Talk:Main Page

Some interesting information and a good link showed up at Phil Windley's site this morning: http://www.windley.com/archives/2005/11/rasiej_campaign.shtml http://micah.sifry.com/archives/2005_11.html

How does this relate to what you're doing here? --12.160.33.128 15:35, 2 November 2005 (MST)

I think the Rasiej campaign indicates a number of issues to be addressed in my campaign. Number one is the fact that right now the Internet is a poor driver for political action in itself. Unless you have the "hand-up" of organizations with large membership or some good national press attention, the Internet alone will not win elections. In my opinion, it is a tool that can be utilized for better organizing and also for the collection of ideas, but not the end-all-be-all in political action.--pashdown 16:57, 7 November 2005 (MST)

I agree absolutely, and I think that's true of any type of marketing campaign. You don't want to be in just one place, you want to be everywhere you can be. Dilvie 17:33, 23 December 2005 (MST)

Great idea

Let me be one of the first to congratulate you on your innovative idea of using a wiki. You are ahead of our times - but that's what I'd expect from people running for such an important position. Good luck with your campaign! --Piotrus 19:48, 8 December 2005 (MST)

Ditto. I hope more politicians follow your lead! Defeating Hatch will be an impressive achievement, as well. BryceHarrington 13:53, 4 January 2006 (MST)

This is an interesting approach for getting out the internet vote. - Edward Lalone

Spam

Wow, we're getting a LOT of spam from various and random IP addresses. It almost looks like someone has a bot going to put this stuff on the site, and it's hitting other mediawiki sites as well. Let's hope it's a phase, but if you see any of this on our pages, please just delete it, or let us know. Chadlupkes 09:31, 14 December 2005 (MST)

Spammers use bots to attack wikis, blogs, and forums all the time. It's difficult to create an interactive website without becoming a target of spam. The best countermeasures are technological, but if I see any spam, I'll be sure to revert it. Dilvie 17:33, 23 December 2005 (MST)

As do I. They'll never learn, but we'll always be watching. Chadlupkes 21:22, 1 January 2006 (MST)

I just tried to add back the links that were inserted by Pete on 1st Jan, but was prevented by the spam blocker. Also if I edit this whole talk page then I can't save my changes, but I can edit just this section. 217.33.199.34 07:01, 4 January 2006 (MST)

Try not putting it on the main page. Spammers go for the main page for obvious reasons. Z 07:02, 4 January 2006 (MST)

Try logging in. There are additional protections against spammers (specifically link blocking) when you are not using an account.--pashdown 22:04, 4 January 2006 (MST)

Just to alert you your wiki has been posted on [slashdot.org]

You've been /.'ted!
Interactive Campaigning ala Wiki : politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/01/04/0634217

I hope that all of this works. As with the hotly-contested political articles of the Wikipedia, this is going to require a lot of effort on the part of the whole community or on your editors to prevent defamation. Some form of protection may be needed, as is used in the Wikipedia for such abuse-prone articles. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection. --12.218.114.218 08:18, 4 January 2006 (MST)

I did some research into ways of configuring Wikimedia to block spam. I'd encourage the wiki admins for this site to implement at least some of these practices: http://www.bryceharrington.org/blosxom.cgi/2005/11/16#wikispam BryceHarrington 13:33, 4 January 2006 (MST)

Much of what you recommend is already in there. I don't want to restrict anonymous users entirely, but they can't post links. What I really need is Captcha that works on 1.5. The fine people at the hrwiki.org have said they might be able to give me their code for that. It really should be default for 1.6.--pashdown 22:08, 4 January 2006 (MST)

Protect

As I'm sure you're aware, you can protect (and now semi-protect) specific articles against editing. I know you are trying to create a good open environment, and I'm not even from Utah (though I have visited a few times). I know not your politics, but from reading a few select pieces, and the idea of a wiki make you seem like a pretty good candidate, and you'd have my vote if I were a resident of your state. Good luck in your race, and if you want, do not hesitate to contact me, via e-mail or my talk page on Wikipedia. -Mysekurity 16:47, 4 January 2006 (MST)

Need for internet savvy politician

Utah resident and Xmission Customer here. I was surprised when your campaign hit the /. page. I am excited at the prospect of an internet/tech savvy politician (besides Al Gore taking the initiative in creating the internet). I am typically replublican, but as of lately I have begun to dislike Hatch and his unintentional/intentional moves "against" the internet, and it's potential power (even for Big Companies). His decision backed laws and motions have been so crippling to advances in technology. You have my vote, and my donations. Keep up the good work! --Sval 01:23, 6 January 2006 (MST)

Hope you don't mind

I added a link on your main page to http://democracy.wikicities.com/wiki/Main_Page site. Because it seems to correlate very well with what your accomplishing with your wiki. Your wiki is really a wonderful idea.

can't revert vandalism

70.105.237.125 just vandalized the main page, but when I try to revert, it says that the edit has been disallowed by a spam filter. Help? --169.229.98.90 04:48, 11 March 2006 (MST)

The link to Wikipedia seems to be triggering the spam filter. I've reverted to the February 15 revision by Brett. --169.229.98.90 05:03, 11 March 2006 (MST)

Please sign your posts!

This really helps in the discussion when we have multiple people discussing the same thing. Without having the posts signed, you can't tell who is saying what! 161.181.53.10 16:40, 14 March 2006 (MST)

To sign your posts put in four ~'s as such: ~~~~ —A 20:23, 14 March 2006 (MST)

Course you need to sign in first..  :) Chadlupkes 16:40, 14 March 2006 (MST)

Even signing with your IP breaks up the discussion enough to know where one person's comments end and the next person's begin. —A 20:23, 14 March 2006 (MST)

Waste in Government Spending

I recently came across an excellent article [1] describing the problem of wasteful government spending and how all the cards are stacked against someone trying to reduce it. In summary, there is a great deal of power behind the goal of increasing spending and maintaining programs even if they’re wasteful, and very little power on the side of the taxpayer.

Fortunately there was also a proposed solution that made a great deal of sense. Here’s a brief description from the article:

To correct this imbalance, Congress itself should create an Office of Taxpayer Advocacy charged with the specific mission of representing the taxpayer interest in opposing unwise or unnecessary spending. This agency could employ thousands of researchers to investigate ineffective and unnecessary programs and highlight the damage done by the spending of tax dollars. It could establish a hotline for taxpayers to call about instances of waste and abuse. It could employ writers and public relations specialists to publicize the costs of spending proposals, to ensure that Congress, the media, and the public heard anti-spending arguments.

To the cynic, perhaps this is just another wasteful program, but I believe it has a good change of significantly reducing wasteful government spending.

This can also be done at different levels of government. Has anybody done this (e.g., a state government)?

I'd like to see you publically support such an initiative.

Bkingsf 12:20, 26 July 2006 (MDT)

GOVERNMENT SPENDING? OH MAN, Dont get me started! I served 9 years in the air force from 1982-1992 and during that time, I saw every October we would purchase our biggest purchases for the year. I learned that if we didn't spend the budgeted money, that we would lose it for the next year. Call me stupid, but what about putting it in an account and saving it for when it was needed? Also, in 1992 I was involved with remodeling a Texas Welfare Office, and I asked a lady there why they were renovating it, She told me, because they have to spend their budgeted money or they will lose it. Dialking. User:Dialking 10:55, 11 August 2006 (MDT)

That's not really a problem specific to government, as so much as any beaurocracratic budgeting system (corporations do the same thing). It's simply logical that if you got your job done with x dollars under budget last year, that x dollars might be better spent somewhere else next year.