Really? You’re sure about that? Just on experiences of the people who would campaign to keep something like that open, I find that difficult to believe.

You say “the council had the authority and power to dismiss the petition on that basis” but you also said (earlier) “Perhaps the fact that the ruling Conservatives no longer have a majority was a factor…” – it doesn’t sound like they DID have the power – the implication of your first comment would seem to be that the fact that they were a weak administration was a factor in persuading them.

In comparing signatures from all over Brighton with the number of people who voted for individual councillors in individual wards is not comparing like with like. One thing is for certain: very many more people voted for the people who made the initial collective decision to close the project down than signed the petition. Even if you’re arguing that the legitimacy of a decision rests on the number of people who agree with it (and I *really* wouldn’t argue that either!) surely the only fair way of looking at it is that a small organised bunch of people with stronger preferences trumped a larger number of unorganised people with mild preferences.

I’d nominate this paragraph…

“No, this was not bullying by a clique. If anything, it was resistance to bullying by the council (far be it from me to suggest it was one councillor in particular). A bad judgment was proposed by council officers and accepted too uncritically by the cabinet (other councillors have very little say these days).”

… for some kind of award for the most blatant of subjective judgements.

And I’m not sure that you’ve ‘demolished’ my argument either. All councils have to make forecasts and make decisions on them. To call that incompetence is very unfair. Financial forecasts like this are never that accurate. You’re accusing people here of ‘bullying’ ‘incompetence; and ‘bad judgement’ – elected governments will always enforce the decisions that are made by their elected executives, forecast things inaccurately and make judgements that you disagree with.

And if you think they are that bad, you can get rid of them on a regular basis. Or if you think that their quality of judgement or deliberation isn’t up to much, you could stand for election yourself?

One way of guaranteeing that judgement gets worse is to promote the idea that populist demands can trump proper deliberation, and that is broadly what happens in practice when petitions become a factor in public life..

However, the e-petition has attracted more ’signatures’ than the number of votes cast for 16 of the city councillors at the 2007 elections–ie, almost a third of the councillors who make all manner of decisions on our behalf have less support. The largest share of the electorate by which councillors were elected was 32 per cent, the smallest 10 per cent. This raises far more important questions about democracy and the number of people who are entitled to have their voices heard.

As for the idea that it was well-connected individuals using their money, charm or fame, the only one of those that any of us might claim is charm. What matters in such circumstances is some ability in organisation and advocacy but most of all sincerity and tenacity. Such campaigns have to be mounted in the face of political party machines, powerful council officers, ill-informed and arrogant councillors and public apathy.

No, this was not bullying by a clique. If anything, it was resistance to bullying by the council (far be it from me to suggest it was one councillor in particular). A bad judgment was proposed by council officers and accepted too uncritically by the cabinet (other councillors have very little say these days).

The clincher that demolishes your devil’s advocacy, however, is the fact that no one has lost out. The small amount of money needed was found because the council had got its sums wrong and underestimated council tax revenue by £1.1m–19 times more than was needed to keep the history centre open for the next five years.

It is incompetience and bad judgments by councils that are worrying. That an e-petition by honourable citizens can make a difference is inspiring.

With all due respect to you and your campaign, let me play ‘Devil’s Advocate’ here: Saving a ‘History Centre’ may have happened at the expense of another project that it would be less easy to convene support for.

There is, surely, a social class issue here? Also, again playing ‘Devil’s Advocate’, you seem to be saying that you issued a threat to a party with a small majority. There is an implication there that they may have acted against their better judgement?

Sure, you have got your way, and I’ve no way of knowing whether that is in the wider public interest or not. But surely if politicians aren’t making decisions based on judgment and are instead increasingly reacting to electoral threats, we’re all in trouble?

You seem to be saying (and let me repeat my ‘Devil’s Advocate’ line to ensure I don’t offend here) that a very small minority of the population bullied the council into doing its bidding.

Or can I put it even more strongly – in the spirit of provocation: That an even smaller majority who felt disproportionately strongly about an issue, and had well connected individuals in their numbers (people with either the money, charm or fame needed to convene larger numbers) came up with an effective way of getting a larger number of people who mildly share their views to respond to a call-to-action?

Personally, I think this is all very worrying.

Perhaps the fact that the ruling Conservatives no longer have a majority was a factor, although the strength of opposition, which was actively encouraged among the other parties, must have come as a shock. Even I was surprised.

Authentication and eligibility were issues after the launch of the petition but the rules and practice seem to have been settled.

You can add Staffordshire, Leicestershire and Brighton & Hove to your list of ‘live’ councils; they all use the same system (from ModernGov, I think) and I have to say I wasn’t impressed by its usability.

Also worth a look are the efforts from the Scottish Parliament (not pretty but functional) and National Assembly Wales (slightly prettier, equally functional).

Of the councils you list, I was totally unable to find even a whiff of e-petitions on the Northants, Southwark and Wolverhampton sites.

Bristol is interesting. It’s hugely popular: there are 10 petitions active at the moment, and one last year got over 10,000 signatories. Yet that’s in spite of the fact that the council seems to take months to consider the petitions and then fails to provide any adequate response to most of them. (Perhaps the petitioners got personal email responses, but if so, that ought at least to be stated in the “closed petitions” section of the site.)