User talk:Meelar/Test of Political Significance

Looks good so far. A quick suggestion – perhaps, instead of at least $X million, have at least $X million during one election cycle OR $Y million over the course of its existence (obviously with Y being some multiple of X) to capture those smaller groups who might be notable based on consistent moderately-large donations. I'll give this some more thought and come back later... android↔talk 00:31, May 12, 2005 (UTC)

Removing groups which are boutique groups, i.e. funded and run largely by private individuals and which exert influence on policy (Such as Jeremy Rifkin) would fall under the radar by your standards, while grassroots groups with minority political opinions would also go undocumented. This policy of Meelar's is one more step by the Democratic Party to exclude third parties from the political debate (meelar is a DNC operative), just as they worked hard in the 2004 election to illegally exclude third parties and their candidates from the election. This is monopolism and politically oppressive. This policy would also keep ad hoc political sabotage groups off the radar, such as minor luddite cells which commit major acts of anti-technology vandalism.Mlorrey 01:28, 31 May 2005 (UTC)