Organisation update
- This topic has 243 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
alanjjohnstone wrote:BrianJ, as someone who talks about positive responses you lapses into negativism in response to the other Brian's post.BrianG's contribution did not explicitly offer specific changes bit some are implicit in the consequences. "how do you propose to support all of these suggestions. Members are currently unwilling to step forward and fill the posts of HOO, Gen Sec and Treasurer." you askedIsn't shedding ourselves of the burden of a HO releasing human resources? We keep appealing for and returning to the issue of HO Organisers and keeping the premises open. Isn't transforming into more a web-based party structure, decentralising the Party in the process, lessening the work-load of a few members and spreading and dispersing the load. It may be unpalatable for other members but BrianG did present a way forward.
It seems the assumption being made here is based on the false premise that HO is a burden on our activity and further reached the equally false conclusion that due to advances in digital technology most of the administrative tasks now being carried out at HO can now be done at a touch of a button, albeit remotely? Not so, and even if it was the case its a negative fallacy to think it logically follows it would lessen the workload. For instance, since the introduction of emails the workload of the General Secretary has actually increased with members and the public demanding and getting a faster means of communication. Which means the volume of hardcopy has decreased but the volume of digital has increased.If HO is in actual fact a burden its a necessary burden seeing that despite the advances in digital communication and technology society is still heavily dependent on the use of communicating hardcopy to those who are uninclined to go digital.
Brian wrote:alanjjohnstone wrote:BrianJ, as someone who talks about positive responses you lapses into negativism in response to the other Brian's post.BrianG's contribution did not explicitly offer specific changes bit some are implicit in the consequences. "how do you propose to support all of these suggestions. Members are currently unwilling to step forward and fill the posts of HOO, Gen Sec and Treasurer." you askedIsn't shedding ourselves of the burden of a HO releasing human resources? We keep appealing for and returning to the issue of HO Organisers and keeping the premises open. Isn't transforming into more a web-based party structure, decentralising the Party in the process, lessening the work-load of a few members and spreading and dispersing the load. It may be unpalatable for other members but BrianG did present a way forward.It seems the assumption being made here is based on the false premise that HO is a burden on our activity and further reached the equally false conclusion that due to advances in digital technology most of the administrative tasks now being carried out at HO can now be done at a touch of a button, albeit remotely? Not so, and even if it was the case its a negative fallacy to think it logically follows it would lessen the workload. For instance, since the introduction of emails the workload of the General Secretary has actually increased with members and the public demanding and getting a faster means of communication. Which means the volume of hardcopy has decreased but the volume of digital has increased.If HO is in actual fact a burden its a necessary burden seeing that despite the advances in digital communication and technology society is still heavily dependent on the use of communicating hardcopy to those who are uninclined to go digital.
I do think that head office is a necessary evil, however I agree with Brian G's point that actually if you were going to pick a place to have it in today's environment, Clapham High Street would be fairly low on the list of possible venues. I also think the idea of letting Head Office as shop premises, would probably generate an ample income which could then be used to rent a more suitable place with better transport links and which could be accessed more easily by ALL members (If there was a surplus we could even consider a small rented northern sub office).
Brian Gardner wrote:If the default position was that the work of the party should genuinely be able to be done remotely with little more than a comrade at a laptop and hosted somewhere without having to still relate to a physical version at HO (eg like extracting the email addresses you mentioned from archives) then workload could genuinely be spread out amongst the membership. The work I'm at has a number of people working rmeotely. It uses Sharepoint for secure access to documents, edit/review facility etc,. There are many other similar products that make this sort of thing laughably easy – I'm sure most comrades have better experience than me at what these things can do. And once you get used to it Skype meeitngs and videoconferencing become second nature.My disappointment with the questionnaire is that I think we all know what the questionnaire responses are going to say. I'm not saying anything novel – I think we all pretty much know how we'd like a new gee-whizz internet-savvy SPGB to look and function. Doing nothing really doesnt look like a viable option for much longer. So to mix metaphors, I'm less for (the old response we always get) "you cant run before you can walk" and more for a Kevin Costner "build it and they will come". We know what's wrong with the current set-up and we have a pretty good idea of how we'd like things to look, so we should be looking at how we implement this, by making the shift to online party admin and democracy the default driver over the next 1-2 years.See my #76 in response to HO being a burden and the need for the party to use more digital technology.In response to your novel Kevin Coster suggestion "build it and they will come". Yes I agree that will be the probable outcome, but nevertheless it depends on what we actually build and throw out there that will determine the volume of response. Sharepoint may have it uses for a few party posts but not all. On the other hand meetings by Skype can be done so long it only involves a small group of people. And video conferencing technology is still in its relatively early stages of becoming user friendly and has a long way to go before it reaches our democratic standard.However, streaming of Conference/ADM and uploading the recording to Cloud or something similar would be possible but currently it would be nothing more than a passive medium with the user being a spectator and not an active contributor to the live discussion.
Bijou Drains wrote:I do think that head office is a necessary evil, however I agree with Brian G's point that actually if you were going to pick a place to have it in today's environment, Clapham High Street would be fairly low on the list of possible venues. I also think the idea of letting Head Office as shop premises, would probably generate an ample income which could then be used to rent a more suitable place with better transport links and which could be accessed more easily by ALL members (If there was a surplus we could even consider a small rented northern sub office).Really? Head Office is situated on one of the busiest trunk roads in and out of London, the A3. It is served by the Underground (Northern line) at Clapham North station which is only four minutes walk away and Clapham High Street station on the Overground circular line which is even nearer and both within easy reach (3 to 4 miles) of destinations in Central London including main line rail stations. In addition there are six separate bus routes including one that runs 24 hours.I'd be interested to hear of an alternative location more easily accessible which the party could readily afford.
Why don't you hold EC meetings on the party forum? Guaranteed a quorum surely? And do business over a couple of days?
gnome wrote:Bijou Drains wrote:I do think that head office is a necessary evil, however I agree with Brian G's point that actually if you were going to pick a place to have it in today's environment, Clapham High Street would be fairly low on the list of possible venues. I also think the idea of letting Head Office as shop premises, would probably generate an ample income which could then be used to rent a more suitable place with better transport links and which could be accessed more easily by ALL members (If there was a surplus we could even consider a small rented northern sub office).Really? Head Office is situated on one of the busiest trunk roads in and out of London, the A3. It is served by the Underground (Northern line) at Clapham North station which is only four minutes walk away and Clapham High Street station on the Overground circular line which is even nearer and both within easy reach (3 to 4 miles) of destinations in Central London including main line rail stations. In addition there are six separate bus routes including one that runs 24 hours.I'd be interested to hear of an alternative location more easily accessible which the party could readily afford.
Birmingham
Bijou Drains wrote:gnome wrote:Bijou Drains wrote:I do think that head office is a necessary evil, however I agree with Brian G's point that actually if you were going to pick a place to have it in today's environment, Clapham High Street would be fairly low on the list of possible venues. I also think the idea of letting Head Office as shop premises, would probably generate an ample income which could then be used to rent a more suitable place with better transport links and which could be accessed more easily by ALL members (If there was a surplus we could even consider a small rented northern sub office).Really? Head Office is situated on one of the busiest trunk roads in and out of London, the A3. It is served by the Underground (Northern line) at Clapham North station which is only four minutes walk away and Clapham High Street station on the Overground circular line which is even nearer and both within easy reach (3 to 4 miles) of destinations in Central London including main line rail stations. In addition there are six separate bus routes including one that runs 24 hours.I'd be interested to hear of an alternative location more easily accessible which the party could readily afford.
Birmingham
Sunderland.Cheap properties, and very few football supporters to navigate around on Saturdays.
Bijou Drains wrote:gnome wrote:Really? Head Office is situated on one of the busiest trunk roads in and out of London, the A3. It is served by the Underground (Northern line) at Clapham North station which is only four minutes walk away and Clapham High Street station on the Overground circular line which is even nearer and both within easy reach (3 to 4 miles) of destinations in Central London including main line rail stations. In addition there are six separate bus routes including one that runs 24 hours.I'd be interested to hear of an alternative location more easily accessible which the party could readily afford.Birmingham
[/quote]Or Sunderland. Yeah, right. And who will staff and maintain an office in either of those cities? There aren't even enough members in either area able or prepared to hold local branch meetings.This isn't really about accessibility, is it? Whereas it takes four and a half hours to travel by train from Glasgow to London it takes me up to almost half that time to get to Head Office from Kent, something like an eighth of the distance. No, apart from the ability or preparedness to make a commitment, it's actually more about affordability which is something the party could quite easily address.
BrianJ, i think the assumption is yours that that HO is not a burden upon the party. It certainly is one financially. It eats up our funds in utility bills and insurance and council costs.It is a burden on the staffing of it. I find it slightly incredulous that we have to make a very special point in announcing when it is actually open. I'm glad we do, Gnome, thanks to your own effort but imagine if Tesco had to put out special notices saying "we're open today"I think it is accepted that it is under-used. And although i may be wrong and i will stand corrected but also that the equipment such as computers and printers and photocopiers it houses is not employed fully as they could be. And we won't get anything too complicated which might require specialist training in its use.But let us get rid of this notion that we should remain in the hi-tech stone-age because some comrades refuse — yes—refuse – to adapt to the arrival of new means of communication. If so, let's turn the Standard into the Beano comic because some members decline to learn a new vocabulary.If necessary branches can run classes and if cost is an issue…with such a low membership we can supply our more destitute members with the tools of the internet. However, BrianJ, it may be right that i am wrong …but giving we are undertaking an investigation of our resources, the absence of any questions on HO and its use seems to be a lapse.But i think we may well have researched for the answer in the past so i would appreciate if a member with better recall can remind us of the facts we already know from previous studies.As for location, it is a red herring.I would support HO if it was being used to its full potential and was actually contributing to its own cost, somehowIn my time, i have discussed No52 often with many different people. Of transforming it into bookshop/cafe/drop-in centre/reading room/resource/advice centre/social and entertainment club. – take your pick – all have been proposed at one time or another.I have favoured the purchase of the right tools to be housed in HO. Equipment that can produce newsletters and pamphlets and leaflets – these printed means of propaganda that some members still think are necessary but or shelves still lack printed material on many vital aspects of the socialist case.Cde Allen i recall, someone who understood the property market very well because it was his business, suggested that we had excess space and could easily modify the building (at a cost albeit) and rent off the more suitable grond/basement floors for a regular income and still use it as our HO.As Gnome correctly points out Clapham High St is no back-street in some provincial back-water but a busy thoroughfare with a high customer foot-fall – highly desirable for commerce as anyone who has visited is well aware of.Nothing ever comes of the debates and discussions over our HO.We improved it for our own comfort yet made it more difficult for out-of-town members to avail themselves of it. HO remains a millstone around our neck and there are cheaper and just as viable other options when we require premises.A three-storey building for a monthly branch meeting that attracts half a dozen branch members…is that a proper use of our bricks and mortar strategy? Come on, comrades. We tried Skype for one or two members for a handful of EC meetings and then it was dropped. I missed the reports and feedback over its use…but i am sure the problem was not with Skype but the lack of commitment to persevere and make feel use of it. Brian G is better acquainted with other software. The choices are wide and varied.A member in Sunderland and Birmingham and Kent and Thailand or Norway and Spain can sit in front of a laptop – nay, even a mobile phone – and conduct an EC meeting. No need to travel..no need for expenses.We have video equipment that can be linked up to the internet and relay the proceedings of conference. We can be streaming conference and public meetings to branches.We could be creating lecture and educational sessions online as Marcos hopes – but they could also be live and interactive.The technology is there for a fully functioning and effective World Socialist Party.How much?Let's get estimates and find out. Let us learn what the possible software and types of equipment is available which are tried and tested and see what is the best for our purpose.Will it save on labour-time and reduce work-loads and increase other types of participation – well, capitalism thinks so. Has it got it wrong?
Just to get it off the chest…Was with one member at the bus stop…when will the next bus be along?…Out comes the smart phone, a few clicks…ten minutes he said…he had the app…Even his giant flatscreen TV is connected to the internet and he can surf the web but it is for You Tube and to watch old black and white films on it.Does he visit and post on this forum…go to see what was on our blogs or Twitter or Facebook…nope…He CHOOSES not to become involved.The reason why is what we should be asking ourselves. What has become of the reason and purpose of being and remaining a member of a political party if engaging in politics is too much of a bother and branch meetings are only occasions for a grumble about the world and the latest issue of the Socialist Standard?One ex-cde complains she has no opportunity to express her views and opinions to the Party and its members…She complains on this actual forum and then doesn't post anything more on it, forgoing the opportunity to exchange ideas. (apologies offered if i'm being a bit hasty)No apologies to BrianG, however…never visited this forum for years, eh?…Give yourself a well-deserved slap But welcome back, anyways.
alanjjohnstone wrote:I find it slightly incredulous that we have to make a very special point in announcing when it is actually open. I'm glad we do, Gnome, thanks to your own effort but imagine if Tesco had to put out special notices saying "we're open today"Nothing incredulous about it. If we had the number of available members to attend HO as Tesco has wage slaves, we wouldn't have to put out special notices either, now would we?
gnome wrote:Bijou Drains wrote:I do think that head office is a necessary evil, however I agree with Brian G's point that actually if you were going to pick a place to have it in today's environment, Clapham High Street would be fairly low on the list of possible venues. I also think the idea of letting Head Office as shop premises, would probably generate an ample income which could then be used to rent a more suitable place with better transport links and which could be accessed more easily by ALL members (If there was a surplus we could even consider a small rented northern sub office).Really? Head Office is situated on one of the busiest trunk roads in and out of London, the A3. It is served by the Underground (Northern line) at Clapham North station which is only four minutes walk away and Clapham High Street station on the Overground circular line which is even nearer and both within easy reach (3 to 4 miles) of destinations in Central London including main line rail stations. In addition there are six separate bus routes including one that runs 24 hours.I'd be interested to hear of an alternative location more easily accessible which the party could readily afford.
Given that London is the UK's most important city, with a population of around ten million (to Birmingham's 2 million), more and bigger train stations and multiple airports, I'd suggest the only thing more accessible than South London would be North London or Central London. Do any other parties have head offices outside London? Are they in North London or Central London?
I do believe you are pissing in the wind Alan. Unless members hold an on-line meeting and make some decisions.There are more members online than could possibly attend a physical meeting yet decisions continue to be made in small rooms as if we still lived in the 20th century. An online organisation of members would hold more legitimacy than an EC meeting at 52
I think we are falling behind in the use of modern technology. The Communist Party of USA is offering 'Marxist' classes, meeting and conferences online. Why can't we implement the same ? http://www.cpusa.org/party_voices/marxism-for-the-99-classes-hosted-by-ny-cp/
Why don't online members of the SPGB form a branch, have discussions, come to decisions and present resolutions to the party for consideration?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.