Turn on thread page Beta

MHoC By-election March 2016: VOTE HERE! watch

  • View Poll Results: Who do you wish to elect as an MP to the TSR Model House of Commons?
    "The Financier" (endorsed by the TSR Conservative and Unionist Party)
    27
    33.75%
    "Hydeman" (endorsed by the TSR National Liberal Party)
    15
    18.75%
    "JoeL1994" (Independant)
    15
    18.75%
    "Gladiator12345" (endorsed by the TSR Socialist Party)
    21
    26.25%
    Spoilt Ballot
    2
    2.50%

    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by rayapparently)
    an 'in-post signature'? If you're suggesting posting 'vote x party' in the same way that a certain mp posts 'drink!' then it would not be against the rules. If you posted in d&ca then the moderators might feel you were spamming and that might be problematic for you. Public messages are an interesting one, i personally think it would be inappropriate.

    I'll hold my hand up to this...

    DRINK!!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    If this complaint is being sustained, I would like to submit the same rule proposed prevents the use of the name 'Conservative and Unionist Party' due to misleading the electorate about links to RL parties, and accordingly, if the Speaker should rule in their favour on this, he must also rule that the Conservative, Labour, and Green Parties must change names.

    Although, I feel that the 'misleading' argument is a poor one, and should simply be rejected, as our use of the manifesto is not misleading, and nor is misleading the electorate an objection per se.
    In that case good luck with changing your name as well, smartarse…
    • TSR Support Team
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by Aph)
    A sig can just be seen as being part of a post.

    And for all we know signs didn't exist when that rule was made so it wasn't an issue. Would you take a stance against someone going around the site posting 'vote tory' or 'vote labour' everywhere?

    It is exactly the same as canvassing IMO. And people wouldn't need to remove affiliations just couldn't mention it.
    As someone who made several campaign signatures for the Tories in some of the general elections before (and Ray can verify this in the Tory subforum), I do not accept this. If there was an issue, it was not brought up for over three years and over three speakers.

    A canvassing thread can be interpreted as spam. A signature is up to the user's discretion subject to compliance with the terms and conditions.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by cranbrook_aspie)
    Haha, thank you:lol:

    Indeed. How fortunate it is that we're not the only left-wing party
    How fortunate indeed! Great minds think alike

    DRINK!!
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    What I mean is the question of where the line is isn't a matter for your discretion IMO; the Speaker's job is a case of textual interpretation, both direct and implicit, and I don't think there's a justification for the place you've drawn the line in the GD.
    There is little room for interpretation - the GD (which is mine to follow or ignore anyway) is very, very clear.

    I'm sorry but the Speaker's job isn't 'textual interpretation'. I have several responsibilities laid out in the Constitution. The GD offers guidance in fulfilling them.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    In that case good luck with changing your name as well, smartarse…
    I feel this is less of a problem for us than it would be for you, but I'd also submit that the electorate isn't being deceived with us since very few know of the RL Socialist Party.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    How about we all stop arguing about party names and join the masses voting JoeL1994 this March!
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Oh dear, it seems like my vote will be between my heart and brain.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    In that case good luck with changing your name as well, smartarse…
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    I feel this is less of a problem for us than it would be for you, but I'd also submit that the electorate isn't being deceived with us since very few know of the RL Socialist Party.
    True, also there are 3 different parties called the Socialist Party in Britain, despite one being a sister party. We'd barely have to add a word and people would conceive us differently.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheDefiniteArticle)
    I feel this is less of a problem for us than it would be for you, but I'd also submit that the electorate isn't being deceived with us since very few know of the RL Socialist Party.
    I challenge you to try. :laugh:
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    There is little room for interpretation - the GD (which is mine to follow or ignore anyway) is very, very clear.

    I'm sorry but the Speaker's job isn't 'textual interpretation'. I have several responsibilities laid out in the Constitution. The GD offers guidance in fulfilling them.
    That part of the GD isn't for you to ignore. It is binding on you.
    (Original post by The Financier)
    As someone who made several campaign signatures for the Tories in some of the general elections before (and Ray can verify this in the Tory subforum), I do not accept this. If there was an issue, it was not brought up for over three years and over three speakers.

    A canvassing thread can be interpreted as spam. A signature is up to the user's discretion subject to compliance with the terms and conditions.
    Just because someone hasn't complained about it before doesn't mean that it is right
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    There is little room for interpretation - the GD (which is mine to follow or ignore anyway) is very, very clear.

    I'm sorry but the Speaker's job isn't 'textual interpretation'. I have several responsibilities laid out in the Constitution. The GD offers guidance in fulfilling them.
    Needless to say I disagree (also, please don't take this as me targeting you personally). In our model political system, the Speaker is proxying the role of the speaker and the courts. The speaker IRL is just a procedural role for the most part. Where the Speaker is acting in the capacity of courts, he should act, insofar as is possible, consistently with the role of courts IRL - that is to say, he should issue guidance based not on what he feels the rule ought to be based on fairness or whatever unless there is literally no precedent on that or a similar point in either the Constitution, the GD, or previous Speaker decisions (which ought to be written down for reference - this is for verification purposes). Rather, he should rule based on what forms the most coherent view of the rules of the House as a whole.

    Do you disagree?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JoeL1994)
    How about we all stop arguing about party names and join the masses voting JoeL1994 this March!
    Your resignation from the party whose seats are now up for grabs to have the chance of practically regaining one of them is a morally questionable one too so I wouldn't push it if I were you…
    • TSR Support Team
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by Aph)
    Just because someone hasn't complained about it before doesn't mean that it is right
    It sets historical precedence especially when the GD is not definitive in it's writing. That more than three speakers were fine with this is sufficient to conclude this is not circumventing any rule.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    I challenge you to try. :laugh:
    Revolutionary Socialist Party
    Reformist Socialist Party
    Democratic Socialist Party

    or if we're going to emit 'socialist'

    The Workers' Party
    Revolutionary Workers Party
    The People's Party
    People's Democracy

    I don't feel I need to go on.



    DRINK!!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DMcGovern)
    Revolutionary Socialist Party
    Reformist Socialist Party
    Democratic Socialist Party

    or if we're going to emit 'socialist'

    The Workers' Party
    Revolutionary Workers Party
    The People's Party
    People's Democracy

    I don't feel I need to go on.



    DRINK!!
    … to try to make every party in the House change its name, obviously…
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    The 'it hasn't been brought up before' argument is pretty terrible btw. When an action against an individual based on a wrong was first brought, it was assessed on its merits, and the fact that nobody had complained before was irrelevant. We can see many cases of this, especially in the original Roman law of delict, but also in the development of the common law, starting basically from the 13th century (there's a whole bunch of stuff surrounding the Magna Carta but the notion of a tort had started developing beforehand).
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by toronto353)
    What about setting up a Gofundme page? We can chip in and get it crowdfunded.
    That's a good idea! Hmm, maybe the more people I offend with my drawing skills using a mouse, the more money I'll get!
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Life_peer)
    Gentlemen, I am in awe.

    :rofl:
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Also, RayApparently, just in case, can I ask for a ruling on JoeL1994 attempting to rejoin the Liberals after winning a seat? The GD suggests his seat would go to the Liberals for the rest of the term, but I'd submit that this should be banned in advance.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
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: March 29, 2016
The home of Results and Clearing

2,502

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
How are you feeling about GCSE results day?

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.