TV Watercooler

Don't see how they can lobby the Gvnt. The GVnt are committed to ensuring youngsters have equality of opportunity - here's you have thousands of predominantly youngsters saying, its ok to pay us nothing. It doesn't create a healthy sustainable workforce or society.
Also there's the issue of taxes not being paid because of the avoidance of NMW.

We're in a recession and here are people who want to be paid less?*%*!

Just want to check my facts here....all Shooting People members can vote in this?

So, those people who pay nothing to be a 'member' get to influence the policy and direction of a service that others are paying for?

I'm sure there must be a word for this type of backwards political philosophy - negative capitalism?

It's a paid membership, isn't it?

To the best of my knowlledge the membership of Shooting People is subscription only, there's no two-tier memebrship.

In fact there is, Bill. It's very hard to find the link (and maybe it doesn't exist any more at all!) but you can be a part member. You have no right to post in the bulletin and you receive it three days late but interestingly you are allowed to vote in their polls. (I'm not sure this is automatically a bad thing, Officer Dibble)

Are you advocating no representation with out taxation?




KC: I think you are right or were right, it's a dim memory from 3 or 4 years ago.

I still am a part member, although I can't remember when I did it. Probably a couple of years ago, and that was after my previous "part membership" was summarily cancelled. I do remember that it took ages to find the page where you could register, and I couldn't find it recently when someone else asked me.

Here's where my logic goes on this. Someone doesn't value your service enough to pay for it, is given a vote to influence your policy decisions. You then try and claim that 'members' (even though they don't value the service enough enough to pay for it), think its a good idea.
A 'member' who doesn't pay for a service is not a 'member' at all, they are just a gratis page impression.

Surely asking people who don't value the service what to do policy-wise to improve the service is a good idea because it would (hopefully) attract those people into using said service?

Don't see it myself, to me its a bit like asking all shoplifters what they think of conditions in retail.