Tatiana,

Your topic has not gone from the list of discussions, merely been pushed down on the default OLO General Discussion list display. The default display is in chronological order of opening posts, and displays only 5 discussions per category.

At the top of the index list you will see a clickable box between the words 'Show' and 'discussions per category' that will display a drop-down menu that will allow you to select 10, 15, etc discussions per category by simply left-clicking on the number you want. You then activate this selection by clicking on the button marked 'Display' at the right-hand end of this line, next to the clickable words '(Advanced filter).

The index page can also be made to display topics in order of recency of postings, by clicking the words 'Last Post' at the top of the right-hand column. This is probably the most used display mode by OLO viewers wishing to keep up with postings to a number of discussions, but nothing other than the default display is a 'sticky' preference, so after around 120 minutes of inactivity on the Forum, your display will revert to the default.

Clicking the word 'Posts' will display the index in descending order of the numbers of posts made to topics, while clicking 'Sort by post date' will return you to the default display order.

By default, topics display for one month, but you can also alter this by clicking the drop-down menu box marked 'One month back', selecting the display choice you want, then activating it by clicking the 'Display' button.

The Articles Discussion Index operates identically, except for the fact that there is no sub-division by categories of discussion as exists in the General Discussions area of the Forum.

Newly posted articles first appear here: http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/ , which page can also be reached by clicking the button 'On Line Opinion' at the very top of any Forum page. The thing is, that until an article receives its first comment, it will not show up on the Articles index page.

Got it! Thank you, Forrest
Will be back

AEC enrolment.
(1) the same problems. Full name of the customer does not go to the integrated system; the best for people with only one middle name they do is to match with one initial. You understand that duplicates would occur. Also think about the screen with your name that will go to the paper electoral poll to be recognised by the people (also sometimes not your correct full name) and the name that goes for the matching purpose within electronic recordkeeping system that usually used by the government auditors. They most ofetn different. For matching would go short name only! In my case for instance, that will be cut of one whole middle name and given initial for the first middle name.
(2) AEC would collect and sent the form to the mailing address which could be different from the address of enrolment or they can make enrolment address to be private. Hello!!
(3) AEC or other agency would not identify person under name at birth and/ or other birth identifiers that could not be changed in a life time; for instance in Québec all Medicare proceedings is linked to the birth information about the person. Once it is recorded then it can not be changed. That seems the key for no duplication.
(4) AEC does not seem match date of birth information at all or immigration, citizenship information even it has to be provided as for their curiosity

(5) AEC would not link or follow any changes of names of the person. Such for instance they would accept your statutory declaration about change of name without requesting or recording relevant documentation or proof of change of name; just give them driver’s license number if you have one or to ask someone to sign that someone know you under this name/ address. You understand that possibilities are endless. Now for enrolment they ask only Statutory Declaration. Mistakes are welcome! Link to the person you say you are now on the declaration and one you were before on the declaration would not go to the matching system. Only goes your new name and new address. Address though could be taken as private or mailing address whatever you pleased. Lucky you if you were accurate or have good glasses or understand that once you overlooked and have it ‘Jon” instead of “John” you identity might be stolen. All the forms are scanned and destroyed. The best you can see then is copy of your signature and copy of the form. Hope that it was the one that you then meant to do. You do not have any right to mistake, but government have it all.
(6) I do collect evidences. Once I have corrected my name on the electoral poll (also they referred to the computer system limitation and give me name without “a” in one of my middle names) and then missed local government election so to see how will look like my penalty notice. Guess what, penalty notice has come without second middle name at all! Again! Apparently legislation provides, that change of information on hard copies of electoral poll shall be approved by the registrar, but no one has to approve when information is changed in the electronic recordkeeping system. Thus I shall think that onnce electoral poll are printed for you and me then elctronic records can be amended for matching purpose without need for anyone to approve. Computer settings that all it takes etc

AEC N3
(7) New form for electoral enrolment does not require any witnesses to sign your enrolment once you obtained state driver’s license! There is nothing easier to have more then one driver’s licenses if one has this purpose. And again I do strongly believe that they insufficient in making issue of the licenses accountable or/ and manipulation of personal information takes place. In my case, when I have changed my name, RTA did not recorded new name as legal name, but as preferred name. Thus my record remained with information that my legal name was the name that was before change of legal name. Think about that government was matching “legal names” only. Then as you can see they could produce additional identity or drivers license where legal name was my correct legal name. And that identity that was in fact my legal idenity was not me according to their records! That is on the topic about how reliable single information about driver’s license number. That appears that moving State you can have another driver’s license without link to your drivers’ license in initial State. Lovely opportunity for someone who loves to vote!
(8) Etc etc etc

General_1
Enrolment for any government service such as immigration, citizenship, drivers license, social security benefits, electoral poll and integrated government systems (State or Cmwth) does not properly identify the people.

(1) one can identify the person by using name and address together. Agency’s policy provides for taking names from primary documents. Taking names etc from Statutory Declarations or making slight misspelling is acceptable because whole approach that administrative mistake are unavoidable. When the person approaches the agency asking to correct records of personal information they appear to have discretion to decide about to correct the records or not to correct. For instance, they can say that, for instance, name at birth do not participate in administrative activity thus they don’t have to correct your name at birth. You understand that birth information about person is the main unique information. If it is current name they may say, ok will do it, but the name that was recorded we can not correct. Correct name will be recorded from today etc. You understand that identity with correct verifiable name at all times is differ from the identity that once had another name and then the name changed to the name it suppose to be at all times. Such administrative mistake would be given name “Patrici” instead of “Patricia” or other slight incorrectness that person may not recognise at first glance. Then you come back and say. excuse me, would you, please, make “Patrici” to be “Patricia”. And they record, that from 2000 to 2001 are used name with "Patrici" and from 2001 with "Patricia".
Also think about that you can not access to sight government records on government computers – many cases under FoI all confirmed refusal. The address could be given not in full on the documents issued as well. There are options with addresses for instance you can get unit and building number together in one block, or misspelled street, or building number only etc