Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    If the voters simply vote in a 1 click widget poll, they won't come to the MHOC, see what here is like, read our manifestos, interact and engage.

    If a widget goes out, the most common sense method is to get a link to the MHOC, maybe the GE thread, and then let people decide!
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    It would be worded to give the speaker disgression to regect similarity.
    You also have the problem of what happens if multiple parties request the same name. The constitution shouldn't be open for interpretation, what it says is what it says, if the amendment does not cover something it is allowed, ambiguity and flexibility are for the GD

    I think your spelling is at an all time low there too.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    You are contradicting yourself, the purpose of the amendment was about ending a beneficial real-life association for one party but not for the others; your comment prove this. If you stood by that comment you would support ending the message, and not having a widget as both suggest an association that does not exist.

    Aph
    Pictures and quotes from IRL politicians are misleading as it suggests an association that doesn't exist.
    Ummmmm what on earth are you talking about?! How does the widget and mass PM suggest an RL connection?!

    To get rid of the RL connection either you use manifestos which are anonymous or you ban parties having names similar to RL names... You can still have the mass PM.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    You also have the problem of what happens if multiple parties request the same name. The constitution shouldn't be open for interpretation, what it says is what it says, if the amendment does not cover something it is allowed, ambiguity and flexibility are for the GD

    I think your spelling is at an all time low there too.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    No, the speaker would decide what is similar and what is not. That isn't interpretation. It's not like there would be a list or banned names.

    And the first who requested the name would get it.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    Ummmmm what on earth are you talking about?! How does the widget and mass PM suggest an RL connection?!

    To get rid of the RL connection either you use manifestos which are anonymous or you ban parties having names similar to RL names... You can still have the mass PM.
    The message, or widget suggest a real life connection because people will vote based on their real life feelings for each party, by not having a message, or widget the voters will be people who enter the MHoC to have a look around, the votes of those people are more likely to be based on what TSR parties do. Aa message can be kept when the parties are anonymous, but you supported a message sent to TSR users when the parties are not anonymous.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    No, the speaker would decide what is similar and what is not. That isn't interpretation. It's not like there would be a list or banned names.

    And the first who requested the name would get it.
    The less ambiguity the better, the letter of the law should be followed and if that means it says no party names it means no party names, it does not mean that colloquial names are not allowed

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    On the topic of RL likeness I think it would be to the detriment of the House if we tried to wipe all traces of the real world from the MHoC. The House is about political debate and ideology but it's also about role playing and there's a reason it was made the way it was 10 years ago. We can debate anywhere - but only here can we be the Conservative, Labour, Liberal, UKI, Green, Socialist and NatLib Party MPs. If members had to join the Social Democrat Party or Neo-liberal Traditionalist Party then I think we would have fewer people join and fewer people care. Ultimately, I think it would be a less enjoyable game.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    I don't know what form the widget will take - I can't even promise there'll be one.
    This.

    It's moot debating whether or not to have a widget and what form it will take as we are entirely at the mercy of the CT. I certainly hope we have a widget as this is a lot more important than most of the polls that end up part of the widget, and I may well mention it to the CT, but they will make that decision.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    The message, or widget suggest a real life connection because people will vote based on their real life feelings for each party, by not having a message, or widget the voters will be people who enter the MHoC to have a look around, the votes of those people are more likely to be based on what TSR parties do. Aa message can be kept when the parties are anonymous, but you supported a message sent to TSR users when the parties are not anonymous.
    I support the message because without it or any kind of promotion we end up with a situation where seats are determined by a parties user base and there are no suprises.
    So if we have no exposure we might as well just get the speaker to ban indies and end the GE and count how many people are in each party.
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    The less ambiguity the better, the letter of the law should be followed and if that means it says no party names it means no party names, it does not mean that colloquial names are not allowed

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I disagree. It is the spirit of the law and not the letter which should be followed.
    Anyone I would word it 'no RL likeness'
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    On the topic of RL likeness I think it would be to the detriment of the House if we tried to wipe all traces of the real world from the MHoC. The House is about political debate and ideology but it's also about role playing and there's a reason it was made the way it was 10 years ago. We can debate anywhere - but only here can we be the Conservative, Labour, Liberal, UKI, Green, Socialist and NatLib Party MPs. If members had to join the Social Democrat Party or Neo-liberal Traditionalist Party then I think we would have fewer people join and fewer people care. Ultimately, I think it would be a less enjoyable game.
    I personally would agrue that the biggest issue with RL likeness is because it is name only. The Labour Party on here could go full on communist or blairite or even full on free market capitalists and could still call themselves labour. If there were a process whereby parties could petition the speaker to take the name of a different party because they are more similar to the RL then I could support that.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    On the topic of RL likeness I think it would be to the detriment of the House if we tried to wipe all traces of the real world from the MHoC. The House is about political debate and ideology but it's also about role playing and there's a reason it was made the way it was 10 years ago. We can debate anywhere - but only here can we be the Conservative, Labour, Liberal, UKI, Green, Socialist and NatLib Party MPs. If members had to join the Social Democrat Party or Neo-liberal Traditionalist Party then I think we would have fewer people join and fewer people care. Ultimately, I think it would be a less enjoyable game.
    Largely the line I would argue along.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    On the topic of RL likeness I think it would be to the detriment of the House if we tried to wipe all traces of the real world from the MHoC. The House is about political debate and ideology but it's also about role playing and there's a reason it was made the way it was 10 years ago. We can debate anywhere - but only here can we be the Conservative, Labour, Liberal, UKI, Green, Socialist and NatLib Party MPs. If members had to join the Social Democrat Party or Neo-liberal Traditionalist Party then I think we would have fewer people join and fewer people care. Ultimately, I think it would be a less enjoyable game.
    Hear, hear. We need to have a reason for people to go here instead of the other place.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Ray, I believe your argument would hold if the goal of the game were simply to make as close a representation of RL as possible. However, I believe the goal of the game is to generate quality debate, and to write mock legislation, as well as to simulate the structure, rather than the content of RL. Party names are the content. By the same logic that you use, we wouldn't write our own legislation, merely debate legislation suggested IRL. That seems an absurd result to me.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Ray, I believe your argument would hold if the goal of the game were simply to make as close a representation of RL as possible. However, I believe the goal of the game is to generate quality debate, and to write mock legislation, as well as to simulate the structure, rather than the content of RL. Party names are the content. By the same logic that you use, we wouldn't write our own legislation, merely debate legislation suggested IRL. That seems an absurd result to me.
    My logic is based around the fact that RL names attract people because they make the game more fun. If we debated RL legislation rather than writing our own that would be much less fun. So I don't see how my logic can be so extended.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    My logic is based around the fact that RL names attract people because they make the game more fun. If we debated RL legislation rather than writing our own that would be much less fun. So I don't see how my logic can be so extended.
    I genuinely don't see how the RL names make a glorified debate club more fun.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    I genuinely don't see how the RL names make a glorified debate club more fun.
    It glorifies it.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    I genuinely don't see how the RL names make a glorified debate club more fun.
    They add to the simulation. Ever dreamed of standing up and slamming the Tories in front of a packed House of Commons? You can do it here without even having to leave your house! It also gives it a bit more gravitas imo.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    They add to the simulation. Ever dreamed of standing up and slamming the Tories in front of a packed House of Commons? You can do it here without even having to leave your house! It also gives it a bit more gravitas imo.
    Eh, I don't really give a damn about the whole petty politics bits, they seem silly to me.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Eh, I don't really give a damn about the whole petty politics bits, they seem silly to me.
    Yes, but the better the simulation, the more chance we have of attracting people.

    It also avoids the rows and bitterness that would result if we had to change the party names, and the tedious process that would be required to ensure that a particular party wasn't actually sharing a name with some minuscule rl party operating only in the Outer Hebrides or something.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    Yes, but the better the simulation, the more chance we have of attracting people.

    It also avoids the rows and bitterness that would result if we had to change the party names, and the tedious process that would be required to ensure that a particular party wasn't actually sharing a name with some minuscule rl party operating only in the Outer Hebrides or something.
    Hence Aph's decent 1000-vote requirement. Obviously you can't say 'any political party', otherwise some of the more petty members could establish one-person RL political parties with names to take them out of contention.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    Hence Aph's decent 1000-vote requirement. Obviously you can't say 'any political party', otherwise some of the more petty members could establish one-person RL political parties with names to take them out of contention.
    As an individuals who would start a real life political party to stop individuals using the name, using a 1000 votes qualifier would be a good idea but there would be a temptation to fund a campaign to achieve 1000 votes.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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