Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I apologise to Saracen's Fez in advance for any negative answers (), but what three aspects of their predecessor's Speakership would each of the candidates retain and what three things would they do differently and why?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    This is the thing though, as speaker you're no longer in the limelight, which makes me worry. I don't think you really want to be speaker, I think you want to be the centre of attention.

    The speaker is supposed to be an admin, an admin who essentially just updates the house. With your lust for the spotlight I'm going to need more convincing g that you're up to the job.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The Speaker is more in the spotlight than an MP, party leader, or member, however, I am going to struggle convincing you I do not aim to be the centre of attention because there is no way I can do that through an internet forum.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by toronto353)
    I apologise to Saracen's Fez in advance for any negative answers (), but what three aspects of their predecessor's Speakership would each of the candidates retain and what three things would they do differently and why?
    I liked that Fez got involved a little in amendments, just broadly giving his opinion on whether things were easy to implement and that sort of thing. He was also pretty much always around and always replied to anything by the same evening, which is something I'd want to maintain. I can't really think of a third thing that Fez did specifically that was different to other speakers.

    I'd do the voting reviews differently, updating them pretty much every night rather than at the end of the night. I'd also update Hansard as a rolling thing - I'd rather do things often in little bits instead of one big chunk. I again can't really think of a third thing. I'll edit this comment if I think of anything.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by toronto353)
    I apologise to Saracen's Fez in advance for any negative answers (), but what three aspects of their predecessor's Speakership would each of the candidates retain and what three things would they do differently and why?
    The things I would do differently would be doing afternoon updates, stopping joke bills from passing to the Division Lobby, and spend more time taking part in the debates that happen in the bar. I think it is important Speakers remain active members in the MHoC choosing to not let being the Speaker restrict non-Speaker activity. The reasons for restricting joke bills is the same reasoning I said in the discussion we had yesterday, and afternoon updates allow a full evening of debating legislation which evening updates do not allow.

    Things I would keep the same are more difficult because Speakers are forced to be similar by the role of the job, however, I would follow Fez by ignoring parts of the Guidance Document which are inferior to another way of doing something, I would be less willing to intervene in party matters, and I would keep the firm approach he takes.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by toronto353)
    I apologise to Saracen's Fez in advance for any negative answers (), but what three aspects of their predecessor's Speakership would each of the candidates retain and what three things would they do differently and why?
    Debate and propose more amendments.
    I will be harsher and more stringent on interpreting the GD
    I will be a dictator and smack down anyone who steps out of line.

    I didn't like much of fez' leadership at all. He tried too hard to please everyone he pleased no one in the end and he didn't really do anything other than a series of massive **** ups.
    • Community Assistant
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Hi adam9317

    You say moderation needs to be approached differently in the MHoC and that "limited outside interference" is desirable, but what powers does the Speaker have to prevent CT/SL/ST 'interference'? You appear to be suggesting that TSR's rules won't be as strictly observed in the MHoC if you are elected as Speaker; can miser and Danny Dorito confirm, if Adam is elected as Speaker, will you allow the MHoC to be tuned into moderation-light zone? I hope not.
    • Section Leader
    • Political Ambassador
    • Reporter Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snufkin)
    Hi adam9317

    You say moderation needs to be approached differently in the MHoC and that "limited outside interference" is desirable, but what powers does the Speaker have to prevent CT/SL/ST 'interference'? You appear to be suggesting that TSR's rules won't be as strictly observed in the MHoC if you are elected as Speaker; can miser and Danny Dorito confirm, if Adam is elected as Speaker, will you allow the MHoC to be tuned into moderation-light zone? I hope not.
    From a moderation standpoint, moderation policy for the site exists independently of the MHoC and the Speakers it elects. The Speaker can usually liaise with the ST/CT team as a representative of the MHoC. The roles of ST member and Speaker are discrete, but any ST member would in principle be able to use their access to internal discussions to champion MHoC interests.
    • Community Assistant
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by miser)
    From a moderation standpoint, moderation policy for the site exists independently of the MHoC and the Speakers it elects. The Speaker can usually liaise with the ST/CT team as a representative of the MHoC. The roles of ST member and Speaker are discrete, but any ST member would in principle be able to use their access to internal discussions to champion MHoC interests.
    Championing MHoC interests is one thing, lobbying the CT to make the MHoC a moderation-light forum is something else. I don't want the MHoC to become another backroom. :afraid: If Adam wins and does try to make this happen, how likely is it that the CT will support it?

    If there's no chance of it happening, perhaps Adam should remove that promise from his manifesto.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snufkin)
    Championing MHoC interests is one thing, lobbying the CT to make the MHoC a moderation-light forum is something else. I don't want the MHoC to become another backroom. :afraid: If Adam wins and does try to make this happen, how likely is it that the CT will support it?

    If there's no chance of it happening, perhaps Adam should remove that promise from his manifesto.
    Why don't you let democracy do its thing, and if he is elected then he can give it a shot?

    If you don't like what's put forward by him then use arguments and debate, why are you being so snakey about it? He hasn't even had a chance to have a say yet.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    As if miser could give you a proper answer anyway...

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Community Assistant
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    Why don't you let democracy do its thing, and if he is elected then he can give it a shot?

    If you don't like what's put forward by him then use arguments and debate, why are you being so snakey about it? He hasn't even had a chance to have a say yet.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    There's no point debating it if it's not going to happen. I want to know if Adam wins, will his ideas be considered by the CT/SL - if not (as seems likely), then the moderation issue is irrelevant in this election.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snufkin)
    There's no point debating it if it's not going to happen. I want to know if Adam wins, will his ideas be considered by the CT/SL - if not (as seems likely), then the moderation issue is irrelevant in this election.
    You're actively trying to stop it before its actually happened though, why couldn't you just wait for Adam to defend his proposal?

    You don't endear yourself, you know that? You come across as a spoilsport and a kindergarten snitch sometimes. Which is strange seeing as you're supposed to be an adult.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Community Assistant
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    You're actively trying to stop it before its actually happened though, why couldn't you just wait for Adam to defend his proposal?

    You don't endear yourself, you know that? You come across as a spoilsport and a kindergarten snitch sometimes. Which is strange seeing as you're supposed to be an adult.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I'm not trying to stop it before it happens. I just want to understand the likelihood of Adam's ideas being considered by the CT. If it is a non-starter then people should know that before they vote in this election.

    I can live with your scorn. I report posts which break the rules too (the horror :gasp:), I'm a proper little Randall.

    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snufkin)
    I'm not trying to stop it before it happens. I just want to understand the likelihood of Adam's ideas being considered by the CT. If it is a non-starter then people should know that before they vote in this election.

    I can live with your scorn. I report posts which break the rules too (the horror :gasp:), I'm a proper little Randall.

    Not quite, Randall had some redeeming qualities....

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Section Leader
    • Political Ambassador
    • Reporter Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snufkin)
    Championing MHoC interests is one thing, lobbying the CT to make the MHoC a moderation-light forum is something else. I don't want the MHoC to become another backroom. :afraid: If Adam wins and does try to make this happen, how likely is it that the CT will support it?

    If there's no chance of it happening, perhaps Adam should remove that promise from his manifesto.
    I can't speak for the CT, but there's no danger of the MHoC becoming another back room.

    (Original post by Lime-man)
    As if miser could give you a proper answer anyway...

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    This coming from a community of politicians. :hand:
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snufkin)
    Hi adam9317

    You say moderation needs to be approached differently in the MHoC and that "limited outside interference" is desirable, but what powers does the Speaker have to prevent CT/SL/ST 'interference'? You appear to be suggesting that TSR's rules won't be as strictly observed in the MHoC if you are elected as Speaker; can miser and Danny Dorito confirm, if Adam is elected as Speaker, will you allow the MHoC to be tuned into moderation-light zone? I hope not.
    I apologise if my plans were misunderstood.

    TSR rules apply to everyone; thats sadly the nature of them, but my work in the last 12 months has allowed me to see what these rules are, and how they are enforced. What I am trying to say is, say there is a scandal, which the speaker doesn't effectively deal with, then members go to the ST/CT, they come in and enforce a solution which is not agreed to, and it ends badly for the house; whereas as a speaker with ST experience, I will ensure that I deal with all issues/ scandals etc before they leave the MHOC, nip them in the bud and ensure no ST/CT with limited MHOC experience has to come in here and disrupt the fun.
    Plus, if some **** did hit the fan, we have the ST/CT forums that I can discuss and come to a more effective resolution with them. Hopefully this clarifies the situation further, as sadly we are bound to the rules much the same, but it is the enforcement of them!

    And on the issue of attempting to get light moderation. I would discuss it with Danny/ Miser etc. I can't see it happening, but I will try my damn hardest to see what I can do!



    (Original post by toronto353)
    I apologise to Saracen's Fez in advance for any negative answers (), but what three aspects of their predecessor's Speakership would each of the candidates retain and what three things would they do differently and why?
    Its a hard one, as SF's speakership has been fairly good over his reign.

    Different:
    -Be more active within the house, engaging with members. Although this is difficult, in the bar in a non political discussion sounds about right
    -Get more involved with the Ad Hoc news, contributing to articles where necessary
    -More frequent updates of the Hansard. I certainly don't want to promise every single day, but far more frequently than current.

    Same;
    -Giving a speakership stance on amendments, how he believes it will impact on the house; good to get a neutral stance from an experience speaker
    -Earlier updates. We're talking around 7-8 most nights, gives members more of a chance to debate legislation.
    -Being on hand frequently. Usually not having to wait days for a response to a query was always nice!


    (Original post by Nigel Farage MEP)
    As a question to the other candidates, when the election comes with the two candidates in, assuming you are not included in that election, which candidate would you vote for?
    I would say it would be between yourself Nigel and Petros in the final 2.

    Its a hard one, I would say Petros would be more stable, and more similar to previous speakers; but Nigel your definitely underestimated, and your commitment, and without a doubt your drive towards the MHOC is second to none.

    Its honestly a tough one, I can't pick!



    (Original post by Andy98)

    Adam, I'll ask you the same as Petros
    The CC certainly is an interesting one Andy!

    The CC certainly has potential, I supported its creation and was a member in the early days.

    The problem is unrealistic crises, the CC produces an unrealistic crisis, it goes out to the house, the govt don't take it seriously, the CC gets a bad reputation for doing a bad job, rinse and repeat; then you have members in the CC who don't take it seriously.

    I would advocate that the speaker could have a role in throwing people out of the CC especially if they do not contribute or are simply there to cause trouble within reason, I'd also give my opinions to the crises created within the CC, let them know how I think it will be taken by the govt to see whether it could be any more realistic etc, but with the new CC chair, I have plenty of faith in the CC should be able to do great things!



    (Original post by RayApparently)
    adam9317 Compelling manifesto.
    Cheers Ray



    (Original post by Connor27)

    adam9317: not really spoken to you at all but that's a decent Manifesto.
    Cheers Connor, much appreciated!
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by miser)
    I can't speak for the CT, but there's no danger of the MHoC becoming another back room.


    This coming from a community of politicians. :hand:
    A community of posh, shy, white boys. xD

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • TSR Support Team
    • Peer Support Volunteers
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Best of luck to all of the candidates standing
    • Community Assistant
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by adam9317)
    I apologise if my plans were misunderstood.

    TSR rules apply to everyone; thats sadly the nature of them, but my work in the last 12 months has allowed me to see what these rules are, and how they are enforced. What I am trying to say is, say there is a scandal, which the speaker doesn't effectively deal with, then members go to the ST/CT, they come in and enforce a solution which is not agreed to, and it ends badly for the house; whereas as a speaker with ST experience, I will ensure that I deal with all issues/ scandals etc before they leave the MHOC, nip them in the bud and ensure no ST/CT with limited MHOC experience has to come in here and disrupt the fun.
    Plus, if some **** did hit the fan, we have the ST/CT forums that I can discuss and come to a more effective resolution with them. Hopefully this clarifies the situation further, as sadly we are bound to the rules much the same, but it is the enforcement of them!

    And on the issue of attempting to get light moderation. I would discuss it with Danny/ Miser etc. I can't see it happening, but I will try my damn hardest to see what I can do!
    But isn't that what the dedicated MHoC ST member is for? I don't think the Speaker role should be turned into a quasi-second MHoC ST, which is effectively what you're suggesting.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snufkin)
    But isn't that what the dedicated MHoC ST member is for? I don't think the Speaker role should be turned into a quasi-second MHoC ST, which is effectively what you're suggesting.
    The 2 members in question would be working hand in hand!
 
 
 
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: January 13, 2017
  • 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
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
  • 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.