Putting your name forward is the first step, belonging to a party seeking pre-selection or going it alone as an independent, you have spoken to family, friends and perhaps work or industry colleagues.

You need to do some research, check out the candidate's information, put a campaign plan together and get out into the designated electorate and work hard.

Let me repeat, work very hard.

Most people are really good, happy to discuss particular issues and certainly keen to share their personal views on anything and everything. This is most welcome. It's the defacing of signs, the rude, hurtful and mean actions that are difficult to cope with.

How often do we hear the call for new faces to come forward and that should be embraced.

Way back in time rules were devised that referred to a sense of sportsmanship and fair play. For example, the Queensberry Rules for boxing were written in the hope they would persuade boxers that "you must not fight simply to win, no holds barred is not the way, you must win by the rules." In summary they signify gentlemanly or polite conduct, especially in a dispute.

On March 25 Tasmanian Liberal Premier Peter Gutwein announced there would be a state election on May 1. But unlike the Queensberry rules, the parties and independents, the combatants, seemed to turn a blind eye to fair play.

In fact, the recipe for this election could well read as follows, ingredients to include factional fighting, candidates contradicting party policies in conversations and emails, possible Court actions, candidates not being, and then being endorsed, candidates withdrawing from the election, a former premier and a political analyst expressing concerns with the House of Assembly election being on the same day as Legislative Council elections for now two of their seats, and a pinch of fake news.

Stir these ingredients with an equal mix of political comment in all media - print, broadcast and digital, and don't forget to sprinkle with a toxic comment from the keyboard warrior who 'bravely' criticises anything and anyone.

Place these ingredients in the election cauldron for 37 days and see who wins.

The ingredients don't read well and to most reasonable people are unpalatable, and that's the reason for this article.

Quite a few of my constituents have approached me and complained of the way some of the candidates and parties are being portrayed.

They are angry with what's written in social media. They are sick and tired of the fake news and they are not the only ones.

The Chief Justice of New South Wales, Tom Bathurst, was reported in a speech in Sydney warning that fake news and social media were undermining the rule of law by shaking trust in public institutions. Social media he stated enabled anonymous vilification and denigration of those in public office and their decisions.

Whatever happened to the blueprint of how elections should be won or lost?

Whatever happened to the contest of ideas, the focus on how a government or opposition has performed over the last election cycle, and an evaluation of how our state is performing compared to previous years and compared to other states?

Whatever happened to an evaluation of each candidate, his/her views and competence to perform an important job?

Rather than test candidates' opinions some would rather demonise these candidates and try to ruin their careers just because their views differed.

We don't want a situation where candidates are afraid to speak up and air their opinions for fear of ridicule or worse.

How are we able to properly understand if these candidates are going to appropriately represent us if they harbour the fear of vilification for their views?

We want our best and brightest, present members and new candidates included, to be willing to throw their hat into the political ring, because these are the people who can enhance our everyday life.

They will have already formed views on how best to keep Tasmania safe and how best to reboot our economy post-COVID, especially our international tourism, how best to improve our health waiting lists, our education institutions and standards, our community housing, our traffic woes etc.

Give them the opportunity to make their views known and test them on their opinions in a respectful manner. If you can devise rules for boxers to act "in a gentlemanly and polite manner especially in a dispute", then you can surely expect the community, candidates and parties to act in the same way.

Respect is the backbone of society and is definitely a two-way street, show it to all and expect to receive if from all.

Let's not deface signs, let's not denigrate candidates, let's not be hostile to anyone, including all those people out and about campaigning.

This approach I'm certain will be welcomed as negative and harsh personal attack campaigns are disliked by the wider community and do nothing to encourage people to choose community leadership roles as a worthy ambition with success a reward for effort.