freedom of speech in the socialist party

April 2024 Forums General discussion freedom of speech in the socialist party

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #81595
    Anonymous
    Inactive

     

    Gnome and admin are preventing the freedom of speech on this forum. This is unforgivable. I ask all comrades to call for their expulsion from this party. Here is what I am not allowed to say

     

     

    Who do you think you are? There is only one guilty of abuse. You cannot suspend a member who has not used intimidation or abuse.

     

    Who runs this forum? Who controls it? I assume the Party via the ec. Is this the ec talking to me, northern light and socialist punk? I think not.

    I call upon any branch to support my resolution to conference

    "This conference instructs the EC to keep a close watch on the WSM forum to ensure a safe environment free from abuse and intimidation, The conference also instruct the EC to suspend under rule 33 any member deemd to be abusive or intimidating." 

    #90175
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Well, well, well they have now allowed me to say it. ??? so they can later make some nast sarcastic comment no doubtCan someone tell me if this forum is under  democratic control or is it run by gnome and admin?

    #90176
    Ed
    Participant

    I suggest you and your cronies come down to ADM no one can stop you spouting your hysterical bollocks there

    #90177
    ALB
    Keymaster

    Neither of these is the solution. We don't want either ADM or the whole of next year to be dominated by this spat (Rule 33 involves special branch meetings, a Party meeting and a referendum of the whole membership) when, as everyone here has agreed, conditions haven't been so favorable for getting the socialist case across for quite a while.The solution is simple. For the participants involved to stop telling those they disagree with to fuck off or suggesting that they might be some outside plant sent in to put people off joining the Party.But I must strongly protest against one thing: the attack on Admin. This is a member who has spent hours and hours setting up this forum. He has not been involved in any of this name-calling stuff, but has the responsibility for ensuring that the discussion on this forum is conducted in an orderly manner and that participants don't infringe the rules they agreed to abide by when they joined. Things had got to such a head that he had to intervene. In fact I in effect asked him to by reporting one post.In any event, a warning is just a warning.It is completely out of order to attack Admin in this way. He must be appalled at what is happening here after all the time he spent setting up this forum and trying to makie it a success, as it was beginning to become and still can be if some participants here would just count to ten (or maybe to a hundred) before posting.

    #90178
    PJShannon
    Keymaster

    MODERATION WARNING.Ed and Old Grey Whistle are now on final warnings. Any further abusive language directed at any other forum user will result in these users being barred for the forum for one week.

    #90179
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I completely concur with ALB's remarks; the attack on Admin was entirely reprehensible.  My own intervention last night was made, as anyone who knows me will confirm, with great reluctance and comes at a time when Admin is facing the huge task of moving over the website to a new webhost company because of difficulties with the existing one.Until recently I naïvely thought that responsible adults and those who describe themselves as socialists could self-moderate their behaviour.  I was wrong.

    #90180
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    gnome wrote:
    I completely concur with ALB's remarks; the attack on Admin was entirely reprehensible.  My own intervention last night was made, as anyone who knows me will confirm, with great reluctance and comes at a time when Admin is facing the huge task of moving over the website to a new webhost company because of difficulties with the existing one.Until recently I naïvely thought that responsible adults and those who describe themselves as socialists could self-moderate their behaviour.  I was wrong.

    I can understand your attitude re Ed and his threats but can anyone quote from the thread in question where I broke forum rules?

    #90181
    SocialistPunk
    Participant

    I wish to thank the forum members who came to my defence yesterday.If I had been available at the time their intervention would not have been needed, I would have had a few things to say in my defence. As it stands now, I am not allowed to reply to the less than constructive comments made against me yesterday, as any attempt to do so may lead to disciplinary action.I am reasonable enough to accept that.I wish to say if I were allowed to reply ,I would be able to refrain from using certain colourful language.I now consider the unpleasant incident to be behind us and I bear no grudge or ill will to any member. We need to get on with the business at hand, even if it means ruffling a few feathers.Now as far as I can tell OGW does not deserve the treatment he has received. His only crime, has been in trying to establish some continuity regarding forum conduct and discipline. He has been a somewhat frustrated with the outcome, but who can blame him? 

    #90182
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Thankyou Socialist Punk.That is all I was trying todo.  I started this thread because I had dificulty posting and I thought I had been suspended for no reason. Of course  I do NOT want the above members charged. But what would the average member feel if they receive 2 warnings and a suspension without receiving a reason?

    #90183
    SocialistPunk
    Participant

    Hi OGW,I imagine they would feel just as you do and be fully justified in wanting an explanation.In fairness I think OGW should have one of the warnings removed and an apology given.But what are the chances of that?

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 10 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.