PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 09:42
13 votes for MP (and we aren't even ON the ballot!).
14, kinda. But I voted for CA. I wish Dan the best of luck.
14, kinda. But I voted for CA. I wish Dan the best of luck.
Politics Forum.org | PoFo
The BBC has described us as 'more addictive than nicotine', come share your thoughts instead of your facebook pictures!
http://www.politicsforum.org/forum/
Election Watch
http://www.politicsforum.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=89&t=107721
Page 2 of 4
14, kinda. But I voted for CA. I wish Dan the best of luck.
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 09:46
23 votes SN-RF
2 votes CA
13 spoilt ballots
2 votes CA
13 spoilt ballots
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 09:50
Dr House wrote:The sad thing though is that close to half of the electorate did not vote for for the SN-RF.
What are you talking about?
How is 15 out of 39 close to half?
Vanasalus wrote:I sense the approach of a breakaway republic.
Or a genocide.
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 10:07
Or a genocide
I have a dream. I dream of a republic where Ingliz and his likes are banned from politics.
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 10:13
Nonsense, ingliz is politics.
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 10:17
Nonsense, ingliz is politics.
And, are you a bootlicker?
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 10:29
Care that you do not misspeak to an executioner. 
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 10:37
grassroots1's vote is ambiguous and although I have asked he hasn't edited his post to make his intention clear (His use of the " 
" emoticon in his PM is not helping). Until he does so, if he does so it looks doubtful, his ballot is spoilt.
22 votes SN-RF
2 votes CA
14 spoilt ballots
These figures are not "official" and are only meant as a guide (The election thread is getting very messy)
" emoticon in his PM is not helping). Until he does so, if he does so it looks doubtful, his ballot is spoilt.22 votes SN-RF
2 votes CA
14 spoilt ballots
These figures are not "official" and are only meant as a guide (The election thread is getting very messy)
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 14:31
14 for the Marijuana party Ingliz.
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 15:49
why are right-wingers acting like fucking immature brats?
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 16:53
23 votes SN-RF
2 votes CA
16 spoilt ballots
2 votes CA
16 spoilt ballots
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 17:03
MP might still take this 'official election'.
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 18:17
why are right-wingers acting like fucking immature brats?
Why are Commies acting like they own the internet?
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 18:19
Honestly, no matter who is doing what to whom, whether SN-RF members have some fault or the rest of the players do, I'm not sure what is accompished by the current situation.
I understand that the MJ party is a reaction to the ruling government, somewhat spoiled sports, but hardly illegal. I also recognize the wisdom on their part of the unification of the opposition.
I'm not clear as to why this party is considered illegitimate. I don't have time to read all the lead ups to this, I know MB and Ingliz have been feuding, but beyond that...I can't tell what the big stink is.
Anyway, as far as I can tell unless this party wins over every single non SN-RF vote (and maybe not even then) they are not a threat to the ruling government. I'm not sure I get why they can't have the freedom to play as is. And for the record, I personally think it's a very silly premise for a party, but then again...so were the other parties!
Are some of us taking all this a little too seriously again? And should we take a step back and think about what makes the game most playable, and enjoyable to the largest number of users? It is quite natural for opposition to unify in the face of a ruling government. Frankly, if this will make them debate the bills and motions more, than let them.
The most boring thing is debating all these bills without any true and consistant opposition voice. I expected we'd have to compromise some to pass anything, as in the very first bill, but ever since, I haven't seen hardly any discussion at all. If all this will bring that about, I don't mind it a bit.
Anyway, my $.02
I understand that the MJ party is a reaction to the ruling government, somewhat spoiled sports, but hardly illegal. I also recognize the wisdom on their part of the unification of the opposition.
I'm not clear as to why this party is considered illegitimate. I don't have time to read all the lead ups to this, I know MB and Ingliz have been feuding, but beyond that...I can't tell what the big stink is.
Anyway, as far as I can tell unless this party wins over every single non SN-RF vote (and maybe not even then) they are not a threat to the ruling government. I'm not sure I get why they can't have the freedom to play as is. And for the record, I personally think it's a very silly premise for a party, but then again...so were the other parties!
Are some of us taking all this a little too seriously again? And should we take a step back and think about what makes the game most playable, and enjoyable to the largest number of users? It is quite natural for opposition to unify in the face of a ruling government. Frankly, if this will make them debate the bills and motions more, than let them.
The most boring thing is debating all these bills without any true and consistant opposition voice. I expected we'd have to compromise some to pass anything, as in the very first bill, but ever since, I haven't seen hardly any discussion at all. If all this will bring that about, I don't mind it a bit.
Anyway, my $.02
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 18:53
An electoral Act was introduced by the government and voted on by the full House. The legislation, the basic election "rules" of PoFo, became law.
MB. chose to ignore its provisions. MB. also chose to reject a legitimate solution to the inevitable problems, all of his own making, that ignoring the Law brings and now he pretends he is the injured party.
No, he will suffer the consequences of his actions, as will those who are foolish enough to join him in intentionally spoiling their ballots.
ingliz, Clerk of the House
MB. chose to ignore its provisions. MB. also chose to reject a legitimate solution to the inevitable problems, all of his own making, that ignoring the Law brings and now he pretends he is the injured party.
No, he will suffer the consequences of his actions, as will those who are foolish enough to join him in intentionally spoiling their ballots.
ingliz, Clerk of the House
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 18:57
In a moment of astute punditry, Dr House wrote:Why is the party with no platform always so popular?
Exactly. The RN-CF (or whatever it's unimportant name is) gets the votes by proposing nothing at all as its platform. "Just a bunch of popular guys who need some kind of process to legitimize their regulatory dominance."
The Marijuana Party seems to have been barred from the election for having a pro-active platform: "Go smoke a joint!"
If this election is about NOT having a platform, then it's clear where this government is headed.
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 19:00
Ingliz wrote:he will suffer the consequences of his actions, as will those who are foolish enough to join him
Whoa there brosky, I don't remember you passing any gas-chamber act yet.
Hey does anyone else think it is retarded that the same dude who heads the current regime gets to administer the electoral process? Conflict of interest, much?
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 19:15
An electoral Act was introduced by the government and voted on by the full House. The legislation, the basic election "rules" of PoFo, became law.
MB. chose to ignore its provisions. MB. also chose to reject a legitimate solution to the inevitable problems, all of his own making, that ignoring the Law brings and now he pretends he is the injured party.
Nice. Nice.
Heil Ingliz!
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 19:18
MB.
Why do you have to be so melodramatic? The "consequences" are your votes will be discarded and the communists win the election by a landslide.
It seems you are "cutting off your nose to spite your face" but that is your choice again.
Vanasalus:
Article 2(a), The Electoral Act 2009
Why do you have to be so melodramatic? The "consequences" are your votes will be discarded and the communists win the election by a landslide.
It seems you are "cutting off your nose to spite your face" but that is your choice again.
Vanasalus:
Article 2(a), The Electoral Act 2009
PostPosted:13 Jul 2009 19:24
Vanasalus wrote:Heil Ingliz!
lolol 3rd edit for the win
Ingliz wrote:the communists win the election by a landslide
I can hardly wait.