Just to clarify this. I'm all for protests, but they should be effective.Rob Wilson wrote:True, but the Senate should be appraised of any possible protests and might even come up with a better idea for them.
Say for instance the person involved had gone along with that idea (of having 1 character per sentence in their sig). Their sig would have looked daft and chances are no one would know why they did it.
Let'ssay they went to the other extreme and had a sig of 100 characters, with 1 character to a line. That would get their Sig privileges revoked and again not make any real protest.
So what avenues could they pursue? Well by contacting me, he got his unhappiness about the shortening of Sigs aired in here. Fair enough.
BUt I don't want to encourage myself and Senators getting drowned in a flood of PM's. If you want to protest then organise, get one person to PM a single Senator, and list in that PM all those that are protesting. If nothig is done by that Senator then PM another or a Governor. Flooding a Senators or my Inbox will just get your Protest ignored and the perpetrators will lose PM privileges as a minimum!
Because the Senators and Governors actually represent a large cross-section of beleifs and idea's they were already posting Idea's that didn't shorten Sig lengths, the whole checks and balances thing.
As counte-intuitive as this sounds, a protest that disrupts the board will only get that protest Quashed ruthlessly. You want to have your protest noted, not removed from existance. You want a protest to have an effect, so think them through.
Lashing out like an immature child will get your arguments treated like those of a child. You want to affect change or prevent what you see as an injustice then act like an adult.
Any thoughts from the Senators on this?