Teh INTERNET PARTY!!!1 - Page 3

Lightspeed · 11th June 2014, 15:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

It's kinda disturbing that this was written by a doctor

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/ne...ectid=11271358

tl:dr - Marijuana isn't harmless and decriminalisation sends the message that it is harmless.

Yeah, the stats are may be accurate but not informative. For example "Smokers of cannabis are about 2.6 times more likely to have a psychotic episode than non-smokers" is likely to be fairly accurate. However whether cannabis is the cause of psychotic episodes or if people who experience psychotic episodes use more cannabis (for symptom relief) is unknown.

Ab · 11th June 2014, 15:31

Something has to be demonstrably harmless to not be illegal now?

^BITES^ · 11th June 2014, 15:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

It's kinda disturbing that this was written by a doctor

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/ne...ectid=11271358

tl:dr - Marijuana isn't harmless and decriminalisation sends the message that it is harmless.

Its kinda disturbing that this is taken seriously ...

"It is an addictive substance"
/facepalm

Jodi · 11th June 2014, 15:50

Well, fuck me, we need to ban potatoes, water, air, fire, life. Because it can be proved that it's all harmful in some manner or not

*I like using this logical fallacy a lot it seems.

pxpx · 11th June 2014, 15:53

If we legalise weed, will that mean no more data caps on mobile and landline broadband connections?

Lightspeed · 11th June 2014, 16:10

Hopefully no one does the math on how much we pay out each year via ACC for rugby injuries. Might need a new national sport.

pxpx · 11th June 2014, 16:15

Rugby and Weed! This is what the internet party should be focussed on!

Someone crowd source it!

Ab · 11th June 2014, 16:17

Let's go Mets! Let's go Mets!

pxpx · 16th June 2014, 14:37

http://tvnz.co.nz/politics-news/inte...ailing-6003352

LOL

adonis · 16th June 2014, 21:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by pxpx

http://tvnz.co.nz/politics-news/inte...ailing-6003352

LOL

I really don't see what the big deal is. These politicians want to represent their supporters, the "coat tailing" provision provides a mechanism for that to happen.

What IMP have suggested, and what most on the left want is to improve on that mechanism. That's what lowering the threshold does. If they wanted to scrap it and leave the rest of the system the way it is then maybe it'd be worthy of a facepalm.

pxpx · 16th June 2014, 23:18

The big deal isn't fiddling with the threshold - if it gets scrapped, fine.

The big deal is using the back door to get into government, but before you try to do it, admitting to all that it's a total dick move to use this back door, then closing and locking the door when you get in.

I really hope the Nats don't bother with Act or that nutbar colin craig.

Lightspeed · 17th June 2014, 10:05

I don't think it's quite like that, there would be subsequent elections to deal with. Any party getting in via this back door and then closing it would have to demonstrate their effectiveness during that term if they wanted to maintain those seats the following election.

It would be a dick move to get into power opposing the coat-tails business, only to change the rules to extend the number of seats via coat-tailing they can get.

fixed_truth · 17th June 2014, 13:03

Yeah good on them for wanting to remove the loophole rather than pretending it's fine the way it is.

chubby · 17th June 2014, 20:40

laila doing her job well.

Quote:

One: We did not design and do not support the existing thresholds for party votes to count under the current MMP rules -- the 5 per cent threshold or the single electorate seat. We are advocating the removal of the single seat threshold along with the lowering of the 5 per cent.

Two: Our job is to represent our voters in Parliament, and that means making sure that their party votes are not wasted under current rules. Voters are sensible and will often vote for their second choice if their first choice could mean a wasted vote. This results in a vicious feedback cycle and is a protection racket for incumbents.

Three: Our agreement to run a joint party list under the internet-Mana name means that internet Party votes, which will be essential to a change of government in September, will be counted. Our alliance is a strategic one, and will strengthen the influence of both parties' supporters on the election outcome and the next Parliament.

nice little read..
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11275132

adonis · 17th June 2014, 21:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by pxpx

The big deal isn't fiddling with the threshold - if it gets scrapped, fine.

The big deal is using the back door to get into government, but before you try to do it, admitting to all that it's a total dick move to use this back door, then closing and locking the door when you get in.

I really hope the Nats don't bother with Act or that nutbar colin craig.

It's not a "dick move" to make sure people are represented in parliament, and if people DO think what they did is a dick move they're perfectly entitled to vote for someone else. The number of seats IMP will get is still linked to their party vote, the "coat tailing" rule just means those votes don't get ignored.

pxpx · 17th June 2014, 21:57

So it's sweet if the Nats do it eh?

chubby · 18th June 2014, 07:45

except they wont.

Spink · 18th June 2014, 08:26

tbh every voted is wasted with the current party options

adonis · 18th June 2014, 17:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by pxpx

So it's sweet if the Nats do it eh?

Yes. Everyone should be represented as best as possible. I'll certainly advise against people voting for Act, or National, Or Conservative, but if people choose to vote for them they have every right to be represented.

The "coat tailing" rule is a band-aid for a threshold that is too high.

Ab · 18th June 2014, 17:51

Hasn't affected the current parliament though.

adonis · 18th June 2014, 20:14

It did in 2008. Act with 3.6% got 5 seats, Dunne with .8% got his, Maori with 2.4% got 5, Jim got his with .9%, NZF... 4%.. no seats.

Over 95,000 votes, no representation in parliament. The current system is broken. "Coat tailing" doesn't fix it entirely but ignoring it or claiming that the people who use it are gaming the system or whatever is really, really dumb.

Ab · 18th June 2014, 20:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by adonis

It did in 2008. Act with 3.6% got 5 seats, Dunne with .8% got his, Maori with 2.4% got 5, Jim got his with .9%, NZF... 4%.. no seats.

Not fair to include Maori in there, those five seats were all electorate wins.

But I take your point - ACT had 3.6% of the party vote and five seats thanks to winning Epsom, and NZF had 4% of the party vote and no seats because it couldn't win an electorate.

In conclusion, thank god, fuck Winston.

DrTiTus · 18th June 2014, 21:58

Would you guys be interested in online democracy at all? Or would you prefer personality politics and mocking everyone because it's easier to hate than to think?

Golden Teapot · 19th June 2014, 07:16

A great many people are mistaken about what democracy is today. Most of those that aren't mistaken can see that there never could be an online democracy.

I don't support attempting something that could never be. If an experiment on this is needed then let's just do it for the South Island (or better still Australia) and let the rest of use watch what happens over say a decade.

Ab · 19th June 2014, 14:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrTiTus

Would you guys be interested in online democracy at all? Or would you prefer personality politics and mocking everyone because it's easier to hate than to think?

Define what you mean by "online democracy".

pxpx · 19th June 2014, 15:06

I think he means laws are written underneath youtube videos?

Lightspeed · 19th June 2014, 15:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ab

Define what you mean by "online democracy".

I'm guessing something along the lines of a meritocracy, or technocracy, given the aversion to "personality politics".

Certainly I can appreciate that dissatisfaction, but I'm not sure we can expect much else.

spigalau · 19th June 2014, 15:58

Why am I thinking of Blakes 7 and Servalan ?

Ab · 19th June 2014, 16:04

lol, white people

Lightspeed · 19th June 2014, 16:25

It's funny the picture doesn't include the only person likely to get a seat next election.

Ab · 19th June 2014, 16:26

Well he's a darkie, can't have a darkie in the promo material.

Seriously though, Harawira has nothing to do with the Internet Party. Why would he be in the picture?

Lightspeed · 19th June 2014, 16:29

I must be confused.

pxpx · 19th June 2014, 16:29

Wonder how much of the $5m has gone to marketing companies?

Pimp-X · 19th June 2014, 16:49

LOLE.

Golden Teapot · 19th June 2014, 17:48

One of the internet party candidates works where I do. We had a fascinating conversation recently about his goals in this regard. He is right-leaning on the political spectrum and so I'm not really clear how this works for him.

I did mention that my vote is for sale - I just need to see ducting for fiber installed past my driveway before election day.

Ab · 19th June 2014, 17:48

No, true lol is the "NZ's most trusted" list. At number one, Willie Apiata VC. At the absolute bottom:

Quote:

99. Kim Dotcom, internet entrepreneur
100. Hone Harawira, Mana Party leader

fixed_truth · 19th June 2014, 19:56

Quote:

56. Helen Clark, former Prime Minister

Aww we all miss Auntie

Ab · 19th June 2014, 20:05

That photo above just makes me laugh all over again at the thought of an Internet party being fronted by a grey-haired old granny.

CCS · 19th June 2014, 20:33

Hey man, she may not know about the twatterbook but she a boomin granny.

StN · 19th June 2014, 21:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCS

Hey man, she may not know about the twatterbook but she a boomin granny.

I rate this post up there with Ab's one about the ginge...

HB Ab.

18th June 2014, 21:58	#103
DrTiTus HENCE WHY FOREVER ALONE	Would you guys be interested in online democracy at all? Or would you prefer personality politics and mocking everyone because it's easier to hate than to think? __________________ Finger rolling rhythm, ride the horse one hand...

19th June 2014, 16:49	#114
Pimp-X Drunken Annoying Superhero Bastard	LOLE. __________________ If there is one movement I could get behind in this world, it would be the discrimination and abuse of fucking idiots.

19th June 2014, 20:33	#119
CCS Stunt Pants	Hey man, she may not know about the twatterbook but she a boomin granny. __________________ I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner?

11th June 2014, 15:31	#82
Ab A mariachi ogre snorkel	Something has to be demonstrably harmless to not be illegal now?

11th June 2014, 15:50	#84
Jodi	Well, fuck me, we need to ban potatoes, water, air, fire, life. Because it can be proved that it's all harmful in some manner or not *I like using this logical fallacy a lot it seems.

11th June 2014, 15:53	#85
pxpx	If we legalise weed, will that mean no more data caps on mobile and landline broadband connections?

11th June 2014, 16:10	#86
Lightspeed	Hopefully no one does the math on how much we pay out each year via ACC for rugby injuries. Might need a new national sport. __________________ Stay shook. No sook.

11th June 2014, 16:15	#87
pxpx	Rugby and Weed! This is what the internet party should be focussed on! Someone crowd source it!

11th June 2014, 16:17	#88
Ab A mariachi ogre snorkel	Let's go Mets! Let's go Mets!

16th June 2014, 14:37	#89
pxpx	http://tvnz.co.nz/politics-news/inte...ailing-6003352 LOL Last edited by pxpx : 16th June 2014 at 14:39.

16th June 2014, 23:18	#91
pxpx	The big deal isn't fiddling with the threshold - if it gets scrapped, fine. The big deal is using the back door to get into government, but before you try to do it, admitting to all that it's a total dick move to use this back door, then closing and locking the door when you get in. I really hope the Nats don't bother with Act or that nutbar colin craig. Last edited by pxpx : 16th June 2014 at 23:21.

17th June 2014, 10:05	#92
Lightspeed	I don't think it's quite like that, there would be subsequent elections to deal with. Any party getting in via this back door and then closing it would have to demonstrate their effectiveness during that term if they wanted to maintain those seats the following election. It would be a dick move to get into power opposing the coat-tails business, only to change the rules to extend the number of seats via coat-tailing they can get. __________________ Stay shook. No sook. Last edited by Lightspeed : 17th June 2014 at 10:06.

17th June 2014, 13:03	#93
fixed_truth	Yeah good on them for wanting to remove the loophole rather than pretending it's fine the way it is. __________________ Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong.

17th June 2014, 21:57	#96
pxpx	So it's sweet if the Nats do it eh?

18th June 2014, 07:45	#97
chubby	except they wont. __________________ "Take four red capsules, in ten minutes-take two more. Help is on the way."

18th June 2014, 08:26	#98
Spink	tbh every voted is wasted with the current party options __________________ Weak hearts I rip.

18th June 2014, 17:51	#100
Ab A mariachi ogre snorkel	Hasn't affected the current parliament though.

18th June 2014, 20:14	#101
adonis	It did in 2008. Act with 3.6% got 5 seats, Dunne with .8% got his, Maori with 2.4% got 5, Jim got his with .9%, NZF... 4%.. no seats. Over 95,000 votes, no representation in parliament. The current system is broken. "Coat tailing" doesn't fix it entirely but ignoring it or claiming that the people who use it are gaming the system or whatever is really, really dumb.

19th June 2014, 07:16	#104
Golden Teapot Love, Actuary	A great many people are mistaken about what democracy is today. Most of those that aren't mistaken can see that there never could be an online democracy. I don't support attempting something that could never be. If an experiment on this is needed then let's just do it for the South Island (or better still Australia) and let the rest of use watch what happens over say a decade.

19th June 2014, 15:06	#106
pxpx	I think he means laws are written underneath youtube videos?

19th June 2014, 15:58	#108
spigalau	Why am I thinking of Blakes 7 and Servalan ? __________________ Spig.

19th June 2014, 16:04	#109
Ab A mariachi ogre snorkel	lol, white people

19th June 2014, 16:25	#110
Lightspeed	It's funny the picture doesn't include the only person likely to get a seat next election. __________________ Stay shook. No sook.

19th June 2014, 16:26	#111
Ab A mariachi ogre snorkel	Well he's a darkie, can't have a darkie in the promo material. Seriously though, Harawira has nothing to do with the Internet Party. Why would he be in the picture?

19th June 2014, 16:29	#112
Lightspeed	I must be confused. __________________ Stay shook. No sook.

19th June 2014, 16:29	#113
pxpx	Wonder how much of the $5m has gone to marketing companies?

19th June 2014, 17:48	#115
Golden Teapot Love, Actuary	One of the internet party candidates works where I do. We had a fascinating conversation recently about his goals in this regard. He is right-leaning on the political spectrum and so I'm not really clear how this works for him. I did mention that my vote is for sale - I just need to see ducting for fiber installed past my driveway before election day.

19th June 2014, 20:05	#118
Ab A mariachi ogre snorkel	That photo above just makes me laugh all over again at the thought of an Internet party being fronted by a grey-haired old granny.