twitter account @worldsocialism.com

July 2024 Forums World Socialist Movement twitter account @worldsocialism.com

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 164 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #116170
    Vin wrote:
    wow you are really throwing the book at me. You do realise that branches and members have blogs, facebooks and twitter accounts that are ignoring rule 11 but I heard not a squeek from you about it.

    My point was that Rule 11 needs to be updated, possibly, to permit social media activity by branches.  i.e. that the situation you're experiencing suggests, to me, that we do need an overaching discussion about how we as a party as a whole control our social media activity, and keep social media activists accountable.

    #116171
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    Young Master Smeet wrote:
    I suspect it would be more difficult if there was an 'owner' defending their control of an account, rather than a dormant account.  

    No it wouldn't. If the account claims to be an official account of an organisation or person then then it will be closed down at their request. There is no possibility that a rogue member or non member could hang on to an account claiming to be someone else 

    #116172
    Vin wrote:
    No it wouldn't. If the account claims to be an official account of an organisation or person then then it will be closed down at their request. There is no possibility that a rogue member or non member could hang on to an account claiming to be someone else 

    With the password, they could change the description, and retain the twitter handle.  Or, they could claim to be the legitimate representative of the organisation.  Even if twitter ruled in our favour, the time lag whilst we dealt with it would be annoying to say the least.  It is a risk we have to at least consider.Just to give an example of the problems we face.  The controller of the @SPGBofficial account inadvertantly forwarded a fascist meme earlier this year (mercifully they deleted it when it was pointed out).  Now, if they had stuck by their guns, or continued to defend it, we could have been in for some reputational problems. 

    #116173
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    Young Master Smeet wrote:
    My point was that Rule 11 needs to be updated, possibly, to permit social media activity by branches.  

    Fair enough.  Rule 11 does appear to be archaic and is being ignored if you believe that every tweet and blog posting comes under rule 11 but I don't think Rule 11 can be interpreted that way. That is just plain nuts

    #116174
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    Young Master Smeet wrote:
    Just to give an example of the problems we face.  The controller of the @SPGBofficial account inadvertantly forwarded a fascist meme earlier this year (mercifully they deleted it when it was pointed out).  Now, if they had stuck by their guns, or continued to defend it, we could have been in for some reputational problems. 

     Doesn't that just come under a party speaker making a slip.  I think I posted a meme which I did not realise was a painting painted by a Nazi. Its going to happen. Mistakes will be made. We can't know everthing. No one is perfectPerhaps account holders should take the speakers test? Or is there a candidates test  

    #116175
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    moderator1 wrote:
    We have informed all the companion party's that the twitter account is available.  I'm not aware of any of the companion party's asking to be more involved in socialist activities.  But does it matter who initiates such activity?

    Seems that the offer has not so far been mentioned in any companion party's meetings and the accound remains unused.Niether NERB nor the EC has received any notification from the Internet Committee. I hope members take note when voting in a new IC

    #116176
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    Young Master Smeet wrote:
     Yes, possibly we need to revisit rule 11 (bit late for this years conference, unless you want NERB to perhaps raise an item for discussion on Social Media policy).

    Long time coming The Blog Committee would like to see Branches with their own blog sites, which could featureminutes from past meetings, details of upcoming ones along with topical comment on local andglobal issues.  Report of the Blog Committee 2015

    #116177
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Who has taken over this twitter account and has the EC been informed. As elected secretary and Internet and social media officer for NERB we have heard nothing.Who actually has control in our party? Branches or committees?Wait dont tell me – the committees because they have been elected by the whole party. Now where have I heard that before? Now that the central command has trampled on NERBs initiative, I will close my twitter account down that I have been working on for the last few weeks of which I am certain the IC know about. As my branch is highly unlikely to have a quorum anytime soon then I am in a powerless position to do anythingFraternal greetingsvin maratty secretary and internet and social media officer nerbPower to the committees

    #116178
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    This resolution by the February EC is beyond comprehension MOTION 14: The EC authorises the Internet Committee to contact the owner of the account and request that they specify that the account is not officially endorsed by the party (Craggs/Scholey) 5-0-0 Why on earth has the EC passed this motion without any explanation and without  first contacting NERB? There is no explanation of why the IC wishes to close the account downApart from the fact that there are 'unofficial' blogs and twitter accounts all over the place, this is the official twitter account of Northe East Regional Branch and is therefore the only twitter account under democratic control.  I am absolutely astounded that the EC should condon the actions of a spiteful and revengeful committee that is cleary preventing the genuine attempts of members to propogate the case for socialism. The owner of the account is a member of the audio visual committee, and Internet and social media officer of NERB and is under the instruction his branch. It is beyond my comprehension and inexplicable that an EC of the SPGB would prevent this activity V maratty,  

    #116179
    moderator1
    Participant
    Vin wrote:
    This resolution by the February EC is beyond comprehension MOTION 14: The EC authorises the Internet Committee to contact the owner of the account and request that they specify that the account is not officially endorsed by the party (Craggs/Scholey) 5-0-0 Why on earth has the EC passed this motion without any explanation and without  first contacting NERB? There is no explanation of why the IC wishes to close the account down It is beyond my comprehension and inexplicable that an EC of the SPGB would prevent this activity V maratty,  

    Quite a bit of scaremongering on your part comrade!  The motion is not requesting the IC to close this twitter account down but to ask the owner – yourself – to specify it carries no party endorsement.But I take it from your previous post that you closed this account down before the EC meeting.

    #116180
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    moderator1 wrote:
    Vin wrote:
    This resolution by the February EC is beyond comprehension MOTION 14: The EC authorises the Internet Committee to contact the owner of the account and request that they specify that the account is not officially endorsed by the party (Craggs/Scholey) 5-0-0 Why on earth has the EC passed this motion without any explanation and without  first contacting NERB? There is no explanation of why the IC wishes to close the account down It is beyond my comprehension and inexplicable that an EC of the SPGB would prevent this activity V maratty,  

    Quite a bit of scaremongering on your part comrade!  The motion is not requesting the IC to close this twitter account down but to ask the owner – yourself – to specify it carries no party endorsement.But I take it from your previous post that you closed this account down before the EC meeting.

     Well comradely greetings MOD1 AND member of the Internet Committee that must thave misled the EC. Why do you deliberately restrict the activity of democratically organised branch of the party. Perhaps motive could be explained???The twitter account carries the endorsement of a democratically constituted branchWhy do you wish to do that?Apart fro being petty and childish

    #116181
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Here's me working abou 5 hours a day producing an intro video for the party and to prpagate socialism. Producing memes tweeting the case to workers. I have my branch at my back supporting me. Then what, the fucking internet committe write to the EC to put a stop to it. I WANT YOUR MOTIVE???

    #116182
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    moderator1 wrote:
    but to ask the owner – yourself – to specify it carries no party endorsement. 

    It carries the endorsement of the world socialist movement here in the north east of the UK.I don't need your endorsement. 

    #116183
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Brian you are petty minded and vengeful. Kent branch opposed my reapplication as a member a few years ago but now they have nominated me for the AV committee and I wont let them down nor my branch. Why cant you and the others on the IC move on like grown upsor at least go away and let me get on with it

    #116184
    Anonymous
    Inactive
    moderator1 wrote:
     But I take it from your previous post that you closed this account down before the EC meeting.

     Isnt it time to close your account? Retweeting David IKe and a load of lefties?  But wait, nobody can tell you what to do, your the IC. 

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 164 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.