Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

whitehouse.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 139 posts

Re: Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

#81

Post by olefoo »

martingordon wrote: post #33

The first thing I thought when I saw this post was that it was a response to the success of the Carmen Ortiz petition. I understand the change doesn't apply retroactively, but it would help future officials face less public scrutiny from these petitions. The growth over the last two months were clearly due to the election and I doubt that that type of growth will continue. We will likely see a drop back down to previ…

This just means that petition drives will need to be more organized and focused. I think the Carmen Ortiz petition was somewhat of a fluke. You aren't going to find that confluence of anger, focus, and clarity of target very often. And we have yet to see if it will have any effect. The Ortiz petition is only effective because she is a political appointee who serves at the Presidents pleasure. And while most of the presidents cabinet falls into that category; it is extremely rare for one to do something that justifies the intense public anger that we've seen here.

Re: Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

#82

Post by nonamegiven »

siganakis wrote: post #74
geuis wrote: post #73

I hate to be a cynic but the timing seems too coincidental with the death of Aaron and the petition to remove Carmen Ortiz from office. She was nominated to her position by the President, so there is an assumption (perhaps invalid) of close ties to the administration.

From the article: "This new threshold applies only to petitions created from this point forward and is not retroactively applied to ones that already exist." So the Ortiz petition will be unaffected.

It's the other way around. The change to the petition process was affected by the embarrassing pace of the Ortiz petition.

Re: Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

#83

Post by count »

pdonis wrote: post #78
sprobertson wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did a quick search and it looks like it might be election related: "... eight different petitions requesting secession following the outcome of the November presidential election. The petition for the state of North Carolina to secede from the union earned more 31,835 signatures, while South Carolina's had just over 26,000." http://www.wcnc.com/news/local/Official-White-House-response...

Which begs the question: why are people petitioning the White House to have their states secede from the Union? That's just stupid on so many levels that I don't even know where to begin.

They're people petitioning to secede. They're obviously not the brightest in the bunch?

Re: Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

#85

Post by andrewflnr »

gbhn wrote: post #47
rprasad wrote: post #32

The Death Star petition and the Piers Morgan petition were the straws that broke the camel's back, according to a friend in the WH PR dept.

Really? Those seem like PR gimmes. You can't ask for better softballs.

I know, right? When else do you get to say "The Administration does not support blowing up planets"? I think that was my favorite piece of the whole Death Star thing.

Re: Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

#86

Post by res0nat0r »

redthrowaway wrote: post #42
rprasad wrote: post #32

The Death Star petition and the Piers Morgan petition were the straws that broke the camel's back, according to a friend in the WH PR dept.

Alright, the Piers Morgan one I understand, but the Death Star one was awesome both because it was inherently funny, and because it gave the administration a chance to show a more human face (which those in the WH should appreciate). I find it odd that they'd look at a gift like that and decide it was a problem.

More like they've realized how easy and useless it is to create a petition and have people who "support" it spend 5 seconds clicking thru any petition that comes into whitehouse.gov, so they are raising the bar to cut down on the time they waste responding to nonsense.

Re: Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

#87

Post by bane »

cheald wrote: post #26

Wow, that infographic is misleading. http://cl.ly/image/2n1H2Q0z1919 They quote that "162 responses" number right after saying "petitions must receive 100k signatures", when none of those responded to had to have received 100k signatures. Additionally, 2.1 million signatures (responded to) divided by 162 petitions (responded to) is an average of 12,963 signatures per petition. The largest petition ever - obviously an…

You know, after looking at these, there's a bunch of stupid and petty petitions there. I wonder if this one will just simply get lost in the noise of idiocy.

Re: Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

#88

Post by cgag »

pdonis wrote: post #78
sprobertson wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did a quick search and it looks like it might be election related: "... eight different petitions requesting secession following the outcome of the November presidential election. The petition for the state of North Carolina to secede from the union earned more 31,835 signatures, while South Carolina's had just over 26,000." http://www.wcnc.com/news/local/Official-White-House-response...

Which begs the question: why are people petitioning the White House to have their states secede from the Union? That's just stupid on so many levels that I don't even know where to begin.

The petitions all say peacefully as I recall.

Re: Why We’re Raising the Signature Threshold for We the People

#89

Post by Firehed »

businessleads wrote: post #70

Wasn't the whole thing set up so the government could spam the signers - like every other petition site?

I've received no emails as a result of signing any petition. I think this is just a much more direct way for the government to pretend it cares what we want while continuing to do whatever it pleases.
Post reply on HN