steve colborn

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 1,276 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Agenda for April Meeting #119323
    steve colborn
    Participant

    SP appears to have a lot of spare time 'collecting evidence' that achieves nothing constructive, I suggest he is nominated as secretary to give him something more constructive to do i would think that trying to stay alive, is far from having "a lot of spare time". There have been accusations and threats made, all SP is trying to as, I'm sure you yourself would do, is find out the rationale behind these events. Its obvious that anyone who would make, what to me are baseless, farcical accusations, re bullying and threats, do not know SP at all.It was not just Linda who accused SP of bullying but yourself, with implied threats thrown in. As with the accusations thrown around by the IC, towards various members, all SP requires is "proof". No more, nor less, than those at the sharp end of IC shenanigans themselves, required of the IC. A bit of Quid pro quo if you like!

    in reply to: Agenda for April Meeting #119316
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Look Vin, can you just copy and paste the problematic E Mails so that I/we can see where the problem lies. I am quite sure if "you" were in the position of SP, you would expect no less.I have seen the E Mails sent to SP, and they must have been some doozy E Mails and or crossed wires to engender that kind of response. So please publish, thats a simple enough request, Comrade. Stevie C.

    in reply to: Agenda for April Meeting #119313
    steve colborn
    Participant

    If Linda recieved E Mails meant for you and interpreted them as meant for her, they must still have contained some pretty provocative stuff to, as I have stated, elicit some of the replies I have seen and the accusations they spawned!No one wants to see interminable wrangling but I can see SP's point, in that, he wishes everything out in the open and to know the reasons behind the accusations he has had to suffer and the threats implicit in the E Mails I, have seen, that were sent to him!!!When this is done, I would like nothing better than to  move on and build on the success our February meeting so obviously was.

    in reply to: Agenda for April Meeting #119311
    steve colborn
    Participant

    SP you have left out the Emails YOU sent to illicit the response Those must have been some serious E Mails to elicit the kind of responses I've seen and the accusations they spawned. In fairness, as I've said, and in order to get a fair and accurate picture as to what has happened, I think I/we need to see the E Mails that were so provocative.

    in reply to: Agenda for April Meeting #119309
    steve colborn
    Participant

    In the interests of fairness, can you post those E Mails Vin.

    in reply to: Agenda for April Meeting #119300
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Eileen. Hello Vincent.

    in reply to: Agenda for April Meeting #119299
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Hi Vin.

    in reply to: Agenda for April Meeting #119296
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Hello everyone, Eileen here. I to will be in and out but I will be watching and taking part when I can.

    in reply to: Agenda for April Meeting #119295
    steve colborn
    Participant

    No problems SP, I have the exact same problems.Iwill need to exit the meeting soon to domy physio, so lets just go with the flow and see how far we get.

    in reply to: Agenda for April Meeting #119293
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Hi Tim, hi SP.Actually Tim, the reason that Vin called the meeting unconstitutional, was that it was taking place whilst a Branch member (himself) was denied access to the meeting. However, as has been explained by Tim above and by others, myself included, the use of the account Linda has, would circumvent this. The question now arises, whyhas Vin not used this facility!Now, over to S P.

    in reply to: Agenda for April Meeting #119292
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Good morning all.When the meeting starts, Standing Orders have been suspended and S D has the floor.

    in reply to: Agenda for April Meeting #119290
    steve colborn
    Participant

    Well Stevie/Joe, if Linda and Vin had shown up at the beginning of this meeting, mayhap the acrimonious posts and gratuitous insults could have been avoided, mayhap we could have moved forward in solidarity, as was the case with our February meeting. Way to make a pigs ear out of a silk purse!

    in reply to: Agenda for April Meeting #119289
    steve colborn
    Participant

    One last thing Linda. If S D's knees were the only thing that were hurting him, I am sure, beyond the possibility of refutation, that he would be overjoyed beyond measure, sadly, that is not the case. Stevie C.

    in reply to: Agenda for April Meeting #119287
    steve colborn
    Participant

    lindanesocialist wrote: Tim is yet to vote.Therefore as Chair, I am suspending Standing Orders.   You have no rigt to suspend standing orders without a vote. Please check SO I'm sorry Linda but you are incorrect. A call was made to suspend Standing Orders, so that a matter a serious mattervcould be discussed visca vis;Sat, 30/04/2016 – 11:40pm #73SocialistPunkOnlineJoined: 17/08/2012Send PM I would like to make a request that the branch suspend standing orders to discuss the serious issue I made reference to in #25 of this thread? It is within the rules and I, as Chair, called for a vote. Of the 5 members who have been in attendance, some like myself, all day, 4 voted 3 for and no other members were envisaged, I correctly and within the rules, allowed the suspension of Standing Orders. The meeting will, as I have already stated, reconvene at 11 AM tomorrow, Sunday the 1st of May, when the serious issue SD alluded to, will be discussed.If you wish to contest my being Chair, please move a motion to that effect, when the meeting resumes. If you have a seconder, it will be put to a vote.By the way, your post in which you state;Sun, 01/05/2016 – 12:29am #81lindanesocialistOnlineJoined: 28/03/2016Send PM I move that this meeting is against the basic principles of the socialist movement in that excludes a member that wishes to be present. It contavens the rules of the SPGB and the Standing orders of the party. I therefore  move that the chairman stands down and the meeting is closed LINDA yes I have tits and a dress but I have a mind tooI rule the above out of order and incorrect and if you have evidence, (party rules ETC), to the contrary, please present them at the resumtion of the meeting, tomorrow.Good night all. Its been a very trying, tiring day and my health is not the best these days, as I am sure all will sympathise with.

    in reply to: Agenda for April Meeting #119280
    steve colborn
    Participant

    steve colborn wrote: I will leave it open for other members to vote later but from the 5 members in attendance so far, we have 3 for/ 1 abstention and Tim is yet to vote.Therefore as Chair, I am suspending Standing Orders. The Branch meeting will reconvene at 11AM tomorrow, Sunday 1st May, when SD will present the Issue he wishes to raise.Good night comrades. Sleep well, I hope your stomach troubles have eased Stevie.Stevie C.   you are incorrect I voted against Sorry Linda, bit late at night and as I was apprised by Vin, that neither of you would be attending the meeting, an understandable oversight.That is now 3 for/ 1 against/ 1 abstention.

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 1,276 total)