| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Welcome to Mock Parliament. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| BLOCKED: Staff Motion | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 23 2008, 04:37 PM (335 Views) | |
| Boohistory | Jun 23 2008, 04:37 PM Post #1 |
![]()
Minister for Awesome
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Under this legislation the Speaker of the House (aka the admin) will be required to do his or her job properly. This would include: Calling elections on time Creating "disasters" Active moderation of the forums Removing the powers of inactive Moderators (yes you know who I mean) Being a truley impartial figure and unable to vote in general elections |
![]() |
|
| Commoncold0 | Jun 23 2008, 04:40 PM Post #2 |
|
Elder Statesman
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
BLOCKED for many, many reasons. |
![]() |
|
| Cieran | Jun 23 2008, 04:40 PM Post #3 |
![]()
Should-like-totally-be-the Prime Minister
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I fail to see why the Speaker, as a citizen of Ostentia, should not be able to vote in general elections... EDIT: For one thing this doesn't really involve the politics, should really go in Suggestions or whatever... |
![]() |
|
| Boohistory | Jun 23 2008, 04:43 PM Post #4 |
![]()
Minister for Awesome
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well I thought this would be a more interesting way of going about it. But fine, if you are all happy with inactive moderaters, late elections and entire terms with absalutly nothing going on, you are welcome to it. |
![]() |
|
| eriatarka1 | Jun 23 2008, 05:41 PM Post #5 |
![]()
Home Secretary
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well if you want to make complaints about inactive moderation, here is not the place to do it. Equally, this place needs little moderation in the first place. Although we do need disasters to occur, the disaster this month already has been caused BY YOUR PARTY. There probably won't be another one |
![]() |
|
| Boohistory | Jun 23 2008, 05:46 PM Post #6 |
![]()
Minister for Awesome
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Internal party politics does not relate to nor create a "Disaster" in any shape or form. It does not change government polls nor test them, nor do they have to do anything about it. Boo party crisis and government does nothing: who cares i wouldnt expect them to do anything Hurricane in the Northen Isles and government does nothing: Well that would be plain retarded |
![]() |
|
| Commoncold0 | Jun 23 2008, 05:47 PM Post #7 |
|
Elder Statesman
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The government did nothing in that case because the Boo Party blocked the government's planned help. :mellow: Anyways, Sheepling has already promised a disaster when he gets back. |
![]() |
|
| Inevitable | Jun 23 2008, 05:52 PM Post #8 |
![]()
WOBBUFFET!
![]()
|
The Boo Party did not block it. We urged for better methods of funding. The bill was inadequate, and the fact that it was not able to gain support is evidence enough of this. |
![]() |
|
| HRH King Zog II | Jun 23 2008, 06:00 PM Post #9 |
|
Waffler of the House of Boreds
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You voted against it because it "needed better methods of funding" "it was not able to get enough support" Therefore you did block it. There are no inactive moderators, all members get a vote, theres a disaster in the pipeline and elections are of a timely fashion |
![]() |
|
| Inevitable | Jun 23 2008, 06:02 PM Post #10 |
![]()
WOBBUFFET!
![]()
|
I didn't say that we voted against it. Thanks to the privacy of voting in those days you'll never now how the Boo Party voted. |
![]() |
|
| Boohistory | Jun 23 2008, 06:03 PM Post #11 |
![]()
Minister for Awesome
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
"There are no inactive moderators" I consider eriataka and miniyoda to be inactive. You may disagree with me, but I do not see them around as often as I would like |
![]() |
|
| miniyoda008 | Jun 23 2008, 06:11 PM Post #12 |
|
Master of the Force
![]()
|
Your selective vision is clearly restricting your vision of anyone not Communist. I have voted in virtually every single motion, as is perfectly obvious under the new system (apart from one or two where I had no particular view either way so abstained), and have limited my involvement in debates because it has been mostly petty slander, which I have no intention of getting involved in. |
![]() |
|
| eriatarka1 | Jun 23 2008, 06:27 PM Post #13 |
![]()
Home Secretary
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That is because we are on at different times. I tend to be on from 10 to 11 at night and for most of the day. In fact, I come close to calling you an inactive member, as I do not see you on as often as someone who is active might be. Challenge then Boohistory: let's compare our lists of active members. EDIT: via PM, as I shall lock this thread as it is of no relevance and/or use; all arguments on both sides have been used and it would appear nobody is convinced. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Debates · Next Topic » |





![]](http://z1.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)






2:16 PM Jul 11