Young Master Smeet

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 2,885 total)
  • Author
  • in reply to: Forum Moderation #246768

    Yes, there do seem to be more tools there, however, for now we’re working with what we’ve got, but, yes, I’m sure the internet committee are keeping an eye on such comments as this.

    in reply to: Russian Tensions #246750

    I’ve removed a post by @Lizzie45 for hinting at a user’s real name, after being asked not to. They are welcome to repost the content, or signal that they are happy for me to remove the offending phrase.

    in reply to: Russian Tensions #246726


    This is an informal warning, in my opinion you’re perilously close to trolling, violation of rule 7: “Do not use the forums to send […] purposely inflammatory remarks” and violation of rule 6:
    “Do not make repeated postings of the same or similar messages to the same thread” – please either provide factual information or structured arguments, rather than postings of the ‘you guys suck’ type.

    More generally, just to echo Paula’s message upthread, rule 7 requires us all to be civil: attack ideas, not people, do not respond to provocation.

    Remember, our moderators are part time, and there will be some delay until we can assess any given post.

    Finally, for anyone other than moderators, moderation is axiomatically off-topic. Please do not send on forum posts about moderation. Do not reply to this message, I will nuke.

    in reply to: London local council by-election campaign #246673

    This thread is broadly on topic, but can I remind people that people’s motives for being on the forum and their behaviour is always off-topic.

    Could I remind you to address people by their chosen handle, please?

    in reply to: Russian Tensions #246551

    So, Lobster magazine has this long detailed article on the rise of Zelensky, detailing in particular how he was sponsored by the Ukrainian oligarch Ihor Kolmoisky.

    Today, the BBC has the news that Kolmoisky has been arrested for corruption “The president faced accusations of acting as Mr Kolomoisky’s puppet during the election campaign, including from rival and former president Petro Poroshenko.” This is the power of political office in action (but let’s see how it plays out and whether Kolmoisky actually gets taken down.

    There’s lots of chatter about the regime eating itself, and there may be something in that, but I suspect it’s more the president asserting his power, alongside the pressure of war. Let’s not forget, the Kyiv regime is basically bankrupt (the civil service is now paid for by western backers).

    in reply to: The aerated “concrete” scandal #246538

    Sky has a list of the schools affected Tellingly, they seem to cluster in a few areas, maybe reflecting the practices of a few architects or building firms? Particularly, Essex seems to be a serious locale.

    in reply to: Forum Moderation #246519

    1: Paula made a public ruling, I agreed with it and was seeking to enforce it, there are two moderators.
    2: Yes, we need to look into methods of contacting moderators, for now there is the report option on each post.
    3: WRT Forum names, it is bad etiquette to use a non-preferred name, or try and ‘out’ someone, and I’ll keep an eye on it.

    in reply to: Party news #246477

    A reminder of forum rules:

    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.**

    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.

    Paula has made the ruling, that’s the end of the matter: I’ll nuke any further comments on this subject.

    in reply to: Save the Wales? #245926

    I’m starting to see a lot of adverts for the recent (and universally ignored) change to the highway code that effectively turns all side streets into zebra crossings (pedestrians get priority over cars turning into a side road).

    Now, this change was made by the highways agency, and I’d imagine that agency would continue to exist into a socialist society (or something very like it). I doubt we would vote on such changes to highway codes, though we would expect some sort of consultative process (I don’t recall one, though for this)…I’d expect in this sort of case we’d leave the agency to get on with it most of the time, and wait for a clamour to greet and change anything objectionable…

    in reply to: Ecuador #245812

    1: Grand juries. We’ve stopped using them here, but prosecutors in the states are very adept at feeding the jury, and since all they have to do is agree there is a prima facie case, that doesn’t really mean anything.
    2: As some have pointed out, Hunter Biden is much like a lot of his peers – there’s all sorts of criminality everywhere, but for the most part they just get away with it – likewise for Trump, much of his criminality would never have come to light if he hadn’t become president. There is no contradiction between saying that lots of the scrutiny is politically motivated, and that they did it.
    3: It’s like the late Roman republic, they were all corrupt, that was how the system worked, and it was strategically remembering the crimes of people who fell from grace that led to the reputations of the likes of Cato.
    4: The important thing is that there is no discussion of principle, the Dems need Trump and his fash adjacent followers to be the bogey to marshal votes behind while promising zero structural change.

    in reply to: Reform #245438

    The issue is that in an election you aren’t voting to a specific policy, but over who is the government (that is the only vote that matters), so voting for a capitalist party, even in return for a specific amelioration is putting a capitalist party in power. Our aim as a party is to make the election question ‘Socialism or capitalism’.

    The difference is, if it were a referendum on whether or not to give free school meals (say if we lived in some US states, or in Switzerland), then you can vote on the merit of the issue, just as socialist delegates in parliament would, as instructed by the party.

    in reply to: Podcast on Kautsky #245434

    Kautsky is good on simplifying Marx’s account of capitalism. His views on money in socialism are useful because of his critique of labour time vouchers (essentially, he argues that commodity money does the job assigned to labour time vouchers better, i.e. they basically are continuity money. His books on the Russian revolution: “Dictatorship of the proletariat” and “Terrorism and socialism” are good, and that’s why most people know him from Lenin and Trotsky’s replies: they had to respond to him because his shots landed. He is worth reading, critically.

    in reply to: Sunday Mail discovers how banks work #244526

    Labour want to protect the banks, as ever

    Well I mean: “Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves says borrowers should be allowed to switch to interest-only payments for a temporary period to ease the crisis.”

    Where to fucking begin? The banks raise interest (i.e. the operating surplus over cost) and Labour says borrowers should be allowed to delay paying the principal (which they will still have to pay), but continue to give the banks profit in the meantime, and the government should co-ordinate this.

    Honestly, this is the Monty Python parrot sketch: the housing market isn’t dead, it’s just pining for the fjords…

    in reply to: God. #244280

    Moderation note: could contributors refrain from posting videos without some text providing context/relevance to the forum. At the very least so members can consider whether it is worth watching the link.

    in reply to: Sunday Mail discovers how banks work #244269

    John McDonnell calls for windfall tax on banks: a left-wing take on the situation: “Big five banks posted profits of about £37 billion for 2022. UK banks made extra £7 billion by refusing to pass on higher interest rates to savers.” At least calling to recoup that profit through targeted taxes makes some sense.

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 2,885 total)