Here are some propositions to resolve the conflict over partisan posting on Vive and lay a solid foundation for the future.
(1). Editors who become candidates or position holders in a politcal party should not have to resign as editors of Vive. Instead, anything such editors wish to post should be reviewed by the other editors of Vive who are not candidates or positions holders in a party. These "neutral" editors would review the posting in question to see if it has the appearance of a conflict of interest. That is, if the editor's post appears to be soliciting partisan information or support. If this is the case the "neutral" editors should ask the "affiliated" editor to revise the post, or if this is not possible, reject the post for publication. General statements of opinion, argument, debate or party position by "affiliated" editors should not be construed as conflicts of interest as long as opposing viewpoints are given the opportunity to state their case.
(2). All rejected submissions, including those of "affiliated" editors should be posted on a seperate page linked to on the main page of Vive. This way readers can see for themselves what is accepted and rejected and assure themselves of the neutrality of the site.
(3). Vive le Canada must always have one "neutral" editor to review submissions of "affiliated" editors.
My personal opinion is that in the future Vive will grow stronger and have a greater impact on the national life of this country. As this happens, it is reasonable to expect that more editors, because they are motivated and active, will become candidates or organizers for political parties. We do not want Vive to loose these talented people because of their political involvement (which we applaud). At the same time, all progressive voices must feel they have an equal stake in Vive regardless of political affiliation if the site is to remain the positive force it is. If a fair process is adopted now, Vive will sail confidently into the future.