Designs for proposed new Head Office signage
- This topic has 91 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
gnome wrote:A is preferred to B by a majority of voters and B is preferred to C by a majority. However, it is also the case that C is preferred to A by a majority.
This sort of thing seems to be also being discussed on the Philosophy for Communists thread:
LBird wrote:A+B=C (or, B+A=C)This disagreement needs to be sorted out, or we'll continue to misunderstand what each other is saying.It now looks likely that the new HO fascia sign will be installed on Sunday, 2nd November.
This is against the 1988 Conference resolution, which was confirmed and backed up by the 1991 Party Poll. There is no criteria for this to be sanctioned. I realise that I am bringing attention to this, at a stage in the process which may not be to the benefit of the Party finances, nevertheless it needs addressing. It is, unless someone can provide evidence, "against a Party Poll", "the Party Poll from 1991".Comrades need to be cognisant of the fact, that the 1991 Party Poll, has never been rescinded, nor could it be, but for another Party Poll. So the restriction on the Name used on the Head Office frontage, is still in place.The 1988 Conference resolution may! have been superceded, (but only the resolution) however, the substantive criteria of the 1991 Party Poll, (unless and until a subsequent Party Poll, over rules it) is still in force. Ergo, the design for the Head Office frontage and moreover the "heading" of the Socialist Standard, are constrained within the parameters set out by the 1991 Party Poll!!!A Party Poll supercedes and "overawes" a conference resolution.
Quote:now looks likely that the new HO fascia sign will be installed on Sunday, 2nd November.Look forwrd to your photos of it once it is done. To all of us who remember and carped on about the bunker-image of HO, its taken a few years but we have managed to transform what passer-bys see. Maybe a coffee shop/drop-in cafe and book-shop as our next ambitious target….or am i being an impossiblist again?
alanjjohnstone wrote:Maybe a coffee shop/drop-in cafe and book-shop as our next ambitious target….or am i being an impossiblist again?I am surprised this has never been tried. Could make a tidy profit
Vin Maratty wrote:alanjjohnstone wrote:Maybe a coffee shop/drop-in cafe and book-shop as our next ambitious target….or am i being an impossiblist again?I am surprised this has never been tried.Could make a tidy profit
The idea has been put forward on a number of occasions but there have never been any takers.
Some members may have a problem if the party paid someon a wage to run a cafe. Personally I think it would be a good idea.
Gnome is correct that it has often been discussed and you are also correct that one objection has been to be efficient it would require financial recompense to those who make a fixed commitment to turn up on time, to open shop and to do all the prep work and the actual serving…The outlay is minimum to set up …we have the kitchen that copes with conference…As i usually do, i suggest a gradualist approach …opening perhaps on the Saturday (and Sunday) to begin with, limited menu, and as for the books, if i recall we already had a fair collection and the Library Commitee was often declining donations for lack of space and duplication.I may again be wrong but a few extra quid under the table in the form of expenses for that day (or two) for some of our out of work members who surely would volunteer in these times of austerity (or rumours of our members personal wealth actually well-founded!) and wouldn't break our treasurers heart. And the security of other parts of HO can be assured with some thought.It merely requires a sandwich board (pun intended) placed outside to say we are open and what is on offer…(We could be discreet to avoid the competition of other cafes and describe ourselves as a reading room with refreshments available which we usually do have for visitors)Ambitiously, we could also offer the use of our internet facilities and photo-copying and printing (once we get the present small snag in that department fixed). Some community groups could use HO for their meetings but we would need to be careful in vetting them but i think a chess club, for instance, asking to meet wouldn't compromise our hostility clause. The more we use the HO, the more the HOO also has to become a party employee…and that too is a debate we had had and also experience of doing so we have learned some lessons on how to do it properly. We have a presence in Clapham High St, we can become more of a feature of it and interact with the community more. The knock-on political effect will be the increased awareness of who we actually are when we stand locally in council elections. We do become The SOCIAList Party.Even though this is all been argued over before and not acted upon for various valid reasons, it needs to be something we continually return to and go over again and always re-discuss because one day, one year, it is going to be possible…even if today it might seem impossible…
The party used to organise dances going back decades. As for chess clubs, cafe etc, there's no reason why head office volunteers can't run other new social activities itself like the old Clarion Club. Some current branches already organise recreational activities.
It all sounds good to me, Alan. If I was on the dole and lived locally I wouldn't think twice about running a cafe for a few bob on the side.Why should we stick religiously to capitalism's rules.
jondwhite wrote:there's no reason why head office volunteers can't run other new social activities itself like the old Clarion Club.Except that there aren't any Head Office volunteers….
Well, I've sent a PM to Mod1 re off topic on this thread but no action has been taken. The title of this thread is not, "a cafe in HO" but "Designs for proposed new Head Office signage". That I have had to raise this "complaint" in thread, is appalling! I should not have to have even brought this to the attention of Moderators! It is such an obvious and blatant infringement of Forum guidelines.If I get a a warning over this, for not letting the Moderator do his job, (when he is'nt and hasn't) then that will be a farce!!! I've sent Mod1 a message and nothing done. What am I to do?
My apologies, Steve. Probably my fault we driftied off topic
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.