Pyrpolizer wrote:Kikapu wrote:Viewpoint wrote:In all honesty Kikapooo I have clarified this many times and due to my lack of respect for you I cant be bothered as I know the type of sarcastic, manipulative, one sided, rude and nasty comments you will make.
Then give them to Pyro instead. I'm sure he would also like to know what you are talking about.
Just copy paste your previous explanations and examples, that's all. If you make a proposal and are not willing to give us the details when asked, then don't bother in the future of making any proposals .
It's in the manifesto thingy page 5. I actually searched for it, thinking it was something I missed during my absence from the forum Instead I found out it was something recent... needs too much reading to possibly figure out what it is...
cyprus31695.htmlKikapu, if you have time to read the whole thing please provide a small summary.
Thanks Pyro for the link. When I have some time, I'll go through it and give you my assessment.
Basically if I'm not mistaken, VP's idea on the
"First Past The Post" thingy is a self created idea that is not supported by the BBF based on UN Resolutions, which is, that the political equality rests with the states and not with the communities. What VP is doing with the FPTP thingy is, he is doing both at the same time, a political equality of the two communities and political equality of the two states where the north state will have equal number of TCs in the upper house to the number of GCs in the south state's upper house. 50-50. So, if there are total of 50 seats in the upper house from both the states, 25 seats each, VP's idea is anyone in the country can choose the 25 TCs who gather the most votes for the north state and anyone can choose the 25 GCs for the south state regardless where one lives, hence not to change the territorial boundaries and leave the present Green Line as a permanent one. Again, he is adding something that is not in the BBF, the political equality of the communities.
But just for the sake of argument that the GCs went along with VP's idea on the FPTP, then why would there need to be two states to begin with? This same system will work just fine as a Unitary state. But VP's and the partitionists like him, their main aim is to have the FPTP system as two states with the present boundaries as a EU member Cyprus, and then within a short time, secede the north state from the union with the already established boundaries to become a sovereign state with half owners of the natural resources of Cyprus. If these are not VP's and his partitionists friends intent, then they can have the same system in a Unitary state, but of course they wont do that, and the reasons are very obvious. That's why VP does not want to get into it with me, because I have already got him sussed out. Not that it was that difficult. He did after all support the AP of 2004. That's all one needs to know about VP's intentions.
Any comment you would like to correct me on the above post, VP?