There has been discussion of this elsewhere and it really does seem like there's no level upon which this is a good decision.
STOCS is small and quiet these days, sure, it's been small and quiet before, but merging it with a larger society that doesn't really care about the primary aim is a bad idea. If STOCS is just left idle for a little while then someone will come along in a couple of years (as Adam Kelly, Shane Wishkah, Glen Moran et al did in the late 90s) and get involved. If it merges with the Games Soc, that's it. It will be incredibly difficult to ever have another STOCS and it will linger on as a minority interest, getting a sliver of the budget. In the first year, sure, the powers that be in DCU may remember that Games Soc was once two societies, but that memory will fade. I have spoken out here before about the need for change as regards Sillicon and STOCS, but it's the need for change, not the need to disappear. Societies have quiet periods, they aren't necessarily a bad thing, but quiet periods are a much better idea than extinction. B. On 06/03/2008, R4ph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Can't say I'm surprised, they had really poor membership this year, but it's > a shame nonetheless. I know they had to cancel Sillicon this year, and it's > possible they won;t run it if they;re merged with the Game Soc, since the > stuff they did will probably only be a small part of what Gamesoc do > afterwards. > > On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 9:24 AM, Mark Cunningham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > I'm afraid I don't have a link for it but STOCs, DCU's oldest running > > society and only gaming and roleplaying society may be merging (or > > rather being submerged) by DCU's Game Soc (predominately computer > > games) due to lack of membership. I have no idea of the fate of their > > annual convention Sillicon. > > -- > > http://thedeadone.net > > http://irishgamingwiki.com > > > > > > > > > -- > Aonghus Collins > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
