Wiki Support Team TSR Moderation Team: Moderator PS Helper
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kent
Re: Leader debates
Originally Posted by Indievertigo
Personally I think this sort of debate should only happen if it were heavily moderated, and no "heckling" permitted. Pure debate and nothing more. Otherwise, I don't see the need.
Personally I think this sort of debate should only happen if it were heavily moderated, and no "heckling" permitted. Pure debate and nothing more. Otherwise, I don't see the need.
Or this:
Originally Posted by Drogue
Why just party leaders? If you wanted to do a debate on the forum, surely it's best to have dayne ask a series of questions, each party PMs him their responses and he posts them next to the question. I can't see any voter reading a free for all among the party leaders, as you know how tedious it is to read hosts of multiquotes going on for pages and pages.
The latter would be better in my opinion, gives a structured response to each issue which enables a reader to decide on the party which they most agree with easily.
Why just party leaders? If you wanted to do a debate on the forum, surely it's best to have dayne ask a series of questions, each party PMs him their responses and he posts them next to the question. I can't see any voter reading a free for all among the party leaders, as you know how tedious it is to read hosts of multiquotes going on for pages and pages.
Well this is also good. I mean the idea was really some type of event that we can host were the public can see the reaction, the capacity, and the beliefs of each of the candidates.
Incidentally I'm not against kij appearing although I would like it, if we do do this, that the Socialist Party only submit as many people as the other parties.
Why just party leaders? If you wanted to do a debate on the forum, surely it's best to have dayne ask a series of questions, each party PMs him their responses and he posts them next to the question. I can't see any voter reading a free for all among the party leaders, as you know how tedious it is to read hosts of multiquotes going on for pages and pages.
I think this is a good idea, because the parties can discuss their answers and give an official answer for the party, which is more representative than any one person answering (even if that person is the leader)
Why just party leaders? If you wanted to do a debate on the forum, surely it's best to have dayne ask a series of questions, each party PMs him their responses and he posts them next to the question. I can't see any voter reading a free for all among the party leaders, as you know how tedious it is to read hosts of multiquotes going on for pages and pages.
This is the exact idea I thought of as I read the original post. I would support this and it would provide further reading for the manifestos the parties present. Which users of the forum could read as a better source to establish what the parties real aims are in more than 250 words.
Cant remember, I have the image though - Im 2 down and 3 across in the left/lib part.
Why do you ask?
Was just interested, an exact score gives a better idea of where you might be placed in terms of parties.
Thats a fairly moderate position so I guess you'd be looking at Labour, Lib Dem or Centre.
I don't think the political compass is very accurate though so make your own mind up.
Was just interested, an exact score gives a better idea of where you might be placed in terms of parties.
Thats a fairly moderate position so I guess you'd be looking at Labour, Lib Dem or Centre.
I don't think the political compass is very accurate though so make your own mind up.
Yea i think im very one way on some things and very the other on other things.
Im browsing currently. =] tar
Ima try and find thier stances on university education somewhere
TSR's model parliament.
Useful Resources:
Re: Leader debates
