Posts by Emma Hart
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Speaker: The silent minority, in reply to Russell Brown,
Asian New Zealanders in several surveys are the most intensive internet users, but I’m not sure what their electoral turnout is like.
From memory, they're one of the lowest turn-out ethnic groups, along with Pasifika.
-
One of these flags has its own Twitter account already. Which, by the reasoning of the original blog, makes it the winner. And also, unfortunately, least likely to win the vote.
-
Polity: Buying a fight with democracy, in reply to Rob Salmond,
including scrutinising the final printed rolls against the page and line numbers announced by clerks staffing the booths.
I have seen one (1) scrutineer actually write down the numbers we call out.
And yes, as seems the consensus here, voter ID is, IMO, a horrible idea. I'm perfectly comfortable with a small amount of voter fraud being the consequence of not disenfranchising people.
-
Polity: Buying a fight with democracy, in reply to Rob Salmond,
In my view, the ban on election-day advertising is egregious
Thanks for clarifying that, Rob. It's not a position I agree with, but it's one I can respect.
-
Hamilton also proposed a shorter advance voting period of 10-14 days and tougher restrictions on campaigning where early voting is taking place.
Both of these changes were proposed by the Electoral Commission. Currently there are no restrictions on election advertising in and around advance voting booths. Scrutineers can’t even be stopped wearing t-shirts that say “VOTE [PARTY]” inside the polling place. All the commission wanted was to make advance voting consistent with on-the-day voting. So either this isn’t a grievous violation of free speech, or the ban on election-day advertising is. I don’t see how you can have it both ways.
-
Up Front: Not Uniform, in reply to ,
it demonstrates one of our school values
"petty-minded authoritarianism". Punishing kids for breaking stupid rules teaches them to NOT respect their school.
-
Up Front: Well, Read Women, in reply to Simon Chamberlain,
Someone in the comments is all "I only read Pratchett and Gaiman", and I've had EXACTLY that conversation with someone I know.
-
Up Front: Well, Read Women, in reply to Simon Chamberlain,
This Buzzfeed article is both hilarious and frustrating:
That's it! That's the column I read, didn't bookmark, and then couldn't find again. And as usual, the comments justify the article.
-
Up Front: Well, Read Women, in reply to Andrew Stevenson,
She’s reading the Percy Jackson series now – any suggestions an advanced reader the twelve year old range?
Diana Wynne Jones, Karen Healey, Emily Roddha, Tamora Pierce.
I’ve found it interesting that I have never judged book by the gender of the author, and that people actually do this??
If you look at that gender-flipping covers thing Neil posted, you can see one of the many little signs you get, whether this book is 'for you' or not. Makes me think that maybe the black 'adult' covers for the Harry Potter books also told older guys they were okay for them to read.
-
Up Front: Well, Read Women, in reply to Andrew Stevenson,
My “Books I must read” list is heading towards critical mass…
Is this a bad thing?This is like Authors I had Forgotten I Loved. Vonda McIntyre! Sarah Monette! Mary Gentle!
Also. Karen Healey, and Jacqueline Carey's Santa Olivia.
gender flipping book covers
I kind of lost it over the feminised Lord of the Flies cover. Jesus.