Cyprus-Forum.com

[Pyrpolizer]

Bu adamların nedir söyledikleri...hep rumca konuşular.

ask lordo pezevenk

[Viewpoint]

Bu adamların nedir söyledikleri...hep rumca konuşular.

ask lordo pezevenk

Wow Pyro are you now in Love with Lordo?

[Pyrpolizer]

Bu adamların nedir söyledikleri...hep rumca konuşular.

ask lordo pezevenk

Wow Pyro are you now in Love with Lordo?

[Viewpoint]

Bu adamların nedir söyledikleri...hep rumca konuşular.

ask lordo pezevenk

Wow Pyro are you now in Love with Lordo?

ask means love in Turkish.

[Pyrpolizer]

Bu adamların nedir söyledikleri...hep rumca konuşular.

ask lordo pezevenk

Wow Pyro are you now in Love with Lordo?

ask means love in Turkish.

ashk, ask the same thing in Turkish as always a mess

[Viewpoint]

[/quote]

ask means love in Turkish.[/quote]

ashk, ask the same thing in Turkish as always a mess [/quote]

Its actually aşk not ashk you GCs always think you know Turkish and spell things wrong.

[DrCyprus]

Its actually aşk not ashk you GCs always think you know Turkish and spell things wrong.

It's a defect in our genes. Top scientists looked into it very seriously, and after meticulous tests the results showed that GC DNA shows clear lack of participation in most inherent Turkish language spelling and punctuation conventions.

[Kikapu]

You can twist and turn all you like people are not stupid as soon as you came face to face with proposals outside of your box you started like Kikapooo to bark, it rattles your cage to read another persons viewpoint, you are against "checks and balances" because you do not want to commit, conform or have to abide by the consequences, this shows you do not trust your own side and feel that they would soon renege on any new solution. I am clear as a bell its you that is confused contradictory, you show that you experience problems understanding that you have to take into consideration the other sides demands, you are now allowed to brush them to one side and ignore them...they do not go away, they just increase in size return and slap you in the face.

I know you were disappointed that I did not support or added anything to your "F" rated Pan voting thingy, only because the TCs would be the major losers, as well as being undemocratic in principle, but since you don't mind the TCs being out voted by the GCs and for them to vote in a lot of "Greek TCs" to help them pass all the bills in the government despite what the TCs may think, ans since you support for undemocratic and Human Rights violations, I thought of this idea for you. Also, since you want to have "Checks & Balances" to prevent any secessionist who would like to break away from the Union at the first chance they get, but in fact you will push for a Unitary state, then let me give you an idea where you can further your Pan Voting system.

Each state to have 50-50, TCs and GCs as that state's MPs. If each state were to have 20 MPs, then 10 MPs would be GCs and 10 MPs would be TCs in the north's state and the same in the south's state. Total MPs = 40. What do you think of this idea and will you support it, bearing in mind, that you will need to have at least 5 MPs from the TCs and GCs to call for a referendum, totalling 15 MPs from that one state, or 75% of that states MPs, to either secede from the Union or to have a Unitary state. This formula does not change the BBF's requirement of "political equality" of the states, does it? Ah, just one more thing. The MPs must also come from the state they will be serving in, but anyone can vote for them from anywhere across the country as per your wish, which means the 20 districts in each state will be divided equally between the TC MPs and GC MPs at 10 districts each, in each of the states.

How's that for thinking outside the box?

[Viewpoint]

You can twist and turn all you like people are not stupid as soon as you came face to face with proposals outside of your box you started like Kikapooo to bark, it rattles your cage to read another persons viewpoint, you are against "checks and balances" because you do not want to commit, conform or have to abide by the consequences, this shows you do not trust your own side and feel that they would soon renege on any new solution. I am clear as a bell its you that is confused contradictory, you show that you experience problems understanding that you have to take into consideration the other sides demands, you are now allowed to brush them to one side and ignore them...they do not go away, they just increase in size return and slap you in the face.

I know you were disappointed that I did not support or added anything to your "F" rated Pan voting thingy, only because the TCs would be the major losers, as well as being undemocratic in principle, but since you don't mind the TCs being out voted by the GCs and for them to vote in a lot of "Greek TCs" to help them pass all the bills in the government despite what the TCs may think, ans since you support for undemocratic and Human Rights violations, I thought of this idea for you. Also, since you want to have "Checks & Balances" to prevent any secessionist who would like to break away from the Union at the first chance they get, but in fact you will push for a Unitary state, then let me give you an idea where you can further your Pan Voting system.

Each state to have 50-50, TCs and GCs as that state's MPs. If each state were to have 20 MPs, then 10 MPs would be GCs and 10 MPs would be TCs in the north's state and the same in the south's state. Total MPs = 40. What do you think of this idea and will you support it, bearing in mind, that you will need to have at least 5 MPs from the TCs and GCs to call for a referendum, totalling 15 MPs from that one state, or 75% of that states MPs, to either secede from the Union or to have a Unitary state. This formula does not change the BBF's requirement of "political equality" of the states, does it? Ah, just one more thing. The MPs must also come from the state they will be serving in, but anyone can vote for them from anywhere across the country as per your wish, which means the 20 districts in each state will be divided equally between the TC MPs and GC MPs at 10 districts each, in each of the states.

How's that for thinking outside the box?

Where does this actually differ from what I have been saying, other than you want to produce 10 Greek TC MPS now from your own state instead of countrywide? What I would now change in my original proposal would be the the pan voting limiting this to a districts first past the post system.

[Kikapu]

You can twist and turn all you like people are not stupid as soon as you came face to face with proposals outside of your box you started like Kikapooo to bark, it rattles your cage to read another persons viewpoint, you are against "checks and balances" because you do not want to commit, conform or have to abide by the consequences, this shows you do not trust your own side and feel that they would soon renege on any new solution. I am clear as a bell its you that is confused contradictory, you show that you experience problems understanding that you have to take into consideration the other sides demands, you are now allowed to brush them to one side and ignore them...they do not go away, they just increase in size return and slap you in the face.

I know you were disappointed that I did not support or added anything to your "F" rated Pan voting thingy, only because the TCs would be the major losers, as well as being undemocratic in principle, but since you don't mind the TCs being out voted by the GCs and for them to vote in a lot of "Greek TCs" to help them pass all the bills in the government despite what the TCs may think, ans since you support for undemocratic and Human Rights violations, I thought of this idea for you. Also, since you want to have "Checks & Balances" to prevent any secessionist who would like to break away from the Union at the first chance they get, but in fact you will push for a Unitary state, then let me give you an idea where you can further your Pan Voting system.

Each state to have 50-50, TCs and GCs as that state's MPs. If each state were to have 20 MPs, then 10 MPs would be GCs and 10 MPs would be TCs in the north's state and the same in the south's state. Total MPs = 40. What do you think of this idea and will you support it, bearing in mind, that you will need to have at least 5 MPs from the TCs and GCs to call for a referendum, totalling 15 MPs from that one state, or 75% of that states MPs, to either secede from the Union or to have a Unitary state. This formula does not change the BBF's requirement of "political equality" of the states, does it? Ah, just one more thing. The MPs must also come from the state they will be serving in, but anyone can vote for them from anywhere across the country as per your wish, which means the 20 districts in each state will be divided equally between the TC MPs and GC MPs at 10 districts each, in each of the states.

How's that for thinking outside the box?

Where does this actually differ from what I have been saying?

The difference is, where you want the north state to be all TC MPs and the south state to be all GC MPs, I'm saying, let the north state have 50% TC MPs and 50% GC MPs = 100% for the north's MPs and the south state have 50% TC MPs and 50% GC MPs = 100% for the south state's MPs. That's the difference!