Moderation is Good

Actually Jonathan I, do not! Could you enlighten me?By the way you state, "Nobody at work moderates me, or tries to. They just ask me questions about what the fuck I'm talking about." So in the same tone and after reading your post but not understanding its quintessential symbolism, what the fuck does it mean?Steve.

I have been away for a weekend visiting friends "int" Leeds and what do I find upon my return to this forum but a strange post entitled "Moderation is Good". I have little idea as to what it is about, but the opening post is a little sparse on the truth.

Actually, Jonathan was moderated from SPintcom not just for simply "using words like "motherfucker" " that he seems to love so much, but for using those exact words directly aimed at two party members in a rather unkind, critical manner. Given the fact he moaned on about bad behaviour and forum loudmouths, made his colourful contribution perfectly hypocritical. But as the post was deleted from SPintcom, it has been removed from public record forever. Chalk one up for the power of censorship to alter events and the historical context.When I read this opening post, I asked myself what does it contribute or seek to achieve? The forum posting guidelines ask the same questions. I couldn't find a thing in this post that had anything constructive to add. It seems to suggest, in a rather crude way, that there is nothing wrong with being moderated?Given the fact that those who are questioning forum moderation have never advocated a "no moderation" approach, there is no need for such a thread as this. Then I figured it out.TrollFrom the Oxford Dictionary: verbno object[..]2 informal submit a deliberately provocative posting to an online message board with the aim of inciting an angry response

In essence this thread looks as though it was set up to say "stop #?>!@#! moaning about being moderated", and in doing so, seeking out emotional responses. I could be wrong, in fact I hope I am wrong.

I do like simple answers actually. It is what attracted me to the SPGB in the first place when I was a teenager. All around me, from the media, politicians, teachers and religious leaders, I heard people spewing complicated waffle about the problems that faced society, poverty, starvation, needless disease, war, racial hatred, with little in the way of actual solutions.The Socialist Standard cut through the bullshit and got straight to the point.The supporters of capitalism like to give complicated definitions and answers, designed to confuse. By contrast, how complicated is the WSM definition of socialism?

So forgive me if I seem to like simple answers.Jonathan says the Internet has limitations, of course it does, every form of communication has limits. But seeing as global digital communication looks like it is hear to stay, and in fact looks like it will continue to become a bigger part in the lives of future generations, I think the SPGB presence on the Internet is a very important fact that should not be underestimated.But it seems Jonathan mistakenly underestimates its potential. By his own admission it has played a part in his making two new socialists. Well done, I say.If the 300 or so SPGB members could make two new socialists each from the online community, that would make 600 new socialists. (I presume Jonathan does not mean he has created two new SPGB members) So if the 600 new socialists each made two new socialist we would have 1200 new socialists and so on and so on……..Now, we couldn't expect all those new socialists to join the SPGB, but some would, and as the new socialists passed on their knowledge we could expect to see a few hundred new SPGB members over the years.Any arena for planting socialist seeds of awareness should not be underestimated. This forum is very important. In my opinion it is vital it should reflect socialist values of fellowship, positive communication, support and co operation. (Apologies if I missed anything) Without these simple values a socialist society could not function. So they should be a part of any online socialist space.Of course questioning and debate are to be encouraged, disagreement will be common place among socialists, it is part of the learning process?What I do not expect to see among socialists is abuse. I am afraid Jonathan has been just as colourful with his targeted language as those he has accused. I do not advocate censoring such behaviour, but hypocrisy should be consciously excised from socialist thought and deed, wherever possible. If we cannot maintain a positive slant on the only alternative to the vile nature of capitalism, then how do we expect potential converts to socialism, to trust our opinions?So with the bigger picture in mind, I join Steve and The Old Grey Whistle in burying the hatchet of animosity, between myself and Jonathan, as deep as possible in the flank of capitalism.Jonathan, I hope you enjoy your  two weeks in America.