Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by ByronicHero)
    Hmm, I like mobbsy's manifesto the best. It's the kind of thing I'd write if I had missed an additional three years of schooling and had 30 fewer IQ points. Currently he is the most likely to secure my endorsement. Long live mobbsy!

    Life_peer is my boy, and his appointment would probably piss a lot of people off which would be amusing. Some good ideas in principle.

    Airmed would be an inoffensive choice. However, when choosing a Speaker to quote you must always choose Boothroyd. That, coupled with her refusal to dance for me, means I cannot in good faith endorse her.

    I know essentially nothing about Adam but he points out the complete lack of quality debate here these days and is right on the money. Definitely under consideration.

    I know Nigel about as well as Adam. I dislike cats. No thanks.

    Fez admits to having a poor memory. Also, I prefer the city to the hat. Lukewarm.

    You need Jammy to not be Speaker. He is one of the very few people I have seen bothering to defend their position(s).

    The fuzzy pictures in Aph's entry hurt my eyes. I consider this an act of war.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    That all being said, the first person to rank all of the Star Trek captains from best to worst in the correct order will win my support :lol:
    Picard
    Janeway
    Sisco
    Kirk
    The other one (from enterprise)
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByronicHero)
    You need Jammy to not be Speaker. He is one of the very few people I have seen bothering to defend their position(s).
    However (in)coherently that might be, right?
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    However (in)coherently that might be, right?
    Yes, actually. I don't really expect anything particularly impressive from anyone, but it does strike me as important that people make the effort :dontknow: It seems that the prevailing behaviour is to post some legislation, ignore most of the criticisms and comments offered in response, and then send it to vote anyway. The debate used to be the main focus here, but now it looks like something people put up with having to do occasionally so they can spend the bulk of their time playing career politician simulator :lol:
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Aph)
    Picard
    Janeway
    Sisco
    Kirk
    The other one (from enterprise)
    You love Star Trek but can't name all of the captains?
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByronicHero)
    Yes, actually. I don't really expect anything particularly impressive from anyone, but it does strike me as important that people make the effort :dontknow: It seems that the prevailing behaviour is to post some legislation, ignore most of the criticisms and comments offered in response, and then send it to vote anyway. The debate used to be the main focus here, but now it looks like something people put up with having to do occasionally so they can spend the bulk of their time playing career politician simulator :lol:
    As someone who writes more legislation than probably any other member of the House at the moment, I can say that I do ignore most comments when it comes to a second reading because the changes suggested would fundamentally change what I want to see done with the legislation. Sure, you argue, but the point isn't to produce as many pieces of centrist, crowd-pleasing legislation as possible either.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by ByronicHero)
    You love Star Trek but can't name all of the captains?
    The last one was very underwhelming I try to forget him
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    As someone who writes more legislation than probably any other member of the House at the moment, I can say that I do ignore most comments when it comes to a second reading because the changes suggested would fundamentally change what I want to see done with the legislation. Sure, you argue, but the point isn't to produce as many pieces of centrist, crowd-pleasing legislation as possible either.
    Saying that you should address people's comments and saying that you should incorporate all of their suggestions are different things though. Many objections will be nonsense, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't respond to them. If somebody makes a comment it should be par for the course that somebody responds, even if just to say that it is an issue of ideological distance you have no intention of traversing.

    Of course, this is just my opinion of what this place should be. It has been a long time since I have bothered to do anything and I am very out of touch with the active membership of today so it is entirely possible that everyone is happy with the way things are. It isn't my place to tell everyone what they should enjoy, but it just seems pretty soulless at the moment.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by ByronicHero)
    Hmm, I like mobbsy's manifesto the best. It's the kind of thing I'd write if I had missed an additional three years of schooling and had 30 fewer IQ points. Currently he is the most likely to secure my endorsement. Long live mobbsy!

    Life_peer is my boy, and his appointment would probably piss a lot of people off which would be amusing. Some good ideas in principle.

    Airmed would be an inoffensive choice. However, when choosing a Speaker to quote you must always choose Boothroyd. That, coupled with her refusal to dance for me, means I cannot in good faith endorse her.

    I know essentially nothing about Adam but he points out the complete lack of quality debate here these days and is right on the money. Definitely under consideration.

    I know Nigel about as well as Adam. I dislike cats. No thanks.

    Fez admits to having a poor memory. Also, I prefer the city to the hat. Lukewarm.

    You need Jammy to not be Speaker. He is one of the very few people I have seen bothering to defend their position(s).

    The fuzzy pictures in Aph's entry hurt my eyes. I consider this an act of war.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    That all being said, the first person to rank all of the Star Trek captains from best to worst in the correct order will win my support :lol:
    I have no intention of taking the chair yet, it was just taking the opportunity to take the piss, hence the being marginally more active than Ray, taking a dig at Birch for his argument Ray was great because toronto did everything, and the hardly disguised trump parallels towards the end. When I come to retire I will be trying to take the chair, but I have a stand for party leader and PM first.

    (Original post by Airmed)
    JD, I never use my mental health to be lazy and I find it shocking that you suggest so. Last summer was an exception: I was extremely ill and I had to take a step back, I was suicidal and not in the right frame of mind to lead a party. You can question my previous absences but when I say I'm struggling, I mean it. I have a perfectionist stance in life and I hate admitting defeat and that's why I tend to burn out and become a horrible mess. But don't believe I use my mental health as an excuse. I don't. I hate being ill but I am and sometimes it can't be denied.
    But tendencies towards hardly infrequent illness and absence isn't exactly desirable for the position

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Peer Support Volunteers
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Peer Support Volunteers
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    I have no intention of taking the chair yet, it was just taking the opportunity to take the piss, hence the being marginally more active than Ray, taking a dig at Birch for his argument Ray was great because toronto did everything, and the hardly disguised trump parallels towards the end. When I come to retire I will be trying to take the chair, but I have a stand for party leader and PM first.



    But tendencies towards hardly infrequent illness and absence isn't exactly desirable for the position

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    My illness isn't infrequent. I battle it every single day of my life and if me admitting that I have problems is a bad thing to you, then I don't even see the point of trying to persuade you otherwise. Very few people on here know the full extent of my mental health illness, which I will always have for the rest of my life.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByronicHero)
    Yes, actually. I don't really expect anything particularly impressive from anyone, but it does strike me as important that people make the effort :dontknow: It seems that the prevailing behaviour is to post some legislation, ignore most of the criticisms and comments offered in response, and then send it to vote anyway. The debate used to be the main focus here, but now it looks like something people put up with having to do occasionally so they can spend the bulk of their time playing career politician simulator :lol:
    I usually get bored and feel like I'm completely wasting my time after three exchanges with the same person on the same topic because I know they can afford to waste a lot more time than I can without offering what I'd consider a single compelling argument.

    It makes me look weak because it's practically retreat but I'd rather lose than spend hours explaining people like Whiggy that e.g. if APA say something on their web page, it doesn't necessarily mean it's true. It used to be very different two or three years ago.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    I have no intention of taking the chair yet, it was just taking the opportunity to take the piss, hence the being marginally more active than Ray, taking a dig at Birch for his argument Ray was great because toronto did everything, and the hardly disguised trump parallels towards the end. When I come to retire I will be trying to take the chair, but I have a stand for party leader and PM first.



    But tendencies towards hardly infrequent illness and absence isn't exactly desirable for the position

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I know you were fecking around.

    I genuinely have no idea who will win as I have no idea who among you is popular and who isn't.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    This is a tough one, but I'm probably gonna vote RON, apologise profusely to RayApparently for voting to get rid of him and then beg him to stand again.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by ByronicHero)
    I know you were fecking around.

    I genuinely have no idea who will win as I have no idea who among you is popular and who isn't.
    Obviously popularity should have little bearing on the result, although I should think Nigel's recent actions likely destroyed his chances. I'm tempted to stay in just to see if I can beat him.

    (Original post by Airmed)
    My illness isn't infrequent. I battle it every single day of my life and if me admitting that I have problems is a bad thing to you, then I don't even see the point of trying to persuade you otherwise. Very few people on here know thr full extent of my mental health illness, which I will always have for the rest of my life.
    Admitting it's a bad thing isn't the problem, the problem is it likely leading to a repeat of last term, and a repeat of Ray's speakership; I don't do sympathy on the whole, particularly when you knew it was almost certainly coming. You saw what happened when ray was absent for massive stints of his tenure.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    I usually get bored and feel like I'm completely wasting my time after three exchanges with the same person on the same topic because I know they can afford to waste a lot more time than I can without offering what I'd consider a single compelling argument.

    It makes me look weak because it's practically retreat but I'd rather lose than spend hours explaining people like Whiggy that e.g. if APA say something on their web page, it doesn't necessarily mean it's true. It used to be very different two or three years ago.
    I have a great deal of sympathy for this as I have felt exactly the same way many times before. However, if you have had the same debate with somebody three times previously I would consider you to have fulfilled the implied requirements of your position anyway to be honest. I would still think it good practice to reply briefly explaining that you have outlined your position before and are unwilling to do so ad nauseam.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airmed)
    Thank you, that's very much appreciated.
    I have decided I am going to vote for Airmed definately. You have my vote and let us hope you become speaker because you have the best and most realistic manifesto
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Obviously popularity should have little bearing on the result, although I should think Nigel's recent actions likely destroyed his chances. I'm tempted to stay in just to see if I can beat him.



    Admitting it's a bad thing isn't the problem, the problem is it likely leading to a repeat of last term, and a repeat of Ray's speakership; I don't do sympathy on the whole, particularly when you knew it was almost certainly coming. You saw what happened when ray was absent for massive stints of his tenure.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Sure, but popularity will always be important. Most people will disregard anyone they consider to be incompetent no matter how much they like them and then vote for the person they like most of those that remain. This is a crude description, but I think it is probably fairly accurate.
    • Peer Support Volunteers
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Peer Support Volunteers
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Obviously popularity should have little bearing on the result, although I should think Nigel's recent actions likely destroyed his chances. I'm tempted to stay in just to see if I can beat him.



    Admitting it's a bad thing isn't the problem, the problem is it likely leading to a repeat of last term, and a repeat of Ray's speakership; I don't do sympathy on the whole, particularly when you knew it was almost certainly coming. You saw what happened when ray was absent for massive stints of his tenure.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    JD, I can't predict my burn outs. If I could, I wouldn't be ill. I'm more prepared now than a year ago, trust me. I don't want you sympathy, I just don't want my illness to be used against me negatively.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByronicHero)
    I have a great deal of sympathy for this as I have felt exactly the same way many times before. However, if you have had the same debate with somebody three times previously I would consider you to have fulfilled the implied requirements of your position anyway to be honest. I would still think it good practice to reply briefly explaining that you have outlined your position before and are unwilling to do so ad nauseam.
    Precisely, I'd just like to specify that by ‘exchange’ I meant two messages rather than a whole conversation, although the latter happens too. I usually address everything that comes up except for the really boring stuff.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByronicHero)
    Hmm, I like mobbsy's manifesto the best. It's the kind of thing I'd write if I had missed an additional three years of schooling and had 30 fewer IQ points. Currently he is the most likely to secure my endorsement. Long live mobbsy!

    Life_peer is my boy, and his appointment would probably piss a lot of people off which would be amusing. Some good ideas in principle.

    Airmed would be an inoffensive choice. However, when choosing a Speaker to quote you must always choose Boothroyd. That, coupled with her refusal to dance for me, means I cannot in good faith endorse her.

    I know essentially nothing about Adam but he points out the complete lack of quality debate here these days and is right on the money. Definitely under consideration.

    I know Nigel about as well as Adam. I dislike cats. No thanks.

    Fez admits to having a poor memory. Also, I prefer the city to the hat. Lukewarm.

    You need Jammy to not be Speaker. He is one of the very few people I have seen bothering to defend their position(s).

    The fuzzy pictures in Aph's entry hurt my eyes. I consider this an act of war.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    That all being said, the first person to rank all of the Star Trek captains from best to worst in the correct order will win my support :lol:
    This is a great shame; and come to realisation- you are one of the few, long serving, respected members who I haven't got to know very well; which is regrettable- but hopefully in the future this can change!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Airmed)
    My illness isn't infrequent. I battle it every single day of my life and if me admitting that I have problems is a bad thing to you, then I don't even see the point of trying to persuade you otherwise. Very few people on here know the full extent of my mental health illness, which I will always have for the rest of my life.
    What makes you think that? We're probably a decade or two from extending our lives indefinitely and effective mood-altering medications are pretty much common nowadays.
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: May 15, 2016
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.