Oh, you'll still be able to talk about it, I imagine, just not in connection with Macleans.
Requiring Registration -- Good. Allows users to build up a history, and I assume will come with some more robust user management features.. such as allowing me to choose whose posts I don't want to see.
Putting it on a separate page -- Very bad. The problem with too many comments will disappear with this change alone. I predict the problem will rapidly become one of too *few* comments, as people won't bother clicking to see what's been said, meaning they won't be enticed to reply, meaning the section will shrink, which will give even regular users less reason to bother checking, and so on until nobody's bothering to check it at all, with corresponding effects on the views of the accompanying article as well.
Indeed. The forums were an interesting experiment. The software running them was always a bit flaky, and they were separate from the articles in that you had to go into a specific forums section -- meaning that they got very little traffic even at the best of times.
That said, some of the discussions on them were fairly interesting. Especially with the first CPC budget, in '06.
Ah yes, the fun of private insurance. They're always quite happy to insure you for everything that won't happen.
Who's mocking? I'm curious if the person understood what they were voting for. If they did, and knew that their own job might be one on the line, then yes, I'm right with you, they should be commended, significantly.
NDP support was up across the country, even though it only translated into a significant number of seats in Quebec.
Liberal support was down across the country.
Mercer's analysis seems solid.
Except what if the way they voted *is* because they're less well-informed?
I mean, why would people vote for a candidate who's never been in their riding?
They're allowed to now. The CPC candidate documents now explicitly give permission ahead of time for any in-and-out that needs to be done. If you agree to become a CPC candidate, you agree to accepting money from the national party and donating money to the national party as needed. (Incidentally, for anybody becoming a CPC candidate.. check that last clause particularly carefully, and consider how much you trust the national party if their outside donations should slow down)
Had they done that before, it would have been impossible to say that the national party was simply moving money to avoid the limit, it was simply a donation to the local candidate, and a donation from the local candidate. That agreement makes all the (legal) difference.
I find that interesting that the one who voted conservative works in the gov't.
Could you ask that friend where the $11billion dollars in purported savings the government is going to conjure up are coming from?