Posts by Che Tibby
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
can a party that's unable to get 1/3 of Maori votes really claim to represent Maori?
as much as any party can argue to represent all of their desired constituents.
The Maori seats were conceived to give Maori representation in Parliament at a time when there was no way they could get there, because we were a FPP system, Maori were few and dispersed, and the general electorate would never vote for a Maori MP. With MMP, none of those arguments stand.
untrue. the maori seats were seat up in the aftermath of the land wars, as a sop to kupapa maori.
there is no "hard-fought" political rights about it.
-
I love the idea of informed comparison of policy, rather than the usual tit-for-tat of talking heads from the respective parties.
I suspect finding commentators as knowledgeable and able to write as well as David does ain't going to be easy, though.
have them sub-edited.
it could be the first step on sending public address over to the dark side.
"Public Address: New Zealand's Premier Online Newspaper <strike>that isn't Scoop</strike>"
-
he has a highly vocal interest in the value of north american currencies...
-
Roping in 'outside' experts for a caged debate does sound like fun. Can we lay bets on the outcome? Who's going to sell the popcorn?
seriously... try to imagine a week-long debate between tim shadbolt and michael laws about a local body issue of trivial importance, and have it *not* be fun...
-
The idea of the cage debates was to rope in a half dozen acknowledged experts on a given topic, commit them to at least one post a day for a week, and just watch.
yeah, that was it.
a secondary objective was to capture some of these debates for posterity. so that people could refer to the debate in a similar way to debatemapper
-
PS. For example the PAS 1st XV discussing an issue, and the blokes relegated to making the tea.
-
sue:
it's true you do have have an amazingly large number of highly well informed and intelligent people here.
russell, (assuming you notice this comment and read it), any more thought given to that 'cage-match' idea i floated with you when you were drawing up system?
if i remember right, you could have a "featured-comments" section where only your given experts discuss an issue. then you have a lurkers section where they lurk and/or talk about the experts.
this way the smarty-pants don't dominate the conversation, and the lurkers can ask each other clarifying questions.
-
note to self: edit rb's wiki. include "tool of the state, possible communist, homosexual sympathiser".
-
hmmmm... the people who opent he eyes of the denialators?
"denialadilators"?
-
QU: "help! is this the denialators!!!"
ANS: "no."