Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 143

Thread: Alternative vote - yes or no?

  1. #41
    Commercial Operator
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Sussex by the Sea
    Posts
    9,276
    Rep Power
    15

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Quote Originally Posted by Franck View Post
    I think the image makes what happens very clear.
    I think the image is a very good argument against FPTP. It's the conclusion that is incorrect. As I said, the voting was not about beer or coffee. If all the other parties were beer parties I can see no reason why they don't become one party and outvote the coffee party. But is was about voting between 3 pubs and a coffee shop - very different from beer vs coffee.

    Please don't think I fully support FPTP. I do not. However, I think that AV is a poor alternative. In these days of t'internet and mobile phones there's got to be a better and more interactive way of casting our votes.

    And, to be even more radical, I think that voting should be compulsory for all citizens. What an amazing referendum that would be. Those who don't think they should be made to vote would, erm, have to vote if they didn't want to be made to vote.

  2. #42
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    677
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy McGregor View Post
    In AV there is a good chance that everybody's second choice gets the job - that's someone who nobody wanted to be their representative. That has got to be worse than putting in a winner who didn't get a majority.
    So you are asserting three things:
    1. "Everyone's" second choice may win
    2. People would put someone as a secondly choice that they didn't want as their representative
    3. That's worse than putting in a winner who didn't get a majority

    On the first point - it may happen, yes. But not all that often, if you look at AV elsewhere. The winner in most Australian electorates is almost always either first or second on the first preference; it's extremely rare that someone who has a significant lead on the first round of voting doesn't win; AV has more effect on a marginal electorate. Your whole 'AV is for losers' really doesn't stack up when you look at the facts and evidence.

    The second point makes relatively little sense to me for a couple of reasons. Firstly, why would you put someone as a second choice if you don't want them to represent you? You don't have to, so if you chose not to rank them, then you don't have to. If you put someone on your ballot, you are indicating that you would rather be represented by them than by someone else that you put lower on the ballot. Under FPTP, I am often forced to put my second preference as first on my ballot because there's someone else I want to lose more and my second preference has a better chance of winning (I've done this in the last three elections I voted in). How is this better than AV, where I wouldn't have to do this?

    The final point is a value judgement. Personally, I think it's considerably worse to be represented by a candidate that most people don't want. Let's look at a marginal electorate, like Cardiff North. There, the Conservative candidate got 37.5% of the vote; Labour got 37.1%.

    What's interesting with that argument is, if a party gets less than 50% of the seats in Parliament, they cannot Govern without support from other parliamentarians. Yet in the electorates, all you need is more than anyone else and you win. Should we change parliament to match your perception of fairness, so that there is no opposition?

  3. #43
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy McGregor View Post
    Please don't think I fully support FPTP. I do not. However, I think that AV is a poor alternative. In these days of t'internet and mobile phones there's got to be a better and more interactive way of casting our votes.
    Firstly, the mechanism of voting is a totally separate issue from the actual electoral system.

    Secondly, new methods of voting (expanding postal voting, recently) have been tried - and have resulted in significant increases in electoral fraud. So I'd be cautious about identity theft with other methods.

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy McGregor View Post
    And, to be even more radical, I think that voting should be compulsory for all citizens.
    I don't have a problem with that - at least, within reason. Australia has pretty much that arrangement (technically, you don't have to vote, you just have to collect your ballot paper), and they're hardly a totalitarian state.

    Huh, and Australia also has AV... funny that...

  4. #44
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Andy, are you still contending that

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy McGregor View Post
    Expecting a voter to provide a ranked table of parties is asking far too much of the majority of voters.
    ?

    If so, would you care to respond to my reply:

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    we all already use such systems for other elections.

    For example, in Scotland there are four different electoral systems used:
    • FPTP: UK general elections.
    • AMS (Additional Member System): Scottish Parliament.
    • STV (Single Transferable Vote): local councils.
    • Party List System: European Parliament


    And yet Scottish voters somehow cope.

  5. #45
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    336
    Rep Power
    8

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    (Of course, this is different from our standard British tradition of incremental reform, but I think referenda should be for dramatic changes, otherwise what's the point?)
    Well quite, hence why so many people in this country were engaged on the idea of a referendum on getting out of Europe - that's a fairly drastic/dramatic thing to suggest, and it would have been very interesting to see which way that vote went.

    Voting between a system which grants victory to the largest percentage of 1st choices and a system which grants victory to the largest percentage of least worst choices... Come on, besides proponents of electoral reform who would see anything but FPTP be our electoral system, who honestly really cares?

    I'm still against AV simply because I favour getting things done efficiently with a simple single vote, whether my preference wins or loses. Funnily enough, true PR wouldn't be so different either. You make your single choice and you stick with it. None of this "oh but I wouldn't mind seeing Y if X doesn't get in". **** that. Life's too short.
    Last edited by DJ Mike; 28th-April-2011 at 09:18 PM.

  6. #46
    Registered User stewart38's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Ambrosden it gets
    Posts
    7,480
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    NO

    Will check with Daily Mail stance first

  7. #47
    Commercial Operator
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Sussex by the Sea
    Posts
    9,276
    Rep Power
    15

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    If so, would you care to respond to my reply:
    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    And we all already use such systems for other elections.

    For example, in Scotland there are four different electoral systems used:
    • FPTP: UK general elections.
    • AMS (Additional Member System): Scottish Parliament.
    • STV (Single Transferable Vote): local councils.
    • Party List System: European Parliament


    And yet Scottish voters somehow cope.
    My first answer is that we are not debating those different electoral systems. We are debating the choice between FPTP and AV.

    To answer DB's specific question, it works in Scotland because, for each vote there is only one voting system available and people want to use their vote. Plus, people will learn to use any voting system in the end. (The other reason it works in Scotland is that us Scots are especially clever )

    It would be fantastic if we were given a choice between all those different voting systems in the forthcoming referendum. I might even vote for something other than FPTP. However, the choice we are being given is FPTP vs AV. And I find myself unable to find enough merit in AV.

    I have given my reasons for voting against AV. I will repeat the main reason. When I vote for someone to represent me in government I vote for a person. So does everyone else. Under FPTP we get the person wanted by the most people. Under AV we might end up with someone who less people wanted as their representative. The system could, in theory, produce a representative who was nobody's first choice. I can not support a change to such a system, even if the chances of that happening are very low.

    I know there is an argument that the people's first choice is usually elected under AV. This argument supports keeping things the same as much as it supports a change to AV.

    As I have also said, I would prefer a run-off voting system of rounds of voting such as the two (or more in exhaustive run-off) round system used in many countries. This way we would end up with someone receiving over 50% of the vote. I know this can be compared with AV and that there are similarities. However, the difference is that the winner in run-off voting is the one chosen as the leader by a majority of voters. In AV there is a possibility that the winner could be everyone's second choice - in other words, and I've said it earlier, we'd be represented by a second place loser. And we are not voting for losers.

  8. #48
    Papa Smurf
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Planet Scathe
    Posts
    12,528
    Blog Entries
    6
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Whats wrong with voting for "losers" they may not expect it and do better than the alternatives. Anyway, any shakeup is worth it, I know it was a Billy Connelly quote but i like "anyone who wants to be a politician should be banned from being one", politicians should be randomly picked out of a hat - like at hogwarts

  9. #49
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    677
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy McGregor View Post
    I have given my reasons for voting against AV. I will repeat the main reason. When I vote for someone to represent me in government I vote for a person. So does everyone else. Under FPTP we get the person wanted by the most people. Under AV we might end up with someone who less people wanted as their representative. The system could, in theory, produce a representative who was nobody's first choice. I can not support a change to such a system, even if the chances of that happening are very low.
    Your main reason - the one I've highlighted - is simply untrue. That is why we're asking you to repeat your reasons - because I (at least) am hoping you'll give a reason that's based in how AV actually works.

    Let me be really clear: you do not have to vote for anyone you don't want to represent you.

    If there is only one candidate that you want to represent you out of all the candidates, then rank them as first and leave everything else blank. End of. It sounds like you would arbitrarily take that position yourself, so that's perfectly fine. But to suggest that, because you are only prepared to be represented by a single candidate, everyone is the same, is simply false.

    At the last election, there were two candidates that I, personally, would have been happy to see win. Had my second choice won rather than my first choice, then I would be happy with the result. For you to presume otherwise is simply wrong. In fact, the whole point of AV is the exact opposite from what you say: it's about finding the candidate that the majority of people are happy to be represented by. FPTP instead produces the case where the candidates are elected by a minority of voters in most electorates (ie around 40% of the popular vote seems fairly normal).

    Do you have any other reasons for opposing AV? Or just this one?

  10. #50
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy McGregor View Post
    My first answer is that we are not debating those different electoral systems. We are debating the choice between FPTP and AV.
    Yep, and your argument was that it was too complex for the poor little voters to understand.

    Which is demonstrably rubbish, because similarly-complex systems have been working perfectly well, all across the United Kingdom, for a decade or more.

    So I'd ask, what makes you think that the voters suddenly become stupid, just for the UK Parliamentary elections?

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy McGregor View Post
    To answer DB's specific question, it works in Scotland because, for each vote there is only one voting system available and people want to use their vote.
    Well, yes. Which is always going to be the case. So I really don't understand your point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy McGregor View Post
    Plus, people will learn to use any voting system in the end.
    Yes, or indeed at the first time. If nothing else, by reading the instructions on the ballot paper. If someone is too stupid to understand "put them in order of preference", then I'm surprised that they can actually remember to breathe.

  11. #51
    Formerly known as DavidJames David Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Norf Lundin
    Posts
    17,001
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    18

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Quote Originally Posted by geoff332 View Post
    Do you have any other reasons for opposing AV? Or just this one?
    The reason that the Tories oppose AV is that it would be disadvantageous to them electorally, due to the way their votes are distributed - and because all right-minded people hate Tories, of course.

    Whereas it'd be advantageous to Labour for similar reasons.

  12. #52
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    677
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    The reason that the Tories oppose AV is that it would be disadvantageous to them electorally, due to the way their votes are distributed - and because all right-minded people hate Tories, of course.

    Whereas it'd be advantageous to Labour for similar reasons.
    I'm not so sure about Labour. The Tory's it would definitely disadvantage (hence their rather dubious argument of "AV would mean different results, different results are bad, therefore AV is bad because it would produce different results"; they never explain WHY different results are bad except by saying that there different and therefore bad).

    The LibDems would clearly benefit.

    But Labour? I'm not sure overall. They would probably win some extra seats, but they would also lose a few. On balance, I'm not sure which way it goes for them.

    Labour are far more terrified of changing the electoral boundaries, which definitely advantage them (a lot of the 'Labour' seats are smaller; if each electorate was about the same size, Labour would find it harder to win an election).

  13. #53
    Commercial Operator
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Sussex by the Sea
    Posts
    9,276
    Rep Power
    15

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Quote Originally Posted by David Bailey View Post
    Yes, or indeed at the first time. If nothing else, by reading the instructions on the ballot paper. If someone is too stupid to understand "put them in order of preference", then I'm surprised that they can actually remember to breathe.
    My agument is not that they're too stupid to understand AV. It's that most people will not be able to rank half a dozen candidates in any meaningful way. This is simply because it takes a lot of analysis to consider all six candidates and work out where I would rank them.

    I'd say the same if I was asked to rank different varieties of apple. On the other hand, I know I like golden delicious and would continue to buy them because I know what I'm getting.

  14. #54
    Commercial Operator
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Sussex by the Sea
    Posts
    9,276
    Rep Power
    15

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Quote Originally Posted by geoff332 View Post
    Your main reason - the one I've highlighted - is simply untrue. That is why we're asking you to repeat your reasons - because I (at least) am hoping you'll give a reason that's based in how AV actually works.

    Let me be really clear: you do not have to vote for anyone you don't want to represent you.

    -snip

    Do you have any other reasons for opposing AV? Or just this one?
    As far as I can see, voting for only one candidate under AV means that you effectively place all the other candidates in equal second place.

    Under AV we are being asked to say who we think should be first loser, second loser, etc. If we were voting in 2 representatives I could see why we'd vote for two people. If we are voting for one representative I think we should vote for one person. I think a run-off voting system would mean that we'd end up with an elected representative who'd been voted by a majority. Why we haven't been offered this system is a mystery - I'd vote for it in place of FPTP. It takes into account the current situation where there's many candidates but still give us a representative who has been elected by a majority.

  15. #55
    Registered User NZ Monkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Auckland, NZ
    Posts
    1,109
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy McGregor View Post
    I think a run-off voting system would mean that we'd end up with an elected representative who'd been voted by a majority. Why we haven't been offered this system is a mystery - I'd vote for it in place of FPTP. It takes into account the current situation where there's many candidates but still give us a representative who has been elected by a majority.
    The thing is, even though a candidate will win with a majority on paper under a run-off system, it doesn't mean a majority actually wanted them there..... just that of the final two (or however many) choices left at the end more people preferred the winner over the loser. The claim that they technically hold a majority at this point is fairly empty if 90% of the voting public wanted other people to govern at the first round IMO.

    I don't understand why you think AV won't deliver essentially what you're asking for here. Putting it another way, under a Run-Off system you vote for who you want to win, then the weakest contenders get cut and you vote for who is left.

    So what is essentially happening is you:
    • Vote for your first choice. Keep voting for them if they get to keep going.
    • Vote for your first choice. If your first choice fails, pick the next best candidate on round two.


    That looks very similar to the AV method of ranking your preferences to me, just spread over two sets of elections instead of one. The only difference is that in AV you might have to go down to third or fourth choices before hitting someone who actually made the cut under a Run-Off system, but that's not exactly a big deal in this age of computer-aided electoral procedures.


    Edit: I supose some of the argument rests on whether not choosing anyone in second place under AV equtes to placing everyone else there equally, or counting as abstaining in the event that you have to look that far down the list. I would think that kind of detail would vary by country.
    Last edited by NZ Monkey; 30th-April-2011 at 03:08 AM.

  16. #56
    Commercial Operator
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Sussex by the Sea
    Posts
    9,276
    Rep Power
    15

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Quote Originally Posted by geoff332 View Post
    Labour are far more terrified of changing the electoral boundaries, which definitely advantage them (a lot of the 'Labour' seats are smaller; if each electorate was about the same size, Labour would find it harder to win an election).
    I think AV means that nobody will win and no single party will be able to form a majority and 'win' an election.

    What worries me in the event of no overall majority is that three or more parties may need to form a coalition to create a government. Why am I worried? Because those people joined different parties because they were so different in their thinking about the way the country should be run.

    We need to be able to form a strong government who have a clear vision of the way they want the country to be run. There should not be 3 or 4 different visions within our government. That leads to an administration who spend much of their time looking inwards at deals and trade-offs within the parties rather than getting on with the business of running the country.

    What is happening in politics is that we have a proliferation of smaller parties with very, very different visions of the way the country should be run. Each of those parties has little chance of forming a government but gets a little bit of support and this whittles away at the votes of the major parties. The result is that nobody gets a majority vote. In a run-off voting system those no-hopers get whittled away and the public who had excercised their voting right to show support for an extreme political dogma can show their support for a party that is more mainstream. The result is that we'd get a government formed from one party with a clear vision and a mandate from the majority of voters.

  17. #57
    Commercial Operator
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Sussex by the Sea
    Posts
    9,276
    Rep Power
    15

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Quote Originally Posted by NZ Monkey View Post
    The thing is, even though a candidate will win with a majority on paper under a run-off system, it doesn't mean a majority actually wanted them there..... just that of the final two (or however many) choices left at the end more people preferred the winner over the loser. The claim that they technically hold a majority at this point is fairly empty if 90% of the voting public wanted other people to govern at the first round IMO.
    The thing about people standing for election is that you need candidates. And the thing about democracy is that any citizen can put themself forward as a candidate. This means there can be any number of candidates. But there can be only one winner. And all the time there needs to be majority support this swarm of candidates means that a majority vote is difficult to obtain. Run-off voting simply means removing the losers and no-hopers and giving the voters a clear choice - they were never going to get the candidate voted for in the first round and they get a second chance of choosing someone to represent them.

    You might even say that those no-hopers shouldn't have stood in the first place because they had no chance of election - but that wouldn't be democratic.

  18. #58
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Oxford
    Posts
    677
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy McGregor View Post
    I think AV means that nobody will win and no single party will be able to form a majority and 'win' an election.
    As I've previously said, that may or may not happen under AV. It may or may not happen under FPTP. It may be a little more likely under AV, but not by much.
    Quote Originally Posted by Andy McGregor View Post
    We need to be able to form a strong government who have a clear vision of the way they want the country to be run.
    So it's more important to have a government, even if they have a support of the minority of the population than it is to have a government that represents the will of the majority. How democratic. But at least you're being clear: you don't want coaolition Governments.

    But, as I've previously said, coalitions tend to work pretty effectively elsewhere (ie in most other mature democracies) and deliver strong governments, but since you clearly believe that the british can't do this, then that's fair enough.

    But that does raise a more serious issue. All the evidence on AV suggests that coalitions are only slightly more likely under AV than they are under FPTP. Given that coalitions can occur under FPTP, this must be pretty worrying for you. So, how should we change FPTP to prevent this from happening under that system?
    Quote Originally Posted by Andy McGregor View Post
    As far as I can see, voting for only one candidate under AV means that you effectively place all the other candidates in equal second place.
    Not at all. If you only vote for one candidate than that candidate doesn't win, then you have no say in who is going to represent you. If you ranked all of the candidates then you will have a say in who represents you, not matter what.

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy McGregor View Post
    I think a run-off voting system would mean that we'd end up with an elected representative who'd been voted by a majority. Why we haven't been offered this system is a mystery - I'd vote for it in place of FPTP. It takes into account the current situation where there's many candidates but still give us a representative who has been elected by a majority.
    In the US, AV is called Instant Run-off Voting. AV is a way of having run-offs without the (rather large) expense of having to run multiple elections.

  19. #59
    Commercial Operator
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Sussex by the Sea
    Posts
    9,276
    Rep Power
    15

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Quote Originally Posted by geoff332 View Post
    As I've previously said, that may or may not happen under AV. It may or may not happen under FPTP. It may be a little more likely under AV, but not by much.
    So it's more important to have a government, even if they have a support of the minority of the population than it is to have a government that represents the will of the majority. How democratic. But at least you're being clear: you don't want coaolition Governments.
    Political parties doesn't want coalition governments either. Coalitions involve deal making behind the scenes and that is not what the public voted for.



    Quote Originally Posted by geoff332 View Post
    But that does raise a more serious issue. All the evidence on AV suggests that coalitions are only slightly more likely under AV than they are under FPTP. Given that coalitions can occur under FPTP, this must be pretty worrying for you. So, how should we change FPTP to prevent this from happening under that system?.
    As I said, run-off voting is simple FPTP with the weaker runners eliminated from the second or subsequent polls.

    Of course it's tough to set up two or more votes. But there has got to be a secure way of voting electronically. I would say it's got to be more secure than turning up and voting in person - you could be anyone with a voting slip.

    Quote Originally Posted by geoff332 View Post
    Not at all. If you only vote for one candidate than that candidate doesn't win, then you have no say in who is going to represent you. If you ranked all of the candidates then you will have a say in who represents you, not matter what.
    This means that you will have wasted your vote under AV. If you want to vote for one candidate AV is unsuitable.

    Quote Originally Posted by geoff332 View Post
    In the US, AV is called Instant Run-off Voting. AV is a way of having run-offs without the (rather large) expense of having to run multiple elections.
    The problem with this is that you don't know who you are choosing between as, at the time of voting, you don't know who will be eliminated. If the situation is "one person, one vote" you are certain who you are choosing and the winner will have been 'chosen' by the majority.

  20. #60
    Registered User FirstMove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    r=1-sin(wt)
    Posts
    1,301
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Alternative vote - yes or no?

    Given long enough, voters and parties in the UK will adapt to whatever electoral system we choose. AV favours some parties more than others. By changing the voting system, we select a different bias to the one we currently have.

    AV doesn't guarantee that the majority of people will vote for the winner. Consider the special case that everyone just selects a single candidate, then you get back to FPTP. The winner may also be determined by the order in which no-hope parties further down the list get eliminated. Creating ghost parties just to cause the numbers to get added up differently is a well known AV tactic.

    My personal view is that FPTP and AV are unfair, just in different ways. I have a slight preference for AV where there is a "New election" option. If all the candidates are rubbish, let us vote again with a new batch. As an electorate, we should be able to choose not to elect any representative for say 3 months. The saved salary would easily pay for the next count.

    I'd also merge pairs of seats together, with each new seat only having one MP. The MP would live in London and appoint a full time representative to stay in the seat. The local rep would not have any of the MP perks, saving lots of money. No-one would have second homes.

    I think the worst electoral systems are those where the direct link between the vote and the particular choice of MP are broken. Proportional systems allow the most sleazy and corrupt politicians to place themselves at the top of party lists, which more or less guarantees them a seat. Italy has suffered from this in the past. Seeing Portillo ejected is one of the defining images of UK democracy in action, in a list system cabinet ministers would be untouchable.

    What will happen is that AV will spoil a lot of the drama of election night. At the moment, candidates can request a recount if the tallies are close. In AV, it might be necessary to do a full recount before every step of the elimination. At each step, candidates close to elimination, as well as those just short of 50% and those about to lose when a candidate just breaks 50% will demand recounts. I expect most councils will not even try to start counting until the following morning. In interesting seats, the count could go on for days and days. To avoid the need to count at weekends, I expect election day would have to moved to Monday or Tuesday.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Lisbon 2 - If you have a Vote, would you vote Yes/No
    By Alan Doyle in forum Chit Chat
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 5th-October-2009, 10:35 AM
  2. Vote for Jon and Julia in SCD - ITT tonight !
    By Bigger Andy in forum Let's talk about dance
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10th-December-2004, 01:36 PM
  3. Alternative ways of leading moves.....
    By Jon L in forum Intermediate Corner
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 2nd-February-2004, 12:52 AM
  4. Vote Ruby!!!
    By Jayne in forum Chit Chat
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 13th-March-2003, 09:18 PM
  5. The alternative LoTR council!!
    By TheTramp in forum Chit Chat
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 28th-December-2002, 03:42 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •