In response to the posts here over the last week on a revised comment policy, Peter May, who is an old friend and supporter of this blog, has offered the following guest post on the Progressive Pulse blog that he now runs, but for which I was once responsible, and which was designed as a deliberate spin-out from this blog. I think that his offer may be of interest to some people here and would encourage those who are interested to take a look at Progressive Pulse and to offer contributions to it.

About nine or so years ago now, Progressive Pulse was created as a consequence of the perceived demand from some Tax Research, as it then was,  commentators to pursue the exploration of disparate, related and other questions not covered on this blog and to write about them at a bit more length than might be possible on Funding the Future, as it now is.

The idea was that, as there was a group of us, there would be a diversity of original ideas, and the views could be discussed separately and from different angles, which were often those not necessarily pursued by Tax Research.

Since then, contributors have slowly fallen away, and then there was just me – and very occasionally Sean Danaher.

My view is that Progressive Pulse still has that original function it was set up to fulfil,  but now that Richard is struggling to interact with the enormously increased participation in, and commentary on, Funding the Future, it would seem to make sense to have a more direct connection between Progressive Pulse and Funding the Future, and to facilitate additional commentary on the main posts and videos that Richard publishes.

The advantage is that Progressive Pulse is set up to have numerous original authors.

Those with a desire to become regular authors can be set up with their own login, and so could post original material or just make a comment, via a hyperlink, on the relevant post on Funding the Future.

Though postings could, of course, be short and simple, they would not need to be limited to 300 words.

The author of a piece would generally, I suggest, be responsible for moderating the comments on their own piece, but I suspect that, with time, this might change as we see how it all works.

For those who might enjoy an occasional or one-off contribution, there is also a ‘Soap Box' feature to get things off your chest.

Anyone who fancies this extended opportunity to discuss ideas should, please, register their interest below.

This registration of interest would have to include permission for Richard to pass on a name and an email address.

PDF of article