Final say: CS Network

The CS Network issue has been running unresolved for sometime now and has been placed under a silence banner. I have kept my silence thinking out of respect for the incumbent representatives and convenors of the alliance. It is their term and they are allowed to run things as they see fit, as they think is what the students and department needs, as they vision the department to be. But I guess my silence has also its down side, having read an unpublished article for Parser on what the current representatives vision is for the network.

I still maintain that they are given free reign on how to run the network, but what irks me the most is for them to say that we during our term had a limited vision vision for the network, contained by the boundaries of what was, and dictated by those that surround us.

Yes, information dessimination was our primary purpose for the network. It was a time when only those who had connections and those who took time to read the WH? and Logscript knew what was happening. Those who didn't have access didn't know what the hell has happening to the college, and to our department. Most didn't even have an inkling on what their department representatives are suppose to be doing. Aside from that, Parser dead, the ECR volcorp was dying, there was a limited number of players for EnggCup, and there were no organizations interested in participating during TechnoFair activities. And with these problems, we wanted make people know that the ESC was doing something for the college and for their welfare. We wanted people to know that the department offers tons of activities that would develop their interests deeper than what I myself has experienced. There were just so many things I wanted to do during my college days but it came too late.

That was why information dessimination came as our first priority for the Network. And yet, this was not the only vision we had for it. Another purpose was for it to become a not an umbrella organization but rather a collaboration between organizations. A collaboration that has respect for each other as its foremost value and concern. Respect for each organizations individuality. Respect for each organizations difference and uniqueness. We wanted it to be a place where the organizations let the others know what they are up to / what their activities are, not compete for activities. It was suppose to be a venue for student leaders to voice their concern on issues concerning the department, the ESC and college.

I mentioned this in the first CS Network meeting despite it being too late. The purpose of the CS Network: 1) information dessimination from the ESC to the organizations, 2) information dessimination between organizations, and 3) a venue to discuss both technical and nontechnical (national, college, department and ESC) issues. Just like EASL but I also emphasized on the need for respect for each other uniqueness - a trait not many organizations in EASL have for one another.

If it were only about visioneering for the department, I personally do not think that we were limited, bounded, and dictated. If it were not for visioneering, we would have made it half of our term before losing interest because of the disappointments we crossed path with during that one year stint. We had problems both in the ESC and our own projects for the department - these I'd not mention as these are all in the past.

When we ran for office, we had this vague idea of the different committees of cs-related organizations forming a newsletter and a varsity for the department. That was before the current EIC's name was brought to our concern. Parser was suppose to be a product of the Network considering that its previous death was due to lack of funds. We didn't anticipate nor regret in involving the current EIC and his friends into Parser without the need for the network. I do not deny that at that point we lost purpose for the network as Parser was revived for the purpose of information dessimination.

But then small organizations came and grew, new ones formed and up until the 2nd sem, there again grew the need for the network and now with more leaders that might be eager to collaborate with each other. Like a network, organizations would work as clients capable of working independently achieving each of their specific tasks and goals. A server is there so that each individual client could connect when they need to collaborate, talk to chat and to share information. However, there were some that doubted it, and sometimes with good reason. The status quo that the representatives before us left was among the best relationships left between two particular organizations. It would be difficult if we brought something of that nature again to the DCS student scene. This was one scenario that we were very carefula about and a scenario we knew was very risky.

That risk we took and ended with a pretty swell CS Week. In planning for that, we never debated on who will take what event, but rather what event will each organization hold, and we schedule it for them. Cursor, being the organization that sponsored the event throughout its entire existence, I believed, deserved the right to be asked if we could invite other organizations to sponsor events. They agree to the condition that as long as these events do not overlap theirs. Thus, I made sure they didn't. The meetings where stressful, I can tell about that now. It was difficult to make everyone give their opinion most especially when they start feeling intimidated. But i guess thats a whole different story.

As I said earlier, I do not want to meddle in the affairs of the CS Network now because it is the current representatives vision running it. However, my point in this whole thing is that people should just not blame for others for lack of vision. There is no one who lacks vision for himself or in his service. Blame the way we implemented the Network, but never underestimate what vision we had for it.