On Sunday, the University Park Undergraduate Association had its first town hall style meeting. In theory, a town hall meeting is a great idea.

It's a place for everyone to gather together and voice concerns about UPUA and bounce ideas off each other in an effort to increase student involvement at Penn State.

At Sunday's town hall meeting, however, newly appointed representative Katelyn Holmes monopolized the floor for about an hour.

The point of a town hall meeting is to allow everyone time to talk and air their ideas and concerns.

When someone monopolizes the floor in such a manner, it frustrates others who are waiting, which could lead to a decreased interest in UPUA's town hall meetings.

If people stop showing up for town hall meetings, then what is the point of having them?

This could lead UPUA to stop town hall meetings when student involvement slips.

But, as frustrating as it may be to other students who went to that meeting, Holmes retains the right to monopolize the floor, and air grievances that she may have.

That's the beauty of a town hall meeting: Every person has an equal opportunity.

What is disconcerting about the town hall meeting is the fact that UPUA Vice President Mitch Belding discouraged the idea of an open debate.

"It sends a mixed message to the student body during our meetings to say 'Here's the opinion,' and 'Now, here's the dissenting opinion.'"

Well, that's the point of a town hall meeting.

These meetings are great, and to discourage the airing of ideas is counterproductive. Both UPUA President Jay Chamberlin and Belding both said that debate should stay within the committee hearings.

If someone has a problem, isn't the perfect place to discuss it at a town hall meeting?

What's even more upsetting is the fact that all this bickering is already beginning to be reminiscent of the problems that USG had during its time as Penn State's student government.

Could history be repeating itself already?