More helmet petition fun

Quoted message said:

I see that the names and comments of certain ;-) of the contributors
have been removed, and replaced with the words "line voided"; but their
signatures still count towards the petition.

"Signatures for this petition must be reviewed and approved by the
petition author or PetitionOnline Staff before they appear on this site."

Bum.

Mark Thompson wrote on 19/12/2006 18:18 +0100:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I see that the names and comments of certain ;-) of the contributors
have been removed, and replaced with the words "line voided"; but their
signatures still count towards the petition.

"Signatures for this petition must be reviewed and approved by the
petition author or PetitionOnline Staff before they appear on this site."

Well it says it's a Compulsory Petition so everyone should sign up - a
petition full of voided signatures is rather more effective for the anti
cause than one with all valid names - IMO

--
Tony

"...has many omissions and contains much that is apocryphal, or at least
wildly inaccurate..."
Douglas Adams; The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Tony Raven said:

Well it says it's a Compulsory Petition so everyone should sign up - a
petition full of voided signatures is rather more effective for the anti
cause than one with all valid names - IMO

I've just signed up as "Line voided", my previous "Wile E Coyote" having
been voided. Line voided is currently pending approval.

--
Danny Colyer <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
Reply address is valid, but that on my website is checked more often
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

Danny Colyer wrote on 19/12/2006 19:28 +0100:

Quoted message said:

I've just signed up as "Line voided", my previous "Wile E Coyote" having
been voided. Line voided is currently pending approval.

It didn't avoid the line then? ;-)

--
Tony

"...has many omissions and contains much that is apocryphal, or at least
wildly inaccurate..."
Douglas Adams; The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Danny Colyer said:

Tony Raven said:

Well it says it's a Compulsory Petition so everyone should sign up - a
petition full of voided signatures is rather more effective for the anti
cause than one with all valid names - IMO

I've just signed up as "Line voided", my previous "Wile E Coyote" having
been voided. Line voided is currently pending approval.

I've just signed up as, "Pending Approval" and received this rather
contradictory sentence in the confirmation email:

"Please contribute $1.00 or more to PetitionOnline and help maintain
this premiere free speech forum."

How can it be described as "this premiere free speech forum" when it
allows petition authors to edit messages contrary to their views?

Tom Crispin said:

I've just signed up as, "Pending Approval" and received this rather
contradictory sentence in the confirmation email:

"Please contribute $1.00 or more to PetitionOnline and help maintain
this premiere free speech forum."

How can it be described as "this premiere free speech forum" when it
allows petition authors to edit messages contrary to their views?

This petition has not really caught the public imagination, has it?
:-)

--
Dave...

Response to Tom Crispin:

Quoted message said:

How can it be described as "this premiere free speech forum" when it
allows petition authors to edit messages contrary to their views?

Of course it's their bat and ball, and they can do what they like on
their website; but the free speech thing should rather stick in their
throats. Still, one can certainly see the funny side of a petition with
45 signatures, thirty-odd of which are presumably iffy.

I'll be interested[1] if my own contribution, under my own name, makes
the cut.

[1] s/interested/bloody amazed

--
Mark, UK
"Justice must not only be done but must be seen to be believed."

Mark McNeill said:

Remember the petition "Compulsary [sic] Cycle Helmets For Children", at
http://www.petitiononline.com/p4hpet/petition.html
?

I see that the names and comments of certain ;-) of the contributors
have been removed, and replaced with the words "line voided"; but their
signatures still count towards the petition.

Check # 47.

Quoted message said:

Check # 47.

How? All I get is a page saying that there are 47 entries, but it will
not list any. Do you need to have signed it in order to see other entries?

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

"I fought the Dharma, and the Dharma won." (Allen Ginsberg)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Check # 47.

How? All I get is a page saying that there are 47 entries, but it will
not list any. Do you need to have signed it in order to see other
entries?

Under the google ads it says "View Signatures : 47" Click on the 47.

Wot did #47 say? Just says 'pending approval' at my end. Wonder if
mine'll get through?

Mark Thompson said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Check # 47.

How? All I get is a page saying that there are 47 entries, but it will
not list any. Do you need to have signed it in order to see other
entries?

Under the google ads it says "View Signatures : 47" Click on the 47.

Wot did #47 say? Just says 'pending approval' at my end. Wonder if
mine'll get through?

It doesn't work for me, I just get an empty list.

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

"I suppose they are vicious rascals, but it scarcely matters what they
are. I'm after what they know." (Gibson-Sterling, The Difference Engine)

On 20 Dec 2006 17:54:20 GMT, Mark Thompson

pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Check # 47.

How? All I get is a page saying that there are 47 entries, but it will
not list any. Do you need to have signed it in order to see other
entries?

Under the google ads it says "View Signatures : 47" Click on the 47.

Wot did #47 say? Just says 'pending approval' at my end. Wonder if
mine'll get through?

I used as a nom de plume "compulsorywithanO@<somethin-or-other-net>";
wonder if it will also get through.

In article <[email hidden]>

Don Whybrow said:

Mark Thompson said:

Quoted message said:

>Check # 47.

How? All I get is a page saying that there are 47 entries, but it will
not list any. Do you need to have signed it in order to see other
entries?

Under the google ads it says "View Signatures : 47" Click on the 47.

Wot did #47 say? Just says 'pending approval' at my end. Wonder if
mine'll get through?

It doesn't work for me, I just get an empty list.

You're not mising much - out of the 47 entries 11 are pending approval
and 22 have been censored, leaving a paltry 14 approved signatures. For
me the most telling comment is "My nephew had an incident on a bike with
no helmet on, he is fine, but it's made me think twice", although I have
to question whether her brain can withstand the rigours of thinking even
once.

Rob Morley said:

You're not mising much - out of the 47 entries 11 are pending approval
and 22 have been censored, leaving a paltry 14 approved signatures.

Of those 14, two don't give any address, and two are Canadian. This
leaves only 10 valid signatures for a petition to the British government.

Quoted message said:

For
me the most telling comment is "My nephew had an incident on a bike with
no helmet on, he is fine, but it's made me think twice", although I have
to question whether her brain can withstand the rigours of thinking even
once.

Mark McNeill said:

Remember the petition "Compulsary [sic] Cycle Helmets For Children", at
http://www.petitiononline.com/p4hpet/petition.html
?

I see that the names and comments of certain ;-) of the contributors
have been removed, and replaced with the words "line voided"; but their
signatures still count towards the petition.

I notice that a certain helmet is prominently advertised smack in the
middle of the petition. An email has been placed asking if this ad
will appear in the formal presentation version of the "petition", and
if so, how much does it cost, and can I have a picture as well as
text.

Suggestions for appropriate item to advertise and ad copy/image(s)
welcome...perhaps I can pay extra and get dynamic content; that
_would_ be fun.

Mark McNeill said:

Remember the petition "Compulsary [sic] Cycle Helmets For Children", at
http://www.petitiononline.com/p4hpet/petition.html
?

I see that the names and comments of certain ;-) of the contributors
have been removed, and replaced with the words "line voided"; but their
signatures still count towards the petition.

My efforts at correcting their spelling error(s) have been partly
successful...

Quoted message said:

Mark McNeill said:

I see that the names and comments of certain ;-) of the contributors
have been removed, and replaced with the words "line voided"; but their
signatures still count towards the petition.

My efforts at correcting their spelling error(s) have been partly
successful...

It's still claiming 50 signatures but only 14 are actually named.

--
Dave...

On 9 Jan 2007 05:58:17 -0800 someone who may be "dkahn400"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

It's still claiming 50 signatures but only 14 are actually named.

This petition has been up for a while. 14 signatures are "pending
approval", 14 have been left in and 22 have been "voided"
(presumably because they told the truth).

Not a very successful petition. Perhaps these statistics should be
forwarded to every MP who called for a helmet law.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

Mark McNeill said:

Remember the petition "Compulsary [sic] Cycle Helmets For Children", at
http://www.petitiononline.com/p4hpet/petition.html
?

I see that the names and comments of certain ;-) of the contributors
have been removed, and replaced with the words "line voided"; but their
signatures still count towards the petition.

--
Mark, UK
"The function of vice is to keep virtue within reasonable bounds."

Dear Mark,

A fellow Coloradoan somehow learned of this petition and begged me to
use my internet connection to let his voice be heard.

I therefore forwarded his signature and details to:

http://www.petitiononline.com/p4hpet/petition.html

In the unlikely event that his signature and comment are rejected, I
append what should appear as the 52nd petitioner's information:

Name: Alferd Packer

Comment: "Save the children so that they can grow up to be full-size
meals! (If you can spell compulsory that way, I can spell Alfred my
way.)"

Area of residence: Hinsdale County, Colorado 1874

Mr. Packer has met with scorn before, but feels that his conversion to
vegetarianism will blunt the malice of bigotry. In any case, it would
be unworthy and elitist for the organization to reject support for its
petition based solely on dietary prejudices.

I note with hope that #52 is "pending approval."

Even if his signature is rejected, Mr. Packer believes that having it
count anyway will be a step forward for Cannibal-Americans.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel