Marmite
Danyl Strype
Public
Seen by 22
What policy should the Pirates have on preventing future outbreaks of Marmageddon? Should we propose a properly-funded Minstry of Marmite, or will that offend potential supporters who oppose Big Government?
Tommy Fergusson
Sun 9 Feb 2014 11:37PM
I just prefer this shade of red
Rob Ueberfeldt
Tue 11 Feb 2014 6:41AM
Marmite is just a distraction lets go straight to the Chilli sauce.
Tommy Fergusson Sun 9 Feb 2014 11:36PM
Careful, there have been other proposals equally absurd that people were serious about, the difference isn't as obvious as you think.
Danyl Strype Mon 10 Feb 2014 12:38AM
In consensus decision-making, the correct use of a 'block' is to state that the proposal goes against the core principles of the group, or is so unacceptable you would leave the group if the proposal passed. For example, if someone put up a proposal for extension of copyright to life plus 500 years, it would be appropriate to block it. If a proposal is just silly, it's sufficient just to 'disagree', and say so.
Andrew McPherson Mon 10 Feb 2014 11:23PM
Ok, it is now obvious that @davidpeterson objections about non-core policy adoption by 4 members isn't likely to see the adoption of nonsense.
David Peterson Tue 11 Feb 2014 3:51AM
My objection wasn't that nonsense policy would always be adapted, just that it could be (and also this was just one point from a broader argument).
David Peterson Thu 13 Feb 2014 4:26AM
@andrewmcpherson , you've wildly misrepresented my argument
Andrew McPherson Thu 13 Feb 2014 6:43AM
Not really, this whole policy can be used to demonstrate that even with a dedicated selection of the party, the policies that go wildly out of track with our core just won't get adopted unless they are considered to have sufficient merit.
As I said, the results prove your argument is unlikely at the very least to happen.
Hubat McJuhes Sat 15 Feb 2014 10:18PM
@andrewmcpherson, your argument implies that, if a proposal way out of the spectrum of core issues would be adopted, it would be because it most likely would have sufficient merit. And your stance is that that would be fine.
I think that @davidpeterson would not necessarily oppose the first part, but the position that he expressed a number of times is that even though there might be merit in the non-core position, it is NOT fine to take the position for the PPNZ.
Danyl Strype · Sun 9 Feb 2014 10:30PM
Tommy, I put this up so we could have a bit of fun, and play around with the different ways Loomio can be used to discuss and find consensus on policy etc. Like the 'Take a Trip to the Moon' trial thread that we had when we first started the group. Any member who thinks this is a serious thread needs their head examined, and their sense of humour reinstalled.