The Commons Bar Mk VIII - MHoC Chat Thread Watch

This discussion is closed.
Birchington
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4921
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#4921
I think 'one member, one vote' works well and is fair, so I cannot see any reason why we would need to change our voting system.
0
Saoirse:3
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4922
Report 4 years ago
#4922
(Original post by Cryptographic)
How about we do the political compass thing. We find each MP (and any other members) so that we can stop talking in the abstract and have the figures infront of us so that we can be informed fully when we decide what measures to take.


Posted from TSR Mobile
If we can find a test everybody agrees is relatively impartial that could be a place to start. I expect it will show a greater distance between the parties than you'd expect given the similarities in legislation they submit.
0
Cryptographic
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#4923
Report 4 years ago
#4923
(Original post by Saoirse:3)
If we can find a test everybody agrees is relatively impartial that could be a place to start. I expect it will show a greater distance between the parties than you'd expect given the similarities in legislation they submit.
The political compass has flaws, but the flaws are consistent so shouldn't really matter when comparing data sets. Therefore it is pretty perfect.


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
That Bearded Man
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#4924
Report 4 years ago
#4924
Think my compass is a bit more unusual compared to the rest of the lefties.

Also agree with Saoirse, banning dual membership will change nothing, I wouldn't be against the idea, but I can't see it mattering too much. We still discuss in the forum.

Unfortunately, the only way I can see this right v left stopping is by removing a Government and an Opposition. By having this head to head you are always going to have Rights+Allies against Left+Allies, thus pushing the moderates outwards.

We need clear distinctions with parties, the Tories essentially appeal to all shades of right wing, which probably doesn't help. A centre party could be good, maybe even one day removing all RL parties and forcing everyone to start anew?
0
Blue Meltwater
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#4925
Report 4 years ago
#4925
Political compass tests could be quite interesting. Maybe there should be a thread for people to share their results.
0
Saoirse:3
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4926
Report 4 years ago
#4926
(Original post by That Bearded Man)
Think my compass is a bit more unusual compared to the rest of the lefties.

Also agree with Saoirse, banning dual membership will change nothing, I wouldn't be against the idea, but I can't see it mattering too much. We still discuss in the forum.

Unfortunately, the only way I can see this right v left stopping is by removing a Government and an Opposition. By having this head to head you are always going to have Rights+Allies against Left+Allies, thus pushing the moderates outwards.

We need clear distinctions with parties, the Tories essentially appeal to all shades of right wing, which probably doesn't help. A centre party could be good, maybe even one day removing all RL parties and forcing everyone to start anew?
Can't remember exactly how long you've been around here so apologies if I say anything you know already. There was once a Centre Party here, I remember a Labour-Lib Dem-UKIP-Centre coalition government, but they became inactive and got shut down. Could be worth reviving though, especially now the Liberals don't really occupy that ground.

Meanwhile, the names idea came very close to happening once - missed out by a couple of votes, it was strongly supported by the left, and strongly opposed by the right in general. I think it could help with activity somewhat and certainly provides fairer election results.

My ideal set of solutions:

a) An immediate Great Repeal.
b) Bill automatically expiring within a set time frame in future.
c) Parties not being able to use real-life names - or a compromise as was made at the time of allowing them, but not on ballots.
d) Getting rid of the government and coalition subforums, forcing discussion back onto party lines and harbouring a sense of Seven Parties rather than Two Wings.
e) A new framework for debating constitutional matters that relate to real life where they are different here by necessity rather than necessarily by choice - for instance, the electoral system even though FPTP is completely unviable here, or whether we should have real-life Lords reform, just to open up the scope for debates a bit further than at current.
0
Blue Meltwater
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#4927
Report 4 years ago
#4927
I'd be up for renaming parties if someone can suggest an alternative name for the Greens which doesn't make us sound like a single issue party. Otherwise, from a self-interested perspective, I'll probably oppose it. I like being Green - it's how identify on here and in RL. I'm a Green patriot, I suppose

All in favour for a Great Repeal, however.

Also, is a left-right dichotomy actually undesirable? A lot of countries which use proportional representation end up with two contrasting left-right coalitions - see Sweden, for instance.
0
tehFrance
Badges: 15
#4928
Report 4 years ago
#4928
(Original post by That Bearded Man)
The Tories essentially appeal to all shades of right wing, which probably doesn't help.
Well considering IRL the Tories do exactly the same, some would say the objective is met in terms of keeping RL close by
(Original post by Saoirse:3)
a) An immediate Great Repeal.
b) Bill automatically expiring within a set time frame in future.
c) Parties not being able to use real-life names - or a compromise as was made at the time of allowing them, but not on ballots.
d) Getting rid of the government and coalition subforums, forcing discussion back onto party lines and harbouring a sense of Seven Parties rather than Two Wings.
e) A new framework for debating constitutional matters that relate to real life where they are different here by necessity rather than necessarily by choice - for instance, the electoral system even though FPTP is completely unviable here, or whether we should have real-life Lords reform, just to open up the scope for debates a bit further than at current.
1. Not yet, end of term would be better.
2. Sounds good.
3. Also good.
4. Exactly.
5. What framework would this be?
(Original post by Blue Meltwater)
I'd be up for renaming parties if someone can suggest an alternative name for the Greens which doesn't make us sound like a single issue party.
TSR Vegetables, a multi-issue party?
barnetlad
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4929
Report 4 years ago
#4929
I am in favour of a Great Repeal too.

Anyway, what plans are there for the bar's first birthday on Monday. Will there be free beer?
0
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4930
Report 4 years ago
#4930
(Original post by Jarred)
I fear that this House has already become a bit too much of a Left vs Right battle rather than a battle of seven parties, and that any moves to introduce multiple votes would just worsen that.
I agree but I don't think its terminal. The Greens and Socialists did maintain a unique identity for a while (Labour had more vocal Blairites when we came but were still pretty left). The Libertarians had a clear identity but right now the entire right seems to have gravitated to one position.

(Original post by Saoirse:3)
I honestly don't think it'll actually change anything, the problems are much deeper. You could remove every dual member on the left tomorrow and I guarantee the parties would be just as similar as they are today.
It won't cause massive change and people can still move but it does put the onus more on poaching or rejecting a member who may be too extreme which at least will begin to cause drift as parties target positions.

.....

I will second the amendment or even write it tonight.
0
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4931
Report 4 years ago
#4931
(Original post by Saoirse:3)
If we can find a test everybody agrees is relatively impartial that could be a place to start. I expect it will show a greater distance between the parties than you'd expect given the similarities in legislation they submit.

(Original post by Cryptographic)
The political compass has flaws, but the flaws are consistent so shouldn't really matter when comparing data sets. Therefore it is pretty perfect.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Regarding the test I think the red bar one in my sig is probably the most detailed. With the party being more pro military action than when I came, it could also throw up interesting results (we were the only party to back action in Syria).


(Original post by That Bearded Man)
Think my compass is a bit more unusual compared to the rest of the lefties.

Also agree with Saoirse, banning dual membership will change nothing, I wouldn't be against the idea, but I can't see it mattering too much. We still discuss in the forum.

Unfortunately, the only way I can see this right v left stopping is by removing a Government and an Opposition. By having this head to head you are always going to have Rights+Allies against Left+Allies, thus pushing the moderates outwards.

We need clear distinctions with parties, the Tories essentially appeal to all shades of right wing, which probably doesn't help. A centre party could be good, maybe even one day removing all RL parties and forcing everyone to start anew?
The two other things I'd suggest for left vs right are to scrap the opposition forum and also cap government at 2 parties plus Indies, weaker government makes it less likely that one side gan gang up on the other.

The onus is on the other right parties to find a position. We don't really want extreme libertarians or extreme uber conservatives for example. I'm not sure there's a massive space for them to fit, non RL parties also struggle more with membership. Heavily against scrapping RL names, all evidence suggests that they draw new members so you'd decrease the talent pool and to be honest I'm not going to,be s turkey voting for Christmas.
0
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4932
Report 4 years ago
#4932
(Original post by barnetlad)
I am in favour of a Great Repeal too.

Anyway, what plans are there for the bar's first birthday on Monday. Will there be free beer?
I'm not sold. Experience of the last one suggests that we get two terms then all the big stuff is done.
0
That Bearded Man
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#4933
Report 4 years ago
#4933
The flip side of banning the government and opposition subforum is that our Government forum has actually been very successful. I see no point in forming a Government if you cannot discuss bills with them. Opposition obviously hasn't worked, but I'd like to think ours has. Does that give us an unfair advantage? I wouldn't support it tbh.
0
That Bearded Man
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#4934
Report 4 years ago
#4934
(Original post by Saoirse:3)
Can't remember exactly how long you've been around here so apologies if I say anything you know already. There was once a Centre Party here, I remember a Labour-Lib Dem-UKIP-Centre coalition government, but they became inactive and got shut down. Could be worth reviving though, especially now the Liberals don't really occupy that ground.

Meanwhile, the names idea came very close to happening once - missed out by a couple of votes, it was strongly supported by the left, and strongly opposed by the right in general. I think it could help with activity somewhat and certainly provides fairer election results.

My ideal set of solutions:

a) An immediate Great Repeal.
b) Bill automatically expiring within a set time frame in future.
c) Parties not being able to use real-life names - or a compromise as was made at the time of allowing them, but not on ballots.
d) Getting rid of the government and coalition subforums, forcing discussion back onto party lines and harbouring a sense of Seven Parties rather than Two Wings.
e) A new framework for debating constitutional matters that relate to real life where they are different here by necessity rather than necessarily by choice - for instance, the electoral system even though FPTP is completely unviable here, or whether we should have real-life Lords reform, just to open up the scope for debates a bit further than at current.
I came in after the Centre had been and went. So yes, I suppose I can't really comment on whether or not it worked.

A) Certainly
B) Also a good idea, but we need someone keeping tabs on when bills expire
C)I think we could do this, but then surely people will just follow their respective party members anyway? We could pause TSR, give members who would like to create a new party a few days to write a manifesto, then get all members to join a party. We could maybe blank out names so people don't just blindly follow.
D) Yes and No
E) Will people be interested in that? If so, we could link this into real life UK politics
0
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4935
Report 4 years ago
#4935
(Original post by Cryptographic)
That is because the left and right are forming into blocks with little to be seen between them. Anyone want to write an amendment banning dual membership? I'll second it.
(Original post by toronto353)
I was considering writing such an amendment - I will probably get round to it tomorrow.
I don't think this should be a constitutional matter - it simply reduces the influence of party leaders and stifles collaboration.

It should be by the discretion of the party wether or not to admit members of other parties or to allow their members to join other parties without dismissal.

That said as DL I'd actually support a movement to abolish dual-membership within Labour as I believe it is important for parties to keep their identity and internal unity but I wouldn't seek to impose my will on the other parties nor would I want them to try and influence how we accept members here.
0
Cryptographic
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#4936
Report 4 years ago
#4936
Another great repeal would be pointless. As Rakas said, within a year all the main stuff will have been done. Then we will be back in this situation. There is no shortage of things to do.


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
Life_peer
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4937
Report 4 years ago
#4937
Indeed, I am opposed to a wipeout. Pointless and allowing everyone to submit the same ideas once again for a tiresome debate. Our real life counterparts seem to have plenty of ideas so if someone is unable to come up with ideas, the problem might simply be his lack of creativity.
0
Cryptographic
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#4938
Report 4 years ago
#4938
(Original post by Cryptographic)
Another great repeal would be pointless. As Rakas said, within a year all the main stuff will have been done. Then we will be back in this situation. There is no shortage of things to do, as our counterparts prove


Posted from TSR Mobile



Posted from TSR Mobile
0
Cryptographic
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#4939
Report 4 years ago
#4939
(Original post by Rakas21)
Regarding the test I think the red bar one in my sig is probably the most detailed. With the party being more pro military action than when I came, it could also throw up interesting results (we were the only party to back action in Syria).
The problem with the red bar one is that it can't be easily plotted to display the information.
0
Cheese_Monster
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#4940
Report 4 years ago
#4940
A Great Repeal has too many problems, I.e, I could just copy and paste all the previous Green bills and resubmit them once the originals are wiped. Debate would become cyclical.


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Do you have any savings?

Yes (173)
67.58%
No (83)
32.42%

Watched Threads

View All