Hi folks,

If people were on here simply saying {insert party name here} either suck or are totally awesome, or providing links to their party of choice to demonstrate their awesomeness (or lack thereof) I'd  fully agree. I've yet to see an example of such on the list - but I often delete unread things with subject headings I'm not interested in, so I may have missed them.

However, I don't put this in the spruiking category as you've framed it - it's a  particular environmental matter which a former member of MO has made a call. Also, there's no mention of any political party in the post in question, just a direct criticism of a specific decision. Lots of people on the list have made comments on PG's political activities since being elected to parliament, which is fair enough IMHO.

The list has a long (though not always illustrious!) history of discussing everything from religion to nuclear power-because the sort of people MO attract are often interested in this stuff. Keep the party political stuff out by all means, but this sort of thing? Fine by me.

Cheers
David


   Election on the horizon .... sigh ... anyone else want to prostitute

powderworks to spray about the party you happen to hate?

I'm thinking along the Quakers rule of meetings here (so I'm told, never
been to one) : Once any election is called and until a week after it's
over - Everyone can have their political say ONE TIME ONLY, then SILENCE
and let others speak. The same person nagging on the same basic topic
will be ejected without notice from the forum until after the election,
at which time they can apply to the mods to re-join.

All those in favour or against: vote here:
http://www.misterpoll.com/polls/496319

On 10/08/2010 6:21 PM, oilsrule77 wrote:
> I still dont know how a deal was done to build a desalination plant on
> top of a wetlands park and reserve its underwater. Pete why did you
> give this the all clear its one big stuff up