Is there, “Something wrong with the party’s case and/or it’s methods.”?

[PJShannon]

MODERATOR WARNINGI am posting the full forum rules below:Rules:1. Keep discussion on topic.2. Resist forwarding messages. 3. Keep signatures to a maximum 4-5 lines.4. DO NOT cross-post to this forum.5. Personal abuse, flaming and trolling will not be tolerated.6. Please keep your posts trimmed so not to include unnecessary text.7. Personal messages should be sent by personal email, not to the forum. Moderating: The moderator reserves the right to reject messages sent to the list. The moderator reserves the right to suspend or expel a subscriber for unacceptable behaviour. Any further comments in this thread regarding the personal integrity, intentions, character, reputation etc of anther forum member may result in action being taken. ‘Ed’ consider yourself to have received a yellow card. Several other members have came close.

[Ed]

steve colborn wrote:

Slandered Ed? I never knew that disagreeing with someone was akin to slander! Nor did I realise that not agreeing with someones argument and putting a counter argument was an Attack!As for being THREATENED, I read Northern Lights comments a while ago, and he was speaking retrospectively, of the way he would have reacted years ago, to someone who called him a LIAR to his face.Please don't continue, anyone, with this type of rhetoric.As a Socialist, my only focus is putting the case for Socialism. I'm looking forward to people, on the different threads on this site, hopefully coming up with inspiring methods for propogating the case for Socialism.That should be the only focus for us all.

To his face?I ASK A STRAIGHT QUESTION AND HE SAYS HE'S A NAUGHTY GIRL WHO MAKES THINGS UPWHAT THE FUCK AM I SUPPOSED TO THINK?And a threat of physical violence is still a threat of physical violence retrospective or not.

[steve colborn]

Well there goes the idea of concentrating on the case for Socialism. Oh well, I tried!So Ed, do you categorically state that you never called, or implied that, Northern Lights was a liar? Or, moreover, that you yourself have never made "cheap jibes". Remember, you are not the only person who can review old posts!By the way, can you read my earlier post, (44) and give me your considered response?

[steve colborn]

oops you got in before me! Guess I got my answer.I ASK A STRAIGHT QUESTION AND HE SAYS HE'S A NAUGHTY GIRL WHO MAKES THINGS UPBy the way, I'm sure NL was joking with the above comment! You know, comedic reply?

[PJShannon]

MODERATION WARNING. FINAL NOTICEThis thread is about the party's case and methods. Any further discussion about what any other forum user may or may not have said or thought will result in the poster being temporarily barred from this forum.

[Anonymous]

admin wrote:

MODERATOR WARNING  'Ed' consider yourself to have received a yellow card. Several other members have came close.

Which other members? This is one sided. 

[steve colborn]

I don't think there is anything wrong with the partys case, nor even it's methods apart from being a bit behind the times.We need to keep up with the modern means of mass communication. The internet being a perfect case in point. Some of the old methods, especially letters to the press and indeed even the public meeting still have a place.The task I believe, is to marry these propaganda methods together and others, as we come up with them, to make the best use of our resources, both manpower wise and financial.

[Anonymous]

I agree to an extent but i think this thread is proof that something is seriously amis. We cannot be seen to deal with criticism in this manner. Socialist punk and northern light have disappeared into the sunset by now and Marx only knows how many we don't know about. Dare we raise the subject again only to be attacked and vilified? Too fuckin' true, comrade. You know me frightened of no cunt. I will make it my business to find out and research how many potential members are being chased with the use of abuse

[steve colborn]

The thread is titled,Is there, Is there, "Something wrong with the party's case and/or it's methods."?By "methods", we can by extrapolation point to  the way we, as party members, interact one with another. It is in this spirit that we can and must be more conscious of the words and manner with which we treat our fellows. We must be reconciled to the fact that what we are after is the same thing, a saner, better society. It is only by keeping this idea at the forefront of our minds that we can act cooperatively, to bring Socialism about.It is in this spirit, that I apologise if any of my posts have caused others offence and that I will be more diligent and have more forethought before posting any future comments. I would hope others will follow suit in the same spirit.#YFS, Steve.

[Anonymous]

well. i was not referring to you comrade lolbut well said

[PJShannon]

TheOldGreyWhistle wrote:

admin wrote:

MODERATOR WARNING  'Ed' consider yourself to have received a yellow card. Several other members have came close.

Which other members? This is one sided. 

Perhaps I was being one sided. Old Grey Whistle, you also receive a yellow card. This is not the first time you have been close and as you seem unable to take a hint..

[Anonymous]

admin wrote:

TheOldGreyWhistle wrote:

admin wrote:

MODERATOR WARNING  'Ed' consider yourself to have received a yellow card. Several other members have came close.

Which other members? This is one sided. 

Perhaps I was being one sided. Old Grey Whistle, you also receive a yellow card. This is not the first time you have been close and as you seem unable to take a hint..

 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."  Your name:

[HollyHead]

northern light wrote:

I was sitting, filling in my membership application form the other day, when HollyHead made his scathing remark. .. Don't bother to reply, I won't be here to see.

 That's a pity because I will now not have the chance of finding out which of my remarks you found "scathing".  ;-(

[Anonymous]

HollyHead wrote:

northern light wrote:

I was sitting, filling in my membership application form the other day, when HollyHead made his scathing remark. .. Don't bother to reply, I won't be here to see.

 That's a pity because I will now not have the chance of finding out which of my remarks you found "scathing".  ;-(

Lollooking forward to the next sympathiser, eh so we can take the piss.

[steve colborn]

I thought gnome said this kind of CHAT was off the map? This thread is, Is there something wrong with the parties case and/or its methods. Where does your post fit in with this Holly?

[Author]

Posts