twitter account @worldsocialism.com

[alanjjohnstone]

Can i be the only member who is becoming increasingly lost and confused by this debacle on the Twitter account. I'm not surprised the EC may have possibly erred because i'm guessing from past remarks most of them like myself are ignorant of Twitter. It began i thought that a dormant Twitter account was being re-activated and then objections were raised that this was the preserve of a moribund WSM and the volunteer should desist….it then has escalated into whether the user is Twitting (Twittering -no idea of the verb) inappropriate sources without a disclaimer, now it seems the whole Twitter account should carry a statement distancing its content from the Party and so it can no longer be called a Party Twitter account, So do we have an official Twitter account now? Or is this all about some other Twit. Is this brief summary accurate? If not, please correct my impression as simply as possible.What do they say about being incapable of organising a piss-up in a brewery…And Vin try not to take it all too personally…the Socialist Party has often never been very social. 

[DJP]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Is this brief summary accurate? If not, please correct my impression as simply as possible.

Part of the Internet Committee's TOR is "To secure the Party’s electronic presence, including the maintenance of appropriate domain names." and "To maintain and moderate the Party’s websites, blogsites and forums."An *individual* applied to take up the moribund twitter account @worldsocialism.The offer was rejected.Said individual then set up a new twitter account @world_socialism (note the addition of the underscore)The IC wrote to the EC for clarification as to how to proceed.The motion was moved and carried by the EC.The description for @world_socialism was changed to read "The natural and industrial resources of the earth are the common heritage of all. Official account of North East Regional Branch SPGB."

[alanjjohnstone]

Many thanks for the clarification.Can i now ask who rejected and why the original Twitter wordsocialism offer to revive it was rejected? And what alternative was suggested and what were the measures to make it active once again? 

[alanjjohnstone]

I'll happily give a hearing if anyone who wishes to explain what has been happening and who possesses a differing view…as long as it is expressed in the same neutral tones as DJP posted, so that people like myself can comprehend what has been going on in this protracted dispute where a lot of accusations are being thrown about. To solve a problem we must first identify where the problem lies and that can be a slow process of resolution. But let us try.Long ago i suggested the Party creates a members' grievance process similar to the IWW but like a lot of my suggestions they are sowed on barren ground…

[Anonymous]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

I'll happily give a hearing if anyone who wishes to explain what has been happening and who possesses a differing view…as long as it is expressed in the same neutral tones as DJP posted, so that people like myself can comprehend what has been going on in this protracted dispute where a lot of accusations are being thrown about.

Quote:

….but like a lot of my suggestions they are sowed on barren ground…

You are not alone…  but eventually they'll find fertile soil…

[DJP]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Can i now ask who rejected and why the original Twitter wordsocialism offer to revive it was rejected? And what alternative was suggested and what were the measures to make it active once again? 

There seems to be some words missing from the question. But in answer to what I think you're asking.An individual applied to the IC. The IC rejected the individual.As this is a public forum and the question is about an individual and rejected application it does not seem appropriate to go into further details here.There is procedure with Twitter that organisations can go through to reclaim impersonating accounts.

[Anonymous]

I found dormand twitter account @worldsocialism.com and asked the IC to recover it and offered to run it on behalf of the party. They did not say 'no' They procrastinated so I took it to my branch. The branch wrote to the IC and EC but still nothing. Months ad years past………..Having only a limited life I opened a twitter account @world_socialism.com (notice the slight difference) after being elected Social Media Officer by the branch  https://twitter.com/World_Socialism (hope you like it, Internet committee doesn't)The  Internet Committee were infuriated and has interfered and done everything it can to prevent our activities While all this has been going on 'individials' and NOT branches have been operating accounts. None of which has the pope's blessingHope that helps AlanObviously this the opinion of myself and if you go onto the NERB business site it is also the opinion of the branch

[Anonymous]

error

[alanjjohnstone]

Quote:

An individual applied to the IC. The IC rejected the individual. As this is a public forum and the question is about an individual and rejected application it does not seem appropriate to go into further details here.

I understand your reticence to cast aspersions upon a bona fide member but can you say if the individual privately was apprised of the reasons his offer to volunteer was turned down in any personal e-mails to him? And did the IC explain their course of action to the EC?My follow up question was having refused the offer of assistance, did those rejecting the offer try to seek other persons to take on the role and turn the original Twitter account into a useful tool for our organisation.I vaguely recall the account being said to belong to the WSM and companion party's approval/involvement was necessary. Which seems to me that the SPGB IC itself exceeded its responsibility on those grounds by refusing an individual assistance. But i may well be wrong in that reasoning because as i say it has been a case of clashes of opinions and those uninvolved have never been any the wiser on the rights or wrongs. Again i have to hazard a guess that some on the EC are as much in the dark as i am since some EC  admit never actually even follow this forum much less the Twitter and Blogs so perhaps their decision should be treated with a certain amount of circumspect. 

[Anonymous]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

I'll happily give a hearing if anyone who wishes to explain what has been happening and who possesses a differing view…as long as it is expressed in the same neutral tones as DJP posted, 

I don't consider referring to a comrade as 'the said individual' is a neutral tone. My name is vincent maratty. You have been in the party too long

[Anonymous]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Many thanks for the clarification.Can i now ask who rejected and why the original Twitter wordsocialism offer to revive it was rejected? And what alternative was suggested and what were the measures to make it active once again? 

By the way  DJP-  tho he does not declare it  – is a member of the said Internet Committee. The only people who come on here and defend the actions of the internet committee are members of the Internet Committee operating more than one account.There is no 'clarification' there. Just obfuscation. I suggest you ask North East Branch or the 'individual' concerned if you wan a more objective 'clarification'For example 'Why would the Internet committee turn down the offer of a branch to run a twitter account?' Explanation for that would be interesting.Ask him the status 'official' or otherwise of the following account to name but a few and perhap supply minutes of when these accounts were 'blessed' by him.  I can find many more.  @OfficialSPGBhttp://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.co.uk/https://www.facebook.com/groups/worldsocialism/https://www.facebook.com/pages/Socialist-Party-of-Great-Britain/105481856152052?fref=ts&rf=110790122282280https://twitter.com/imposs1916 https://twitter.com/4SocialismNow

[Anonymous]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

I vaguely recall the account being said to belong to the WSM and companion party's approval/involvement was necessary. 

 The account belonged to a member in the midlands who may have left the party or other reasonIt never belonged to any other party. It was wasting and only became active when NERB start using theirs

[Anonymous]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

I understand your reticence to cast aspersions upon a bona fide member 

 I am the member involved and DJP is an IC member

[Young Master Smeet]

Vin wrote:

https://twitter.com/imposs1916

Is a personal account.But, as you can see, this does demonstrate the need for a register of authorised accounts.  And from authorising, taken steps to secure ownership, and co-ordination between operators.

[Anonymous]

YMSI have nothing against any of the accounts and there are many more. But why has the IC not sought permision to instruct the facebook account to state that it is not 'official'If I and even the branch are to be treated differently by the IC  then the IC  should be explicit and explain why we are being treated differently.

[Author]

Posts