|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 24, 2021 10:06:07 GMT
I wish to propose a new Almanac of MPs to contain biographies, achievements, voting records, bill introduced, noteable speeches, opinions and positions, wings, attachments and associations, speculation and gossip (with strict emphasis on avoiding libel or unpleasantness or partisan diatribe).
The question is how to organise it?
Do we start will an alpha list of all current MPs by new thread as with constituencies or is there an ability by the Mods to permit random creation with ability to reorganize those entries later, if and when they bulk out numerically?
Do we also have a separate set of threads for former MPs?
Is this thought to be a good idea?
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jan 24, 2021 10:15:09 GMT
You could have asked Byron Criddle if it's a good idea, unfortunately he died a few days ago..
|
|
Crimson King
Lib Dem
Be nice to each other and sing in tune
Posts: 9,843 
|
Post by Crimson King on Jan 24, 2021 10:18:20 GMT
perhaps group them by the year of the GE (by elections with the preceding GE) they first entered the HOC for manageability, and start with the earlier ones with (possibly) more to say
|
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Jan 24, 2021 10:54:34 GMT
I wish to propose a new Almanac of MPs to contain biographies, achievements, voting records, bill introduced, noteable speeches, opinions and positions, wings, attachments and associations, speculation and gossip (with strict emphasis on avoiding libel or unpleasantness or partisan diatribe). The question is how to organise it? Do we start will an alpha list of all current MPs by new thread as with constituencies or is there an ability by the Mods to permit random creation with ability to reorganize those entries later, if and when they bulk out numerically? Do we also have a separate set of threads for former MPs? Is this thought to be a good idea? We could just link to www.theyworkforyou.com/ for post-2004 stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 24, 2021 11:04:19 GMT
I wish to propose a new Almanac of MPs to contain biographies, achievements, voting records, bill introduced, noteable speeches, opinions and positions, wings, attachments and associations, speculation and gossip (with strict emphasis on avoiding libel or unpleasantness or partisan diatribe). The question is how to organise it? Do we start will an alpha list of all current MPs by new thread as with constituencies or is there an ability by the Mods to permit random creation with ability to reorganize those entries later, if and when they bulk out numerically? Do we also have a separate set of threads for former MPs? Is this thought to be a good idea? We could just link to www.theyworkforyou.com/ for post-2004 stuff. That is an excellent resource Alan with good body of factual information far wider than just MPs, but I like the thought of our own almanac on our own model using this link rather duplication much of what it contains. And we can frame it in a manner that that site could not do and include material and speculation they would not think appropriate. But many thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on Jan 24, 2021 11:12:02 GMT
Andrew Roth used to compile a big, somewhat slanted and selective collection of biographies. He's dead now I'm afraid and, unsurprisingly, his work in the 2000s slowed down (he was in his 80s then, and he died in 2010).
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,916
|
Post by The Bishop on Jan 24, 2021 11:16:58 GMT
Andrew Roth used to compile a big, somewhat slanted and selective collection of biographies. He's dead now I'm afraid and, unsurprisingly, his work in the 2000s slowed down (he was in his 80s then, and he died in 2010). But often quite entertaining, its a shame that nobody else carried on his work. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 24, 2021 11:18:34 GMT
Andrew Roth used to compile a big, somewhat slanted and selective collection of biographies. He's dead now I'm afraid and, unsurprisingly, his work in the 2000s slowed down (he was in his 80s then, and he died in 2010). Yes matureleft. I had both he a Craig in mind and feel that on a co-operative contributory basis we could achieve a very useful and interesting resource here. |
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on Jan 24, 2021 11:26:20 GMT
Andrew Roth used to compile a big, somewhat slanted and selective collection of biographies. He's dead now I'm afraid and, unsurprisingly, his work in the 2000s slowed down (he was in his 80s then, and he died in 2010). Yes matureleft . I had both he a Craig in mind and feel that on a co-operative contributory basis we could achieve a very useful and interesting resource here. It would be dull if there weren't a (legal) edge to it. As The Bishop says, Roth could be entertaining if not entirely balanced! |
|
|
|
Post by Robert Waller on Jan 24, 2021 11:30:25 GMT
You could have asked Byron Criddle if it's a good idea, unfortunately he died a few days ago.. One thing Byron may well have told you, is beware: if you write something about an MP that is controversial or questionable you may end up by losing several thousands of pounds ... ( .. and just one MP was involved) The publishers also lost the same amount, and that was the end of the Almanac of British Politics in book form. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jan 24, 2021 11:35:29 GMT
Will this be like Watergate's 'Deep Throat', you will only confirm which MP it was when they die?
|
|
|
|
Post by Robert Waller on Jan 24, 2021 12:40:29 GMT
Will this be like Watergate's 'Deep Throat', you will only confirm which MP it was when they die? I think the fact that someone like me - who really likes to try to be as open and honest as possible - is still reluctant to name the person tells you something about how seriously the 'libel' issue should be considered .... |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 24, 2021 13:02:44 GMT
Will this be like Watergate's 'Deep Throat', you will only confirm which MP it was when they die? I think the fact that someone like me - who really likes to try to be as open and honest as possible - is still reluctant to name the person tells you something about how seriously the 'libel' issue should be considered .... Do you consider that most MPs and most lawyers would consider that open publication on TV, in the press and in books and magazines is of a rather different oder to that of a members forum on IT that does not copy and publish elsewhere? That said, I feel that we are duly warned and should be careful and circumspect in what we assert and contend to be true. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Jan 24, 2021 13:09:39 GMT
I remember reading something questionable in one of the MP profiles in the Almanac of British Politics, but I don't think it was in the last edition to be published and therefore it probably wasn't the profile that caused a problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by Robert Waller on Jan 24, 2021 14:35:48 GMT
No, AJS, it wasn't one of Byron's more obvious acerbic comments - and that's part of the reason why addressing MPs is potentially so dangerous.
I believe I made it clear when I suggested this 'Vote UK Almanac' idea last year that I did not want the 'Criddle' MPs part of my Almanac replicated, but to stick to seats.
So though I can have no objection to such an idea on another part of this site (and I don't wish to cut down the freedom of expression in the round), I would respectfully request that it is not included under the 'Almanac' name, to which I may, I I suppose, have some claim - particularly given the circumstances regarding Byron.
|
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Jan 24, 2021 14:58:32 GMT
Will this be like Watergate's 'Deep Throat', you will only confirm which MP it was when they die? I think the fact that someone like me - who really likes to try to be as open and honest as possible - is still reluctant to name the person tells you something about how seriously the 'libel' issue should be considered .... Intriguing how little the libel laws seem to bother the free speech fundamentalists! |
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on Jan 24, 2021 15:02:22 GMT
I wish to propose a new Almanac of MPs to contain biographies, achievements, voting records, bill introduced, noteable speeches, opinions and positions, wings, attachments and associations, speculation and gossip (with strict emphasis on avoiding libel or unpleasantness or partisan diatribe). The question is how to organise it? Do we start will an alpha list of all current MPs by new thread as with constituencies or is there an ability by the Mods to permit random creation with ability to reorganize those entries later, if and when they bulk out numerically? Do we also have a separate set of threads for former MPs? Is this thought to be a good idea? We could just link to www.theyworkforyou.com/ for post-2004 stuff. It's a useful resource. However beware the classifications that they assign based on voting behaviour. They select particular divisions to include and they aren't necessarily the ones that count most. The classifications pick up relentless and fairly indisciminate rebellion but are less good at nuance (for example supporting second reading on the principle and then voting for or against in various subsequent divisions, including third reading). |
|
|
|
Post by pragmaticidealist on Jan 24, 2021 17:56:51 GMT
The MP by the name of *DELETED* who has represented the constituency of *DELETED* since *DELETED* is a corrupt piece of shit.
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 25, 2021 10:05:40 GMT
I am not sure I agree that anyone sould be able to corner exclusive use of a word like almanac, but you are closely associated to that excellent and much missed publication, and obviously have bad memories over the MPs element, so I shall use a diffent 'brand'.
I have mentioned elsewhere that I shall start this in concert with my own analysis of constituencies for each of the MPs I get to. Any thoughts on a good word for it? Directory, Compendium or Companion?
|
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Jan 25, 2021 10:27:05 GMT
I am not sure I agree that anyone sould be able to corner exclusive use of a word like almanac, but you are closely associated to that excellent and much missed publication, and obviously have bad memories over the MPs element, so I shall use a diffent 'brand'. I have mentioned elsewhere that I shall start this in concert with my own analysis of constituencies for each of the MPs I get to. Any thoughts on a good word for it? Directory, Compendium or Companion? I have always liked the word "Gazetteer". Whether it is the right word for this is another matter. |
|
