The Galleon - Portsmouth's Official Student Newspaper

Response from IS Director
I was very saddened to read in Issue 48 about Emily Venables’ frustrating experience with computers in the Library. When Emily visited, we were updating software on some PCs. At the same time and very unexpectedly we had a fault with the entry system, which prevented us from lending fifty laptops. Our supplier fixed this the following day, but meanwhile students struggled to find free PCs.

Despite the spacious appearance, there are the same number of computers as before and we will add even more shortly, along with attractive furniture that will provide more seats for students working with laptops. Some of this will be especially suitable for group work.

The University has invested hugely in e-learning over the last few years and has also grown! This has made open access computing busier. To address this we have amazing plans for the coming months that will improve things for our students. Not long after Christmas the North Campus (and one or two other places) will see Quick Access machines (like the Library), power sofas (wait and see) and automated laptop loans. New technology called VDI will allow us to make more software available in more places, perhaps even on student owned computers. We will make the wireless work faster and in more places. Key IT teaching suites will be improved and made available for general use when not used for teaching.

As for the touch tables, we have been really amazed at the uses students have found for them and have had several requests for more!

Feedback from students is incredibly useful and always welcome. Our target is to provide world-class student IT, but this sometimes means that pressure on our facilities is very high!
IT help is available every hour of every day on 7777.

This letter was sent via email by Andrew Minter, Director of Information Services at the University of Portsmouth, in response to ‘Where have all the computers gone?’ published in issue 48 17/11/2010 by Emily Venables. Contact the writer on twitter: @isuop

Dear Pugwash News,
After reading the edition of Pugwash News dated Wednesday 17th November 2010, I am appalled after reading the ‘Senior Lecturer in Media Studies” response to Greg Barker-Devereux’s letter. I myself am against the wars in the Middle-East. However, a very close friend of mine was killed by an IED in Afghanistan on Sunday the 14th November. This date being Remembrance Sunday, a very prominent day in the UK’s calendar, makes his death more than a little saddening, especially for those who know him. In my grievance, when I read Mr Harper’s e-mail regarding ‘Poppies as Propaganda’ I myself was disgusted by his comment about the charity ‘Help For Heroes’. Yes, I welcome people’s opinion, however, allowing this statement to be published was not only wrong but completely immoral. Tony Blair’s Government dictated that military operations should commence in Iraq, leading to Afghanistan, but the Military Forces have no choice. It is their career, the same way as Mr Harper has chosen to become a lecturer in Media Studies. I know that Ranger Aaron McCormick had wanted to be in the army since he was very young, and he made his way through the ranks to be the lead in the search for IED’s. He then died as a result of injuries from a routine IED inspection. Mr Harper, I ask the question, if you were in Aaron’s shoes, how would you approach such a situation? Consider your words before you let them loose. Help for Heroes is not ‘disgusting’ as you claim; they clearly help our soldiers with their limited resources. The after effects of such deployments include injuries and post traumatic stress syndrome, that of which I have had experience in dealing with.

I urge you, Pugwash, to consider more thoughtfully what you publish within your newspaper.
This article was sent via e-mail by Olivia Esler in response to ‘Poppies as propaganda’ published in issue 48 17/11/2010 by Dr. Stephen Harper

Dear Dr Harper,
I have read your rebuttal to Greg Barker-Devereux’s letter (‘About time to wear your poppy’, 3 November 2010) in ‘Pugwash’, and find your reply ignorant and insulting. I believe you are somewhat misinformed on the facts and background of both the Poppy appeal and the Help for Heroes charity, and are using this media as a way of simply inciting anti-war sentiments. Both charities are categorically NOT about the war in Afghanistan or Iraq; they neither support nor condemn it, what they support is the people. The Poppy appeal was set up in 1921, to assist those and their families who were injured or killed in the Great War. Since then it has continued to support underpaid armed forces personnel and their families, with much needed financial support when they can no longer work to support themselves; regardless of whether their injuries are the result of war or training exercises. Opinion on recent conflicts are neither welcome nor relevant when it comes to charities designed for nothing more or less than supporting those who have offered their lives to ensure the freedoms we enjoy in this country.

I wear my poppy with pride every year, because I respect those who have and who are willing to do what the majority of this population simply couldn’t. Irrespective of whether you support conflict or politicians or the Government, or not; the members of our armed forces are there to do a job – and it is completely unreasonable to deny them support for that.

I understand and appreciate the need for freedom of speech in the media; however I believe that your choice of language is offensively strong, and some of your assertions of fact are inaccurate in your references to the armed forces charities’ political alignment. Both websites show no evidence of ‘pro-war propaganda’, and Help for Heroes categorically state that they are ‘strictly non-political’; their focus is simply to assist injured servicemen and their families in the best way they can, and to suggest otherwise is offensive.
This article was sent via e-mail by Samantha Galloway in response to ‘Poppies as propaganda’, published in issue 48 17/11/2010 by Dr. Stephen Harper

Dear Editor,
I most strongly and profoundly disagree with the statements issued forth by Dr. Stephen Harper in his letter “Poppies as Propaganda.” Help for heroes is a great campaign to help those that have given all for their country. I would wager that Dr. Harper has never taken part in any military activity ever. I have not either, but I have friends who have served and who, like me, are outraged that such a comment can be issued by someone who is supposed to be educating the next generation of media professionals. Dr. Harper has a completely wrong opinion of the use of the poppy. It is used to commemorate those who gave all for their country, and Dr. Harper should be grateful too. It is not primarily about current or recent wars, but about wars now long past. Dr. Harper should acknowledge that his statements are not fair to those who have been injured or the families of those who have been killed in service for this and other countries.
This article was sent via e-mail by Lloyd Collins in response to ‘Poppies as propaganda’ published in issue 48 17/11/2010 by Dr. Stephen Harper

This content is one individual's opinion and does not represent the opinion of The Galleon. If you disagree with this article or have any further comment to make please email letters@galleonnews.com.