NGMsGhost wrote on Apr 14
th, 2010 at 8:53am:
My mobile number has long been registered with the TPS and the FREEMSG message has been notable as coming from about the only sender of such messages to ignore TPS registration.
Thanks for pointing this out - clearly I am lucky to have been spared this nuisance.
Quote:My mother has an elderly friend with a psychological makeup that makes her vulnerable to all scams of this kind. Fortunately my mother herself would never fall victim to such messages.
This well made point highlights the vital issue.
Any regulatory system for issues such as this that is based on aggregating numbers of complaints totally misses the point. Those who really suffer would rarely complain, those likely to complain have little personal reason for doing so. In my view, this is why we need regulators who do not have to be driven by popular pressure and why we cannot rely on citizens simply being "empowered". (That is where "SCV" came from; when I adopted the nickname I had long ceased being a "victim".)
NGMsGhost wrote on Apr 14
th, 2010 at 8:59am:
have you also comprehensively declared your list of commercial alignments in carrying out any work on behalf of any governmental bodies or commercial organisations in the UK that are responsible for operating and earning revenue share from call centres.
I work, I buy stuff and I use public services. There is no relevant "commercial alignment" to be declared.
Quote:Also does your political non alignment mean that you never exercise your democratic right to vote and hence have little reason to complain about any governmental policy that may then be imposed upon you? Or are you saying that you do vote but you frequently change your allegiance between the parties from election to election according to the policies that they are espousing on that occasion?
I always exercise my right to vote. As this is done in private, I have no need to explain my decisions. Indeed, because it is private, we therefore have the right to lie about how we vote, so any discussion is purely academic. Having said that I always exercise my right to vote, I cannot even prove that, because I may invariably spoil the ballot paper.
As we are a democracy, any citizen is entitled to express opinions about the actions of government, regardless of whether or not they had any part in electing that government or its parliamentary opponents, or if they voted against the member that was elected. Furthermore, one does not even have to be directly affected to express an opinion on an issue of public policy.
I fear that these important principles, especially the latter, are too often put aside by those who do not share my view of democracy. There may be circumstances in which these factors could contribute to the weight to be applied to an opinion; however I believe that they are much lighter than is generally thought and are usually outweighed by the intrinsic merits of the idea expressed.
Under our system, voting in a parliamentary election is simply expressing a single preference from amongst the list of candidates to represent one's constituency in the House of Commons. Much else may be assumed, as many consequences may ensue, but this is all that one actually does.
(I have highlighted the "on-topic" bit)