The ATS Election Thread. Election for Regent of ATS(IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT PG. 71)

page: 14
61
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Hmmm, I didn't think I'd have a favourite so early on in the piece, being an self-appointed independent observer an' all, but those are some good points.

Question, what is your stance on a Carbon Tax?




posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth

Originally posted by lIIuminatus


3. Said Regent is thus chosen to actively become an elected voice of reason to help inspire the next generation of role models that are needed before all echo's of logic and humility are lost to the confusions of contempt and derogative trends that are growing more evident.


This what here is what I think a great Regent would do. Be a wonderful example for the members, new and old. To be the voice of reason, logic and civility in the face of adversity.

Okay, now, really, I must go to sleep.

Good night.

Peace and love.
edit on 17-6-2012 by gimme_some_truth because: (no reason given)


Agreed. Only those members already recognized as stated above should be nominees for Regent.

Also, I think one perk the ATS Regent should enjoy is to be addressed as "Your Regency" or "Honorable Regent" in all replies to his/her posts as a show of respect. If anyone breaks this rule - 1 point deduction. More ceremonial than anything, but fun.

"Your Regency, I respectfully disagree.."



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by antonia
So, this is just a popularity contest?

How juvenile.


No, it's an election process. We talk of elections all the time. I thought we could have one here. Discuss, debate, vote.

You're free to run as well, or debate or ask questions.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:02 PM
link   
reply to post by AwakeinNM
 





Also, I think one perk the ATS Regent should enjoy is to be addressed as "Your Regency" or "Honorable Regent" in all replies to his/her posts as a show of respect. If anyone breaks this rule - 1 point deduction. More ceremonial than anything, but fun. "Your Regency, I respectfully disagree.."


That's not a requirement of my platform. To distinguish myself aside of my fellowman is totally against our Party's guidelines. If I am elected I will vehemently oppose such segregation.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cuhail

reply to post by nenothtu
 


That's a great platform. I like it. Top to bottom.

Made sense AND made me laugh out loud in spots.

Starred.

Cuhail


Thank you. It's a work in progress, with a plethora of issues yet to be covered. I just hit some of the high points that have already been discussed by other candidates. other issues, those of concern to the ATS membership, will have to be expounded upon as they are brought up by the membership.

ATS - YOU decide what your issues are, not me. I only explain my stance on them!



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001


Hear, hear! Let it be known that the Radical Centrist Party would be willing to form a coalition government with yours should the need arise... which reminds me... is this a parliamentary or "winner take all" style election? Beezer, you haven't exactly laid out the ground rules here....
edit on 17-6-2012 by DJW001 because: Edit to correct a missing letter, --DJW001. Vote Radical Centrist! --DJW001


I would have to go with a "winner take all" since Regent is a stand alone position and not a PM one.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Netties Hermit
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Hmmm, I didn't think I'd have a favourite so early on in the piece, being an self-appointed independent observer an' all, but those are some good points.

Question, what is your stance on a Carbon Tax?


I am against humans paying a carbon tax. If you want to tax carbon, let the carbon pay it.

It's a bit more involved than that, and goes into my stance on global warming. Rather than get to far into it at this point, let me just say that I LIKE being warm!



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Netties Hermit
 


I'll take it that any questions asked are directed towards all candidates, if not, sorry, but I would think it interesting to have all the serious candidates give their position on all the issues.



Question, what is your stance on a Carbon Tax?


Short Answer: Taxing energy production facilities does nothing to directly lower the emissions output, but rather generates another source of revenue. The are better ways to encourage compliance with regulations.

It's another tax levied. There are enough taxes. I believe that taxes are going to a very important factor in the upcoming discussions.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Druid42
reply to post by Netties Hermit
 


I'll take it that any questions asked are directed towards all candidates, if not, sorry, but I would think it interesting to have all the serious candidates give their position on all the issues.



Question, what is your stance on a Carbon Tax?


Short Answer: Taxing energy production facilities does nothing to directly lower the emissions output, but rather generates another source of revenue. The are better ways to encourage compliance with regulations.

It's another tax levied. There are enough taxes. I believe that taxes are going to a very important factor in the upcoming discussions.





And.........

Iran, North Korea, Sudan racking up millions by trading UN carbon credits

It doesnt help any of the people,in these countries. Only the Regimes.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Druid42
 


I think one of the first issues here is the marriage issue. All of you candidates are espousing 'marriage' to be open to anyone and everyone. However, as you aptly pointed out, it is an institution peculiar to religion alone, at least as seen today.

I believe that marriage should be the first order of business in clarifying each respective candidates position thereof, since all (or most) of you want 'marriage' to be an insitution in which everyone is invited to participate.



Can the candidates please explain how marriage will heretofore be defined and upon what basis?
edit on 17-6-2012 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by AwakeinNM

Also, I think one perk the ATS Regent should enjoy is to be addressed as "Your Regency" or "Honorable Regent" in all replies to his/her posts as a show of respect. If anyone breaks this rule - 1 point deduction. More ceremonial than anything, but fun.

"Your Regency, I respectfully disagree.."


I like the sound of it, but have to stand against it. I don't even like being called "sir", much less any loftier title.

You know that snipers look for the guy being saluted to know where to put the crosshairs, right?



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by lIIuminatus
As I initially stated, none have thus far taken this idea quite seriously, and would rather adhere to troll like tactics and ad hominem assaults in attempt to mask their own contradictions and flaws. Deny ignorance, but be mindful of your own. The idea's I presented seem like a platform in it's self, so I may very well advocate them, as should all.
I would like to nominate my self as an independent, for now.
Consider it done.

May I posit a question, though?

I find striking similarities to this and national elections. Sides are being taken, issues resolved, a polarisation, as it were.

This is a great microcosm of what we experience in life, don't you think?



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Druid42
 


I'll take it that any questions asked are directed towards all candidates, if not, sorry, but I would think it interesting to have all the serious candidates give their position on all the issues.


Sorry, absolutely, yes. I would like to hear from all candidates.

And so far, so good



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Partygirl
Ooh fun fun.

Is it too late for a new nominee? I nominate myself, for the "Clean Living Party." We support cleanliness on all levels, whether its rooting out corruption in government or making sure that people stop littering and wearing droopy clothes that expose the upper part of their bottoms. We don't need to see it! And with me in office, you won't have to.

Clean living is pro-Environmental protection, which is a left-leaning idea. But our focus on clean living also bolsters traditional religions and traditional culture, which should make me some friends on the right as well.

In a clean country, people behave respectfully to one another, dress as well as they can on their limited budget, and eschew dirty tricks of all sorts! Crime will be mecilessly punished, Singapore-style! Public caining will be brought back for graffitti artists and window-breakers.

Corruption is the number-one problem in government because without elected officials you can trust to do the right thing, you can't achieve anything. I would bring back the old Roman punishment for corrupt officials: Sew the offender in a bag with a rooster, a dog, and a snake and throw the whole thing into the nearest river. That ought to thin the ranks of the lobbiests and maybe even clear out almost all of the current officeholders in Congress.

Vote Partygirl for a cleaner world!

Of course you can nominate yourself.

Consider it done.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by Druid42
Do we even have the ability to hold a formal debate?





I believe we should.

It couldn't be too hard. Heck,we can use ATS LIVE for it!!!

It would be awesome,actually !


Let me get back to everyone on that. With the surprising activity, this may not be an issue.

I will check.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:24 PM
link   
I have a question to pose to all the candidates.

This question only pertains to ATS as a site, though. (As opposed to a world-political query)

"Do you think the "20 Posts" a member needs to start his first thread is enough?"

It's an ATS-specific topic and I agreed with someone a bunch of posts back that there should be some more ATS-specific positions stated.

Cuhail



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by OpinionatedB
reply to post by Druid42
 


I think one of the first issues here is the marriage issue. All of you candidates are espousing 'marriage' to be open to anyone and everyone. However, as you aptly pointed out, it is an institution peculiar to religion alone, at least as seen today.

I believe that marriage should be the first order of business in clarifying each respective candidates position thereof, since all (or most) of you want 'marriage' to be an insitution in which everyone is invited to participate.



Can the candidates please explain how marriage will heretofore be defined and upon what basis?


It's primarily a personal matter - who you want to spend your life with, and the level of commitment involved in it. I would think it should be limited to adult humans, since children an animals are either incapable of making their own decisions in such a momentous matter of commitment, or of speaking their mind in the matter.

If a couple wants a religious ceremony, then it would devolve to the rules and regulations of their religion, not the State. if they are NOT religiously minded, then it would primarily be a matter of commitment to one another, within the guidelines set forth above - no kids, no critters.

In either case, the State has no business interfering in their personal affairs, neither authorizing nor forbidding. If a guy want 12 wives, or a gal wants 12 husbands, and everyone involved is cool with that, who am I to tell them "NO!" ? IF a guy or a gal wants to commit to someone of their own sex, what business is that of mine, or the States? If I'm not living in their house, why should I care?



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cuhail



It's an ATS-specific topic and I agreed with someone a bunch of posts back that there should be some more ATS-specific positions stated.

Cuhail


Not a candidate,but their are actual threads,that address these types of issues.


Board Business & Questions



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 
Consider yourself a candidate, I will provide an updated list later in the "day".



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 11:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cuhail

I have a question to pose to all the candidates.

This question only pertains to ATS as a site, though. (As opposed to a world-political query)

"Do you think the "20 Posts" a member needs to start his first thread is enough?"

It's an ATS-specific topic and I agreed with someone a bunch of posts back that there should be some more ATS-specific positions stated.

Cuhail


I'm not sure that 20 posts are enough. Some come here, rapid-fire their 20 posts, start a frivolous thread, then sky right out. perhaps the post count for thread starting should be increased, but with a review mechanism in place to allow for earlier thread starts in exceptionally relevant or discussion stimulating cases.





new topics
top topics
 
61
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join