rest with our fellow students and the standard of measure is in the tangible things you do for them; so if you do your job, your record will show. Student reps deemed ineffective by students, can be voted out of office. So I will take their word for it over anyone elses.

Finally let me address the beginning of your comments, in which you state that you “stand by your words,” even in the face of the facts. You even brush it off as just a disagreement in the “manner of the relationship between SGA and the admin;” again after being confronted with the facts. It sounds as if you are the one who has an indoctrinated belief and I find it odd that someone who believes that SGA plays a subordinate role to the admin would want to join the organization. There is a proper way to critique a person or group who you believe is not maximizing their efforts; it is called a challenge. Now I challenge you to stop making assumptions, learn the facts and positively contribute to a discussion on how to move the student body and university forward. (Btw that was advice #2)

Okay. We disagree on the manner of the relationship between SGA and the UH administration. I have another issue.

I just read today’s article titled, “SGA veteran hopes to claim student presidency”.

( http://thedailycougar.com/2010/03/09/sga-veteran-hopes-to-claim-student-presidency/ )

It’s a piece about Mr. Reyes.

I am very curious to get your take on the following statement from him:

“Students want SGA to take action,” Reyes said. “We want to focus on representation, not legislation, and the senators actually doing something for the students, not just writing bills and legislation that will just be archived in the SGA Web site. We want more action from the senate.”

To me the line that sticks out is, “…senators actually doing something for the students…” Mr. Reyes is an insider; he’s a SGA veteran. I would think he would know better than anybody on the effectiveness of the senate…which, taking his word for it, doesn’t seem effective at all.

Please advise,

James