The Commons Bar Mk IX - MHoC Chat Thread Watch

This discussion is closed.
ByronicHero
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#661
Report 4 years ago
#661
I believe him, and beyond that find this rather amusing.
1
Birkenhead
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#662
Report 4 years ago
#662
(Original post by ByronicHero)
I believe him, and beyond that find this rather amusing.
Cheers. I appreciate the support.
0
Green_Pink
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#663
Report 4 years ago
#663
(Original post by Birkenhead)
Over two years.

_Lycanthope = Kathryn, who is a mature student re-doing school exams.

Glyx = Temi, who transferred to UWE nursing in 2013.



You have my word, and I'm not an MP so that actually means something :P
Thanks Birkenhead. We'll get back to you in due course.
0
InnerTemple
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#664
Report 4 years ago
#664
(Original post by Birkenhead)
created accounts to involve themselves in TSR politics in which, naturally, they assisted their friend every now and then.
Is this even proper?

How active was the supposed friend within the party? I can see that Glyx had very few posts on the forum as a whole. So on the face of it, her activity within the wider community was limited, bordering non-existent.

Surely it cannot be right for a MP to encourage his friend to sign up and then gain advantage from this in the MP's dealings with the house?

(Original post by Birchington)
MSG
Mr Speaker can you clarify the position on this. Is there anything wrong with what is outlined above?
0
Birkenhead
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#665
Report 4 years ago
#665
(Original post by InnerTemple)
Is this even proper?

How active was the supposed friend within the party? I can see that Glyx had very few posts on the forum as a whole. So on the face of it, her activity within the wider community was limited, bordering non-existent.

Surely it cannot be right for a MP to encourage his friend to sign up and then gain advantage from this in the MP's dealings with the house?
I'm not an MP.

I don't understand how it can be seen as any less proper than encouraging strangers to join your party and then 'gain advantage' from their support in the House. As far as I can recall the right of someone to join a TSR party and vote in TSR elections is not curbed by a low post count or by their proximity to a fellow party member, nor is it disallowed for party members to recruit support from their social circles anymore than MPs do among theirs.
0
That Bearded Man
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#666
Report 4 years ago
#666
I highly doubt Birk has used this dupe, he seems better than that, but I agree with Temple above, surely it is wrong to allow your friends (with no interest in politics perhaps) to log on and influence the vote is in itself, completely immoral, especially since Birk probably "accepted" them into the party?
0
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#667
Report 4 years ago
#667
(Original post by Birkenhead)
I'm not an MP.

I don't understand how it can be seen as any less proper than encouraging strangers to join your party and then 'gain advantage' from their support in the House. As far as I can recall the right of someone to join a TSR party and vote in TSR elections is not curbed by a low post count or by their proximity to a fellow party member, nor is it disallowed for party members to recruit support from their social circles anymore than MPs do among theirs.
Yes, people need 150 posts to vote in the TSR elections...
0
Birkenhead
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#668
Report 4 years ago
#668
(Original post by Aph)
Yes, people need 150 posts to vote in the TSR elections...
That requirement is exclusively for TSR general elections. It does not apply to party matters.
0
That Bearded Man
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#669
Report 4 years ago
#669
(Original post by Birkenhead)
I'm not an MP.

I don't understand how it can be seen as any less proper than encouraging strangers to join your party and then 'gain advantage' from their support in the House. As far as I can recall the right of someone to join a TSR party and vote in TSR elections is not curbed by a low post count or by their proximity to a fellow party member, nor is it disallowed for party members to recruit support from their social circles anymore than MPs do among theirs.
To me, it's similar to having popularity with say, 15 year olds, and then legislating in government to allow 15 year olds the vote, purely for this reason. You haven't done anything legally wrong, but it's just....wrong.
0
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#670
Report 4 years ago
#670
(Original post by Birkenhead)
That requirement is exclusively for TSR general elections. It does not apply to party matters.
I know, but you said MHoC elections so I was just pointing out that inaccuracy in what you said it's just party elections but you want the rules changed.
0
Birkenhead
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#671
Report 4 years ago
#671
(Original post by That Bearded Man)
I highly doubt Birk has used this dupe, he seems better than that, but I agree with Temple above, surely it is wrong to allow your friends (with no interest in politics perhaps) to log on and influence the vote is in itself, completely immoral, especially since Birk probably "accepted" them into the party?
I did not accept anyone. I have never had user group privileges.

It isn't a dupe, that's the whole point.

I have also clarified that they are interested in politics. That's precisely why I asked them to join originally, in an effort to boost party activity. I didn't push them to join as some dodgy way of getting more votes, but it is perhaps unsurprising that they chose to support me being my friends. There's nothing 'immoral' about my behaviour and I resent any suggestion to the contrary.
0
InnerTemple
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#672
Report 4 years ago
#672
(Original post by Birkenhead)
I'm not an MP.

I don't understand how it can be seen as any less proper than encouraging strangers to join your party and then 'gain advantage' from their support in the House. As far as I can recall the right of someone to join a TSR party and vote in TSR elections is not curbed by a low post count or by their proximity to a fellow party member, nor is it disallowed for party members to recruit support from their social circles anymore than MPs do among theirs.
Well maybe consideration should be given into changing the approach the House takes to some of the points you mention.

In any event, I do think what you described whiffs a bit.
0
Birkenhead
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#673
Report 4 years ago
#673
(Original post by Aph)
I know, but you said MHoC elections so I was just pointing out that inaccuracy in what you said it's just party elections but you want the rules changed.
The meaning is in the context. What rules do I want changed?
0
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#674
Report 4 years ago
#674
(Original post by Birkenhead)
The meaning is in the context. What rules do I want changed?
You want only exclusive and active members voting in party votes.
0
That Bearded Man
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#675
Report 4 years ago
#675
(Original post by Birkenhead)
I did not accept anyone. I have never had user group privileges.

It isn't a dupe, that's the whole point.

I have also clarified that they are interested in politics. That's precisely why I asked them to join originally, in an effort to boost party activity. I didn't push them to join as some dodgy way of getting more votes, but it is perhaps unsurprising that they chose to support me being my friends. There's nothing 'immoral' about my behaviour and I resent any suggestion to the contrary.
How long before the vote had they joined? Obviously if they had joined months ago then it would be different than had they joined the day before the vote.
0
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#676
Report 4 years ago
#676
(Original post by That Bearded Man)
How long before the vote had they joined? Obviously if they had joined months ago then it would be different than had they joined the day before the vote.
I'm more interested in how many posts they'd made in the Liberal Party sub-forum. If the only time they ever enter the MHoC is to vote how Birk wants them to (noting we can't categorically rule out that they are Birk's dupes - just saying) then it's very dodgy indeed.
0
InnerTemple
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#677
Report 4 years ago
#677
(Original post by That Bearded Man)
How long before the vote had they joined? Obviously if they had joined months ago then it would be different than had they joined the day before the vote.
I'd also be looking at their activity as a whole.

They could have joined months before, not done much and then appear from the woodwork at the time of the vote.

If this account was not a dupe, then I think there is an issue as to whether these were genuine forum members in another sense.
0
Birkenhead
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#678
Report 4 years ago
#678
(Original post by InnerTemple)
Well maybe consideration should be given into changing the approach the House takes to some of the points you mention.

In any event, I do think what you described whiffs a bit.
Maybe it should, and maybe any accusations of wrongdoing should only be cast when members defy such a change once it's actually taken place. However, I fail to see what part of any of this is at all questionable. The points in my post stand.

How does it 'whiff' of anything? Have the decency to engage with what I've said if you're going to question my integrity. There was nothing ignoble in my motivations or actions at any stage.
0
InnerTemple
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#679
Report 4 years ago
#679
(Original post by Birkenhead)
Maybe it should, and maybe any accusations of wrongdoing should only be cast when members defy such a change once it's actually taken place. However, I fail to see what part of any of this is at all questionable. The points in my post stand.

How does it 'whiff' of anything? Have the decency to engage with what I've said if you're going to question my integrity. There was nothing ignoble in my motivations or actions at any stage.
The fact of the matter is that you have said that you recruited a friend to the party. This friend "helped you out" on matters. This friend appears to have had bugger all activity on the rest of the forum.

Now it may be that this friend of yours was very active in the party, almost exclusively posted in the party's private forum and was clearly acting of their own accord. If that's the case, then fine.

But on the face of it and from what you have said, I feel that it is possible that something not altogether proper has occurred.
0
RayApparently
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#680
Report 4 years ago
#680
(Original post by Birkenhead)
I don't understand how it can be seen as any less proper than encouraging strangers to join your party and then 'gain advantage' from their support in the House. As far as I can recall the right of someone to join a TSR party and vote in TSR elections is not curbed by a low post count or by their proximity to a fellow party member, nor is it disallowed for party members to recruit support from their social circles anymore than MPs do among theirs.
There is a difference. A random TSR user's relationship with someone who 'invited' them to the MHoC can't possibly be the same as the relationship between to MHoCers who are real life friends. And whilst there's nothing wrong with knowing MHoCers in real life so to speak if the only reason they are using TSR is to support you (and if that can be demonstrated by their posts) then the spirit if not the letter of the rule has been broken.

But as I've said before, I sincerely hope it isn't so.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
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

Would you turn to a teacher if you were being bullied?

Yes (94)
24.54%
No (289)
75.46%

Watched Threads

View All