moderator1

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 845 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: The PRINCIPLE of HEALTHY & MEANINGFUL LIVING #126098
    moderator1
    Participant

    Reminder: 7. You are free to express your views candidly and forcefully provided you remain civil. Do not use the forums to send abuse, threats, personal insults or attacks, or purposely inflammatory remarks (trolling). Do not respond to such messages.

    in reply to: Pseudonyms, anonymous , sock puppets and trolls #131604
    moderator1
    Participant

    Reminder: 14. Rule enforcement is the responsibility of the moderators, not of the contributors. If you believe a post or private message violates a rule, report it to the moderators. Do not take it upon yourself to chastise others for perceived violations of the rules.

    in reply to: Statisation: a possible flaw in world socialism #131495
    moderator1
    Participant
    Wergittep Eki wrote:
    Vin wrote:
    Ike Pettigrew wrote:
    moderator1 wrote:
    Reminder: 6. Do not make repeated postings of the same or similar messages to the same thread, or to multiple threads or forums (‘cross-posting’). Do not make multiple postings within a thread that could be consolidated into a single post (‘serial posting’). Do not post an excessive number of threads, posts, or private messages within a limited period of time (‘flooding’). 

    The tone of this thread, I feel, was fine until Vin joined it.  

    Rubbish. Ike Pettycrew and other ex member Johnathan Chambers are responsible. If you care to check, I only reply to posts that reference me and are usually abusive. Like this one. Or I have asked a simple question and you spoiled the thread with a personal attack rather than answering the questionBy the way the tone of this thread was already offensive long before I joined.

    LOL.  You are a hypocritical, fork-tongued, two-faced fuckwit.In common with the rest of the SPGB, you think white women should be raped by foreigners, to bring about socialism, much like a "socialist" might want more profits for British Gas or might want a railway co-operative because that "speeds up the collapse of capitalism".You are a vile, hypocritical, rape-apologising, thuggish, violent, idiotic, narcissistic, self-righteous, childish, fork-tongued, double-dealing cunt.

    This user is placed on an indefinite suspension for using a sock puppet account: 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts 7. You are free to express your views candidly and forcefully provided you remain civil. Do not use the forums to send abuse, threats, personal insults or attacks, or purposely inflammatory remarks (trolling). Do not respond to such messages..8. Do not register or operate more than one account without first obtaining permission from the moderators. Do not share your password with others or allow anyone else to use your account. Do not use your account to post messages on behalf of any suspended user, without prior permission from the moderators.

    in reply to: Orban and the Anti-Immigration Right #132044
    moderator1
    Participant
    Wergittep Eki wrote:
    Matt wrote:
    Ike Pettigrew wrote:
    Well Alan, at least you, me and Vin are keeping the punters entertained.  You and I should start up a double act.

    I do not find the subject remotely 'entertaining'. I am sure Alan and Vin do not do so either. It is all very well trying to understand why and where, obnoxious ideas arise from, in order to combat them, but I have some first hand experience of seeing some terrible consequences arising from them.

    Do you have any first-hand experience of rape?I've heard that lots of young white women are being raped by the immigrant pets that idiots like you, Vin and Alan want to keep bringing into the West.When do we get to discuss that, fuckwit?And why do you, Vin, Alan Johnstone, Adam Buick and the SPGB hate white women and want white women to be raped?

    This user is placed on an indefinite suspension for using a sock puppet account: 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts 7. You are free to express your views candidly and forcefully provided you remain civil. Do not use the forums to send abuse, threats, personal insults or attacks, or purposely inflammatory remarks (trolling). Do not respond to such messages..8. Do not register or operate more than one account without first obtaining permission from the moderators. Do not share your password with others or allow anyone else to use your account. Do not use your account to post messages on behalf of any suspended user, without prior permission from the moderators.

    in reply to: Pseudonyms, anonymous , sock puppets and trolls #131602
    moderator1
    Participant

    Reminder: 14. Rule enforcement is the responsibility of the moderators, not of the contributors. If you believe a post or private message violates a rule, report it to the moderators. Do not take it upon yourself to chastise others for perceived violations of the rules.

    in reply to: Suggestion: Close the web forums #131725
    moderator1
    Participant
    Ike Pettigrew wrote:
    Vin wrote:
    If you have anything personal to say to posters then send them a PM. See forum rules.

    That is completely hypocritical!You have no points to make, Vin.  As somebody has pointed out early on in this thread – DJP, I think – you are one of the worst offenders on this Forum for stirring up trouble.  You are a violent, egotistical, childish, immature and self-righteous thug.That is the truth about you.  

    This user is placed on an indefinite suspension: 7. You are free to express your views candidly and forcefully provided you remain civil. Do not use the forums to send abuse, threats, personal insults or attacks, or purposely inflammatory remarks (trolling). Do not respond to such messages.

    in reply to: Myth of Overcrowded Britain #131351
    moderator1
    Participant

    Reminder: 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.

    moderator1
    Participant
    Marcos wrote:
    moderator1 wrote:
    Marcos wrote:
    moderator1 wrote:
    Rather than issue indefinite suspensions to users to Bijour Drains and LBird I have blanked their posts 21-29 under Rules 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.  12. Moderators may move, remove, or lock any threads or posts which they deem to be off-topic or in violation of the rules. Because posts and threads can be deleted without advance notice, it is your responsibility to make copies of threads and posts which are important to you.If such behavour continues I will not hesitate in unblanking these posts and issue indefinite suspensions.

    How many times have you suspended them on this forum?  You have already done that several times, especially L Bird,  and he continues doing the same thing over and over again which means that does not care, or he has not mental maturity, he is like a child playing with his favourite toysYou should pull out the plug permanently. This forum is the playground of few peoples who are not interested in real socialist discussion. Give them a lollipop and a permanent suspension. The best decision is to close down  this forum permanently and use the ones that we have already, we are not attracting any sympathizers, on the contrary, if they come to his forum they will leave because there is nothing which will answer their questions

    1st warning: 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.

    I am not starting a new topic, I am just giving an opinion of your warnings to several peoples that are members of this forum. 

    2nd warning: 2. The forums proper are intended for public discussion. Personal messages between participants should be sent via private message or by e-mail.  14. Rule enforcement is the responsibility of the moderators, not of the contributors. If you believe a post or private message violates a rule, report it to the moderators. Do not take it upon yourself to chastise others for perceived violations of the rules. 15. Queries or appeals relating to particular moderation decisions should be sent directly to the moderators by private message. Do not post such messages to the forum. You must continue to abide by the moderators’ decisions pending the outcome of your appeal.

    moderator1
    Participant
    Marcos wrote:
    moderator1 wrote:
    Rather than issue indefinite suspensions to users to Bijour Drains and LBird I have blanked their posts 21-29 under Rules 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.  12. Moderators may move, remove, or lock any threads or posts which they deem to be off-topic or in violation of the rules. Because posts and threads can be deleted without advance notice, it is your responsibility to make copies of threads and posts which are important to you.If such behavour continues I will not hesitate in unblanking these posts and issue indefinite suspensions.

    How many times have you suspended them on this forum?  You have already done that several times, especially L Bird,  and he continues doing the same thing over and over again which means that does not care, or he has not mental maturity, he is like a child playing with his favourite toysYou should pull out the plug permanently. This forum is the playground of few peoples who are not interested in real socialist discussion. Give them a lollipop and a permanent suspension. The best decision is to close down  this forum permanently and use the ones that we have already, we are not attracting any sympathizers, on the contrary, if they come to his forum they will leave because there is nothing which will answer their questions

    1st warning: 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.

    in reply to: Free Access: I want ten Ferraris! #132006
    moderator1
    Participant
    LBird wrote:
    alanjjohnstone wrote:
    On re-reading my last post, it may seem that i envisage a socialism that is merely capitalism – but only better.In a sense that is correct. Capitalism has already organised production socially – but it is not socially owned or controlled, remaining in the hands of a few individuals and acting in their interests of them and not society's.

    But surely by 'socially' we mean 'democratically', alan?So, Capitalism hasn't 'organised production socially' – but for a social elite.Your view here, that 'socialism' is 'merely a better capitalism', is fundamentally wrong, not 'correct' in any sense.Though… I suppose if one thinks that an elite will be in control of academic production, then it's a small step to think the same of all 'social' production.If 'academic production' remains 'not socially owned or controlled, remaining in the hands of a few individuals', why shouldn't it, too, be 'acting in their interests of them and not society's'?Since your views of science are non-democratic, it brings into focus what you might actually mean by 'scientific socialism'.'A science that is merely bourgeois science – but only better'?

    This user is on indefinite suspension for breaching Rule 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.

    moderator1
    Participant
    LBird wrote:
    Bijou Drains wrote:
    LBird wrote:
     You now seem to be saying that 'adults and non-dementia sufferers' would constitute an 'elite'.

    Dictionary definition of "Elite"" Noun 1. a select group that is superior in terms of ability or qualities to the rest of a group or society"Seems to me that by selecting out infants and people with dementia, which apparently you agree with, you have selected out  a group of people, creatign a select group that by definition is an elite. Not my words, but your.I am examining your propositions, your view of things, not giving mine.

    [my bold]I'd read your chosen definition again, BD, you don't seem to understand it.'A select superior to the rest of society' is an elite, not a majority.You seem to be wanting to define a 'majority' as a 'dictatorship' – the politics behind that attempt is nothing to do with democratic socialism. Perhaps your own version of 'straightness' is beginning to show, after all.

    3rd and final warning: 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.

    moderator1
    Participant
    LBird wrote:
    You still haven't given a straight answer about which areas of social production you'd deny democracy, DB. This 'straightness' of yours seems to be a one-way street.You now seem to be saying that 'adults and non-dementia sufferers' would constitute an 'elite'.I think most workers would think that that category would consist of the vast majority of humans, but perhaps you could explain how you seem to see a 'majority' as an 'elite'?I'm beginning to think that you're not really interested in the issue of 'democracy within social production' (ie. World Socialism), and simply wish to retain at least some areas (perhaps physics, logic, mathematics, etc.) as the preserve of an educational elite.How about a straight answer to the question of which areas of social production that you'd deny democracy within?

    2nd warning: 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.

    moderator1
    Participant
    LBird wrote:
    You haven't returned the courtesy, BD, and answered my question. Fair dos, eh?But, attempting to make an answer out of your post, if your list of areas which you will deny democracy really extend beyond infants and dementia sufferers (which you probably would be able to make a good political argument for, and would probably win a vote) to physics…… then you intend to deny democracy within a central part of the theory and practice of social production.If I've understood you properly, why not simply say to workers that this is what you intend, to leave political power within the hands of an elite within certain areas, and list those areas?I think that in these areas that you'd lose a vote, and the revolutionary, class conscious proletariat would make a start on making all science comprehensible to all proletarians.That is, education would be democratised. If you oppose democracy within education, then you should say so, openly, and explain why you hold these anti-democratic views.

    1st warning: 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.

    in reply to: Suggestion: Close the web forums #131719
    moderator1
    Participant
    Marcos wrote:
    jondwhite wrote:
    I am open to the suggestion to close the forums. The time and effort members spend moderating it could be better spent elsewhere.

    We already have 3 forums besides this one. The WSM forum is more than enough for Socialist Party members, the WSM members, visitors and sympathizers. In this forum, we need a 24-hour moderator to police all the postings

    From my own experience there's no need to moderate this forum 24/7.  My time spent on moderating is about 2-4 hours per day. The volume of postings is not the problem, its the breaches of the rules and guidelines which take up the time.

    moderator1
    Participant

    Rather than issue indefinite suspensions to users to Bijour Drains and LBird I have blanked their posts 21-29 under Rules 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.  12. Moderators may move, remove, or lock any threads or posts which they deem to be off-topic or in violation of the rules. Because posts and threads can be deleted without advance notice, it is your responsibility to make copies of threads and posts which are important to you.If such behavour continues I will not hesitate in unblanking these posts and issue indefinite suspensions.

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 845 total)