Friday 27 November 2009
Thursday 5 November 2009
BAG on architectenweb.nl
Another article on the actions of BAG on architectenweb.nl including the reaction of bad management (same as in B_Nieuws).
We will not be patronized and have a cup of coffee with a dean that obviously does not take students seriously!
http://www.architectenweb.nl/aweb/redactie/redactie_detail.asp?iNID=21874
We will not be patronized and have a cup of coffee with a dean that obviously does not take students seriously!
http://www.architectenweb.nl/aweb/redactie/redactie_detail.asp?iNID=21874
Wednesday 4 November 2009
Why we choose to remain Anonymous? at least for now....
1. Anonymity is a tool that affords us to bring focus to our agenda rather than to the participants of the movement – a way of maintaining the idea(s) above any events or individuals involved.
2. Anonymity keeps the issue of change the focus. Not allowing the individual demographics of those involved in change to be used by bad management to marginalize or detract from the issue.
3. Anonymity prevents opening a direct discussion between BAG and bad management, and forces bad management to address the student body as a whole.
4. Anonymity opens the door for other actions about which bad management may be very unhappy.
5. Anonymity prevents bad management from changing the dynamics and co-opting BAG into a
negotiation.
6. We are truly concerned of the fairness of the institution as marginalization can happen in very
subtle ways. Let bad management address the faculty, not us. Then let us all debate the idea(s) – not the names.
2. Anonymity keeps the issue of change the focus. Not allowing the individual demographics of those involved in change to be used by bad management to marginalize or detract from the issue.
3. Anonymity prevents opening a direct discussion between BAG and bad management, and forces bad management to address the student body as a whole.
4. Anonymity opens the door for other actions about which bad management may be very unhappy.
5. Anonymity prevents bad management from changing the dynamics and co-opting BAG into a
negotiation.
6. We are truly concerned of the fairness of the institution as marginalization can happen in very
subtle ways. Let bad management address the faculty, not us. Then let us all debate the idea(s) – not the names.
The Dean of the Faculty (Wytze) Writes in Our Blog
"Jongens, leuke actie. Kom toch vooral een kopje koffie met mij drinken. Dat heeft meer effect dan anonieme postertjes onder de magneetjes schuiven. Wytze"
This is a response from an anonymous supporter that summarizes our position:
why is it that - despite of a clear explanation of what BAG's "anonymity" conveys and why it has been established as a form to FORCE management to face the ISSUES, not the NAMES (see B_Nieuws), management insists on shielding itself from taking responsibility for the unrest and distrust it has instilled in our community?
This is a response from an anonymous supporter that summarizes our position:
why is it that - despite of a clear explanation of what BAG's "anonymity" conveys and why it has been established as a form to FORCE management to face the ISSUES, not the NAMES (see B_Nieuws), management insists on shielding itself from taking responsibility for the unrest and distrust it has instilled in our community?
Why is it that a collective voice --of many or of a handful-- is suddenly not a voice unless it has a big, important name attached to it? Is it because management itself believes that REAL ISSUES can only be real, and hence be taken seriously if they are voiced by BIG NAMES such as OCW, NWO, MVRVD, etc? (These are also acronyms, btw)
Why does management (and I take that the previous post really comes from Witze, "our" Witze) believe that -because claims and complaints are made by an action group (sufficiently identified as precisely that) they can be dealt with and solved "over coffee"? This shows a complete disconnection of management's perception and the REAL feeling of unrest in our community. These claims have been extracted from a series of public documents (available online) and the REAL feeling of dissatisfaction in the way that management has dealt with us in this dark, difficult period since the fire. I suggest to have coffee with Witze and see if that is really all there is to be done to regain these items that management has "managed" to dissolve in our community:
1. CONFIDENCE, COMMUNICATION, DIALOGUE
2. RESPECT (not for celebrities but for regular STAFF & STUDENTS - do you need names? look at your registration systems, your payrolls, your unending ID lists...)
3. UNIFIED VISIONS for the FUTURE of our community (more than glitzy parties, flying buildings and soft-tech hallucinations)
4. CLEAR OBJECTIVES for our educational curriculum, our research priorities, etc
5. CLEAR EXPLANATIONS of the consequences and implications of (necessary) budget cuts as well as JUSTIFIED actions that concern US ALL.
But most importantly, TRUST. Face it, nobody trusts you management boys anymore. Unrest is growing, you've spread dissatisfaction... AND THAT IS A FACT. As this week's Archined opinion article suggests: There is trouble in paradise, and you will have to face it: disdainful puns, belittling language, superficiality and poor quotations of Engels or Marx will not do this time.
We are all watching your moves now, we are judging your responses, we are expecting convincing explanations of what caused this UNREST, whether we are an active part of BAG or not, we are all part of the BK COMMUNITY.
And yes, I CHOOSE to signing this "anonymously" - in support of BAG.
Why does management (and I take that the previous post really comes from Witze, "our" Witze) believe that -because claims and complaints are made by an action group (sufficiently identified as precisely that) they can be dealt with and solved "over coffee"? This shows a complete disconnection of management's perception and the REAL feeling of unrest in our community. These claims have been extracted from a series of public documents (available online) and the REAL feeling of dissatisfaction in the way that management has dealt with us in this dark, difficult period since the fire. I suggest to have coffee with Witze and see if that is really all there is to be done to regain these items that management has "managed" to dissolve in our community:
1. CONFIDENCE, COMMUNICATION, DIALOGUE
2. RESPECT (not for celebrities but for regular STAFF & STUDENTS - do you need names? look at your registration systems, your payrolls, your unending ID lists...)
3. UNIFIED VISIONS for the FUTURE of our community (more than glitzy parties, flying buildings and soft-tech hallucinations)
4. CLEAR OBJECTIVES for our educational curriculum, our research priorities, etc
5. CLEAR EXPLANATIONS of the consequences and implications of (necessary) budget cuts as well as JUSTIFIED actions that concern US ALL.
But most importantly, TRUST. Face it, nobody trusts you management boys anymore. Unrest is growing, you've spread dissatisfaction... AND THAT IS A FACT. As this week's Archined opinion article suggests: There is trouble in paradise, and you will have to face it: disdainful puns, belittling language, superficiality and poor quotations of Engels or Marx will not do this time.
We are all watching your moves now, we are judging your responses, we are expecting convincing explanations of what caused this UNREST, whether we are an active part of BAG or not, we are all part of the BK COMMUNITY.
And yes, I CHOOSE to signing this "anonymously" - in support of BAG.
Monday 2 November 2009
The GOOD media is paying attention!
Please check this great article by Piet Vollard in Archined !!! It is a critical view on TU Delft's BAD MANAGEMENT from someone that used to study there and one of the most important journalists and promoters of dutch architecture in the world.
Indymedia also reported!!!!
We thank the media for their support, more news agencies will follow!
Indymedia also reported!!!!
We thank the media for their support, more news agencies will follow!
B_Nieuws cover page - too controversial?
writes a member of the editorial board on his blog: "it was, however rejected, because it isn’t a very pleasant thing, and it’s not like that piece was the most important thing in the whole issue".
in other words the gloomy future of our education is not the most important thing in our faculty?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)