Forum Replies Created
Are you referring to the idea, that the EC had something to do with Vin's suspension? If you are, as far as I can tell, that link first came from you and I first read it on this thread, post #9, or on the thread about Vin's suspension decision. But if someone else said otherwise, please post a link and the quote here.lindanesocialist wrote:To the EC I had not realised that the EC had suspended me from the SPGB Party forum and this led to some confusion with the IC and Moderators . I request that the EC lift my ban and reinstate my account. I undertake to abide by the rules of the forum. May I also ask that the EC reconsiders my nomination as a member of the AV committee as I feel I have something to contribute to the party and our movement?
Linda,The reason Joe brought the idea of the NERB discussing nominating Vin to get back on the AVC, here on this thread, was to see if we could get a decision agreed on to send to the EC today. Alas, as no one else seemed interested in the discussion, so it looks like we'll have to wait until the next branch meeting on Oct' 24th to discuss the issue.Oh, in case you'd forgotten, the IC didn't permanently ban Vin. As far as I'm aware, Vin only decided to make an appeal to his indefinite suspension, quite recently. The situation regarding the IC, Vin and the EC has been explained a number of times. The last time was post #13 on this thread, by Joe. Cheers,Stephenlindanesocialist wrote:Vin is taking a lot of shit on line and would like to go to ADM and confront his accusers but is not a member of a branch and can no way afford to travel and live in London for a couple of days. Staying over at HO would definitely result in his demise. Any suggestions?
Same suggestion I made to you months ago. Put together a dossier of evidence and present it to either the EC or ask a branch to look it over.September 25, 2016 at 4:08 pm in reply to: the difference between Marxism and original communist theory/ideology #120986Capitalist Pig wrote:I am just so confused
Your're not the only one CP.As mcolome1 has pointed out on a few occasions.mcolome1 wrote:I think that we have better issues to pay attention at the present time, this is just a wasting of time.
Gnome,What do you make of the following from YMS (#277), in reply to my "fair enough assumption"?Young Master Smeet wrote:Fraid not, not unless the work you're taking it from has an attribution and a licence statement (as we have at the end of the staandard). We all know what happens when you assume…September 21, 2016 at 1:21 pm in reply to: the difference between Marxism and original communist theory/ideology #120922Young Master Smeet wrote:Bourgeois science works by rstricting access to the fruits of collective endevour: education, training, resources to practice science and time. When there are no more classes, and the intellectual fruits of society are available to freely access by all, and the working day is reduced to the bare minimum, members of society will be able to practice a different sort of science. The basis of that society will be that the free development of each will be the condition for the free development of all, so there will be access to heterodx views, and active steops taken to ensure that minorities interests and opinions are supported so that they can test and promote their ideas through equal access to the means of communication. Where large projects are required, society will democratically decide whether it is worthwile to build ITER, or CERN like facilities, and we will co-ordinate worldwide to ensure that we can all benefit from them.Science would be a part of daily life, with the practical possibilities of being able to feed it into our communities and workplaces providing a fucs, so knowledge will be produced out of our daily existence. Where "the human essence is no abstraction inherent in each single individual. In its reality it is the ensemble of the social relations." What we won't have is a "doctrine [which] must, therefore, divide society into two parts, one of which is superior to society." by having binding votes on whateveryone thinks.Indeed, it will be a society in which 'everyone' can access [evidence], and then have to decide what it means to them… "
That's what it's all about.
Gnome,In the absence of any other Party member willing to kick start the process of making Party videos, I don't see any other choice than to get Vin back on the AVC. Cheers,Stephengnome wrote:northern light wrote:That is my condition. But first, I think, we need some explanation why the E.C. removed Vin from the A.V. committee, in the first place. Seems like an almighty breakdown in communications.
I think that's an absolute prerequisite and I will personally do my best to elicit an explanation at the Autumn Delegate Meeting next month and trust others will do likewise.Incidentally, at my branch last Sunday I suggested nominating Vin for the AV committee but was told by other members present that it was inconceivable that the present Executive Committee would re-appoint him…
Can two branches nominate a person for the same post?
It's a fair enough assumption to make.
Joe,I agree. I don't see why it couldn't be discussed here and a decision made by a majority of active NERB members. Cheers,StephenSeptember 20, 2016 at 10:37 am in reply to: the difference between Marxism and original communist theory/ideology #120869
LBird,Perhaps I'm a bit dim, but I've never understood what you mean by "reality" and "production of our reality"?Could you attempt to give me a simple explanation, starting with what you mean by "reality"?
Weird how two forum users who don't like the forum rules, but still choose to post, have used the report feature of this forum for, "experimentation" purposes only. I guess it must be scientific socialism at work?
What prediliction would that be?
sat·ire[ sat-ahy uhr]NOUN1.the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc.2.a literary composition, in verse or prose, in which human folly and vice are held up to scorn, derision, or ridicule.3.a literary genre comprising such compositions.gnome wrote:ALB wrote:lindanesocialist wrote:moderator1 wrote:without prior permission from the moderators.”
May I ask via what channels would permission be requested and on what grounds would permission be granted/decided upon? How long will it take to come to such a decision?
I can't think why the moderators want to create this rod to beat their own backs.
It's the power which appeals, at least to some. Which is why, in the past, I've argued for an unmoderated forum. Let's face it, things couldn't have really been that much worse, and in all likelihood a great deal better, than over the past few years. The almost constant public wrangling cannot have had anything but a deleterious effect. How many visitors to this forum, does one suppose, have left in dismay, never to return?
Out of interest, have you ever used the report feature of the forum?