Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Results and Post Election Discussion watch

Announcements
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    Spiffing I'm sure
    Haha. For once I wish the LDs had got 16 seats just to get rid of you lot :lol:
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    Haha. For once I wish the LDs had got 16 seats just to get rid of you lot :lol:
    What makes you say that?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    Haha. For once I wish the LDs had got 16 seats just to get rid of you lot :lol:
    Seconded :p:
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    What makes you say that?
    That I don't like a Conservative/Libertarian government getting numerous terms in government?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    Haha. For once I wish the LDs had got 16 seats just to get rid of you lot :lol:
    Most decidedly thirded. :awesome:
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    That I don't like a Conservative/Libertarian government getting numerous terms in government?
    I know, a Conservative majority would be much better :fuhrer:
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    I know, a Conservative majority would be much better :fuhrer:
    No way.
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    Spiffing I'm sure
    Just slightly off topic, but I like that smiley.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    I know, a Conservative majority would be much better :fuhrer:
    Far too true!
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by jesusandtequila)
    I expect that it won't have exactly the same makeup...or will it?
    It will all depend on who is negotiating with who at this current time.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Well I've certainly learnt a lesson here. That's the last time I leap to the defence of my colleagues in the House (those of a different party to me, too) against rather unpleasant and snide comments of a "potential newcomer".

    I'm glad you've all been able to let off steam at my expense. I'm sure you're not the only ones under a fair amount of stress at the moment who've really needed to do so.

    Thanks for the loyal support folks, it really means a lot.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnythingButChardonnay)
    Well I've certainly learnt a lesson here. That's the last time I leap to the defence of my colleagues in the House (those of a different party to me, too) against rather unpleasant and snide comments of a "potential newcomer".

    I'm glad you've all been able to let off steam at my expense. I'm sure you're not the only ones under a fair amount of stress at the moment who've really needed to do so.

    Thanks for the loyal support folks, it really means a lot.
    whoa whoa whoa don't generalise us all.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnythingButChardonnay)
    Well I've certainly learnt a lesson here. That's the last time I leap to the defence of my colleagues in the House (those of a different party to me, too) against rather unpleasant and snide comments of a "potential newcomer".

    I'm glad you've all been able to let off steam at my expense. I'm sure you're not the only ones under a fair amount of stress at the moment who've really needed to do so.

    Thanks for the loyal support folks, it really means a lot.
    I'm sorry, I didn't see where you came to anyone else's defence - you first post was a fail comment and a personal one about his background - or what unpleasant and snide comments comrade_jon made. He made a comment about the election disliking the result for one party, you made a fail comment and a personal one - nothing too bad by either side, though I'd consider the fail comment a little snide. He responded by answering the question, then edited in a query about why you negged him and went for a personal comment about his school, with a (understandable IMHO) comment about negging that being a bit pathetic. You then layed into him. He responded pretty politely IMHO, and then you came in with more snide comments in return.

    I seriously cannot see where he was unpleasant and snide or who you were leaping to the defence of, all I see is you being rude, patronising and snide to him.

    This says nothing about your longstanding debating and effort in the House, which I'll happily praise, but that doesn't give you carte blanche to launch into potential new members for saying what they were and weren't happy with about the election. Seriously not ok, in my view. And then you react to the neg by reciprocally negging people, which is always tempting and I know mods who do it, but always struck me as a bit much. It seems pretty obvious to me why quite a few people negged you, they likely felt your comments went too far as well. There's nothing to learn about jumping or not to people's defence here, just that a post like his that you don't agree with is no justification for being rude and snide.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drogue)
    I'm sorry, I didn't see where you came to anyone else's defence - you first post was a fail comment and a personal one about his background - or what unpleasant and snide comments comrade_jon made. He made a comment about the election disliking the result for one party, you made a fail comment and a personal one - nothing too bad by either side, though I'd consider the fail comment a little snide. He responded by answering the question, then edited in a query about why you negged him and went for a personal comment about his school, with a (understandable IMHO) comment about negging that being a bit pathetic. You then layed into him. He responded pretty politely IMHO, and then you came in with more snide comments in return.

    I seriously cannot see where he was unpleasant and snide or who you were leaping to the defence of, all I see is you being rude, patronising and snide to him.

    This says nothing about your longstanding debating and effort in the House, which I'll happily praise, but that doesn't give you carte blanche to launch into potential new members for saying what they were and weren't happy with about the election. Seriously not ok, in my view. And then you react to the neg by reciprocally negging people, which is always tempting and I know mods who do it, but always struck me as a bit much. It seems pretty obvious to me why quite a few people negged you, they likely felt your comments went too far as well. There's nothing to learn about jumping or not to people's defence here, just that a post like his that you don't agree with is no justification for being rude and snide.
    I saw a comment I thought was unfair and unnecessary and responded to it less well than I should have.

    All you've done since is try to humiliate me. That is "a bit much" in my opinion. Well I think you've done quite enough today, thanks.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drogue)
    Yeah. Nice to see ABC reciprocally negging people who negged his, frankly shameful, post. A potential new member posts, he first makes a joke at him and negs him, then berates and insults him when he replies to the joke, and is surprised that he gets negged for it? I've no idea what issue he took with anything comrade_jon posted, but if this is how the MHoC treats potential new members, I worry about its future.
    (Original post by Thunder and Jazz)
    Hopefully the shameful conduct of some individuals in this thread will not spill over into this parliament's debates.

    (Original post by AnythingButChardonnay)
    I saw a comment I thought was unfair and unnecessary and responded to it less well than I should have.

    All you've done since is try to humiliate me. That is "a bit much" in my opinion. Well I think you've done quite enough today, thanks.

    I think ABC has a fair point here, when either of you first saw his post that you objected to, I feel if you'd been genuinely interested in the behaviour of the house you'd have PM'd him and suggested he word it differently or delete it altogether.

    Instead though, I think you've both jumped to judging and criticising, without trying the softer approach, which to my mind would have been the more mature and effective thing to do. Instigating a public criticism of ABC (who you've both known in whatever way for quite some time now) because of a post or two you object to really doesn't do much for the house other than highlight and demonstrate exactly the problems which you mention Will.

    So you're all as bad as each other frankly Now hug and make up.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnythingButChardonnay)
    I saw a comment I thought was unfair and unnecessary and responded to it less well than I should have.

    All you've done since is try to humiliate me. That is "a bit much" in my opinion. Well I think you've done quite enough today, thanks.
    You reciprocally neg people for an entirely innocent post, just to get them back, right after you neg someone for a pretty innocent post and justify its use, and expect them to stay schtum about it? Come on.

    All I said was that was a bit much and defending my original neg because I thought you were over the line to comrade_jon. That was it. No humiliation, I just wanted to make my point. That would have been it (without any comment at all even) if you hadn't taken issue and negged me, and it would again have been it if you hadn't come in here and tried to play the victim. I don't mean to victimise you, and I strongly don't think anyone has, for pointing out that I think you were over the line. That's not victimisation to me.

    I respect you as a MHoC member, so I'll leave this now. I've made my point, which isn't an attack or victimising, just that I felt you were overly rude and snide to him unfairly and then in reciprocally negging me. That's it.

    (Original post by Indievertigo)
    I think ABC has a fair point here, when either of you first saw his post that you objected to, I feel if you'd been genuinely interested in the behaviour of the house you'd have PM'd him and suggested he word it differently or delete it altogether.

    Instead though, I think you've both jumped to judging and criticising, without trying the softer approach, which to my mind would have been the more mature and effective thing to do. Instigating a public criticism of ABC (who you've both known in whatever way for quite some time now) because of a post or two you object to really doesn't do much for the house other than highlight and demonstrate exactly the problems which you mention Will.

    So you're all as bad as each other frankly Now hug and make up.
    The whole argument had happened before I saw it. If I had seen it earlier, I would have done exactly as you said and PMed him or posted saying "that was a bit harsh", or somesuch. But I didn't, and all I did was neg ABC for stepping way over the line, IMHO. I wouldn't have even done that if he hadn't negged comrade_jon for an innocent post and then defended it. That was the extent of my involvement until he reciprocally negged me, which I think is something petty enough to be worth mentioning.

    Tbh, endemic problem in the MHoC for as long as I've been involved. I felt this changed a lot while I was mod, but I think responses to new members like ABC's are a big enough problem to be worth publically criticising someone for it. Though as said, there would have been no public criticism from me if he hadn't decided to neg me for having the cheek to neg him, after he made a post saying why this was ok. And even after saying I thought it was a bit much, all he had to do was to either apologise or just leave it. Since he tried to defend it and paint himself as the victim, I think I'm entirely ok in responding and saying "actually no, I do think you were wrong and you're not the victim".

    I don’t want to trivialise this by saying we’re all as bad as each other. Is pointing out where you think someone has gone over the line, and then defending your point when they debate it and play the victim, as bad as going over the line? I certainly don’t think so. I really feel ABC was pretty nasty, and while I wish him personally no ill at all, I don’t feel bad for making that point publically, and then defending it when he debates it.

    This isn't an attack on ABC, I want to stress that, as I have a lot of respect for him, but it is a criticism of what he posted and then did, and I believe a justified one. And I think it's important that when people do things that I or we feel steps over the line, that I/we say so. He needs to stop taking it as an attack on him and playing the victim and realise that it’s just a few people saying we think he went over the line. Nothing more. If he stops defending it or playing the victim, there’s no need for us to assert why we felt he went over the line and isn’t the victim.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wilzman)
    That would simply not be feasible.
    Sssshhh, you don't want people to guess that the Libertarians have all come out as Orange Bookers and agreed to create a glorious liberal government

    (Original post by Teaddict)
    I know, a Conservative majority would be much better :fuhrer:
    I love how you've actually used a Hitler smilie to emphasise that point :p:
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wilzman)
    That would simply not be feasible.
    It certainly would be feasible, we'd have 20 seats and would need a 3-party coalition to top it (assuming that there's no Lab-Con coalition!) but whether it will happen or not is another matter (that I happen to have information on from our sub-forum, but shan't be sharing, wouldn't want to rule the suspense).
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by jesusandtequila)
    It certainly would be feasible, we'd have 20 seats and would need a 3-party coalition to top it (assuming that there's no Lab-Con coalition!) but whether it will happen or not is another matter (that I happen to have information on from our sub-forum, but shan't be sharing, wouldn't want to rule the suspense).
    Yeah, I wouldn't wait up for that one.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Drogue)
    Sssshhh, you don't want people to guess that the Libertarians have all come out as Orange Bookers and agreed to create a glorious liberal government
    I actually have a lot of time for the Orange Book and those that share those views. I've read it in it's entirety and find myself agreeing a lot of the time. Certainly, if it was implemented as a manifesto and then carried through as a programme of government, I'd be delighted. Indeed, I think the (RL) coalition has many Orange Book elements, and that the Orange Book is the reason that the Conservatives and Lib Dems found a fit.

    However, the mathematics simply don't work. 6 from the Libers, 4 from the Centre and 4 from the Lib Dems means only 14 seats, beaten by any Lab coalition or equal to the Tories or Labour on their own. Furthermore, I think there's a Social Democratic feel to the TSR Lib Dems that would make a coalition unfeasible.

    But of course that's just my personal opinion.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?

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.