October 26, 2012 at 10:05 am #419728
2007. You are replying to a 5 year old thread. Seriously, Brickfilms.com admin, do you not understand forum etiquette? Enforce them and lock these outdated threads that are no longer relevant to your new site.
And deleting my post? Clearly you know what your doing.******Dont try to insult any user and before say anything please read instruction of posting a comment in a topic.****** Rethink your objective for this site and stop instructing people to post on outdated threads.October 26, 2012 at 8:15 am #419714
Rakibul HasanParticipantOctober 13, 2012 at 4:18 pm #419453
Brix_LoverParticipantMarch 16, 2007 at 10:36 pm #267756March 16, 2007 at 7:32 pm #267679
Mr. LessParticipantMarch 16, 2007 at 2:54 pm #267596
Ah, I understand now. Three branches of the same political party with the same basic principles. Each branch can put forth a candidate, but each one will be running for essentially the same party.
Not too shabby!
Why three though? I would have settled with two, but I suppose it’s better to have too many than too few.March 16, 2007 at 2:36 pm #267590
That’s partially correct. These three legally separate parties were created to prevent cases like we had last election, when Monko was unable to run, simply because he wasn’t nominated (even though he had good plans and dedication).
If you think about it, this format does little to help any single candidate from any of the entities. First of all, our former party is now split into three, each of which could nominate a candidate. This dilutes our membership, and crowds up the races. Furthermore, We are quite clear in stating that we do not actually endorse any candidate. We only nominate candidates so that they may run, even if we don’t agree with their plans — and we make it clear to our members that they are to vote individually on who they feel is best for the position.
This format is not beneficial to us. In fact, it’s beneficial to the other parties, who do not have a policy of encouraging their voters to vote individually.March 16, 2007 at 2:16 pm #267587March 16, 2007 at 1:44 pm #267577
Aled OwenParticipantMarch 1, 2007 at 4:00 pm #265868
The topic ‘The Coalition for the Reign of Free Thought 3’ is closed to new replies.