I think it is called debate. 'Yes' or 'no' answers only apply when there is no ambiguity in the question.

Like an earlier post of mine. Bix asked me a straight question and I was able to give a simple, one-word reply.

Yes. Although you really should try to keep the questions in a less complicated form.

What do YOU think we should discuss?

I will have no debate?? I would suggest that voting in this election is going to involve more debating than any other.
You will have to weigh up pros and cons based upon misleading and incomplete information whilst also trying to factor in the possible, or probable, reaction of the parties involved to events which may, or may not, occur in future years.
These reactions are likely to be the bastardised outcome of decisions being made with the influence of parties that you don't app[rove of and didn't vote for.

And you reckon that the question of who to vote for is unambiguous?

To the other posters: Sorry for responding to a totally off-topic post.

Reflections on current affairs in Portugal by journalist and author Len Port


Amaral to appeal McCanns' libel action


The McCanns partially won their libel action against the author and former lead detective Gonçalo Amaral, but the matter is far from over.

Amaral intends to appeal. In his first comment on the verdict he said: “I find that the court’s decision is unfair and questions my right and every Portuguese citizen's right to freedom of expression and of opinion. For that reason, I do not resign myself to the decision and I will appeal it until the very last judicial instance.”

Apart from Amaral’s assertion on the “unfairness” of the court’s decision, there were two remarkable features about the verdict and the way in which it was announced that got little or no mention in the mainstream media coverage.

The first unusual aspect was the huge sum awarded. It may be normal in the UK, but not here. Amaral was ordered to pay the parents of Madeleine McCann half a million euros in damages, plus interest, currently calculated at €106,000 and rising.

Kate and Gerry McCann had sought a total of €1.2 million. In addition to €250,000 each, they claimed €500,000 for Madeleine and €100,000 for each of their twins. The judge ruled against the claims on behalf of the children.

The McCanns successfully claimed that Amaral’s book, Maddie, the Truth of the Lie,  caused them great personal distress. The judge did not agree, however, that the book had hindered the search for Madeleine or had caused damages to the twins.

Should Amaral on appeal get the verdict overturned, or the compensation figure greatly reduced, the McCanns may lodge a counter appeal. The deadline for appeals is 40 days. The legal battle that has been going on for more than five years looks like continuing for some time yet.

A defiant Amaral supporter noted that, “a decision from a Portuguese court can only be enforced after all appeals are exhausted. No money will change hands until a final decision is reached by the very last appeals court.” With this in mind, other well-wishers are being urged to make donations to a Gonçalo Amaral defence fund.

The second oddity was the way in which the announcement of the verdict was handled. The judge’s ruling was not read out in court. It was contained in a 52-page report, which was received by the McCann’s Lisbon lawyer Isabel Duarte who swiftly passed it on to media organisations in Portugal and abroad.

Soon after the news appeared on media websites on Tuesday, Kate and Gerry McCann said they were “delighted” with the outcome.

In a statement issued by their spokesman Clarence Mitchell, they said the case had never been about money. “It was entirely focused on the effect of the libels on our other children and the damage that was done to the search for Madeleine.”

When contacted by journalists the same day, Gonçalo Amaral chose not to comment because neither he nor his lawyer, Miguel Cruz Rodrigues, had received a copy of the ruling. They only received it the following day, by which time to many in the mainstream media it was old news.
       
Madeleine went missing on 3rd May 2007.

No shame this pair.

I fully understand. It was probably wrong of me to ask in the first place. I suppose it was a bit like asking somebody questions about his friend (or, in this case, a family's friend).