twitter account @worldsocialism.com

[Young Master Smeet]

Quote:

To me if you are not reliable enough to be trusted with a twitter account, then you are not reliable enough to be trusted with a party membership, and I trust Vin's Socialist credibility.

That doesn't follow, a person may well be a member, and a sound socialist, but be unsuitable for a particular kind of job, that's why we have elections, nominations and appointments.

[Young Master Smeet]

Vin wrote:

And that is down to meYou know well we could not have had this discussion when I first joined. My suspensions were basically for discussing 'internal matters on a public forum' (Jesus!)  Now we are moving toward open criticism of each other

We were having internal party discussions on publicly available forums long before you turned up.  Spintcom and SPopen have always been publicly readable, and the old WSM Yahoo list was the scene of many a happy bust up.  So, no, it isn't down to you. 

[Bijou Drains]

Young Master Smeet wrote:

Quote:

To me if you are not reliable enough to be trusted with a twitter account, then you are not reliable enough to be trusted with a party membership, and I trust Vin's Socialist credibility.

That doesn't follow, a person may well be a member, and a sound socialist, but be unsuitable for a particular kind of job, that's why we have elections, nominations and appointments.

A person may be unsuitable for a particular kind of job, however the management of a twitter account is a fairly straightforward job that, in my opinion, is one that any technically competent member should be able to carry out. As you say we have elections, nominations and appointments of party posts. We also have explanations for the actions of committees and officers of the party, except curiously in this case. If Cde Marratty was deemed unsuitable for this role by the IC, why was he not told of the reasoning and more importantly why is the party as a whole not aware of that reasoning. The lack of this information makes the IC unaccountable to the party for their actions. Just a very quick and very straight forward yes or no question YMS. Do you think that officers and committees of the party should be accountable for their actions?

[alanjjohnstone]

Quote:

What i find extraordinary is a committee chose to find a member inappropriate for a job, not on technical ability but it seems on "political" grounds of unreliabilty that reflects badly on the member.Who has told you this? This is the first I have heard of it. Am I in a special section of the party without being informed but you have??

My apologies. No-one told me. I tried a guess  that there had to be a personal reason, one which was better not publicised as DJP post implied. I made an assumption. Perhaps i am totally wrong and my apologies to the IC and yourself for casting aspersions on both. As for not being above reproach, Vin, don't re-write history. I merely refer to repeated occasions over a very long time where you ended up in conflict with others in the party as a non-member, as an applicant to re-join and as a party member and forum contributor….You are not  the only sinner by all means but you were hardly a saint in the years i have been aware of you on these web-pages. If some members have concerns about offering you a position of responsibility, it is understandable if mistaken. (as an aside, i recently recall you started a thread and forgot you had, blaming it on prozac and booze, scarcely a recommendation, is it?) What we have to do is go beyond this atmosphere of friction and reach out for a settlement of it. I am sure many, including yourself, is fed up of this acrimony that has been going on for some years. I am simply trying to clear the air and pin-point what the problem is…and since as i said it is not simply the Twitter account but something that goes further back. We need to get it sorted once and for all. 

[Bijou Drains]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Quote:

What i find extraordinary is a committee chose to find a member inappropriate for a job, not on technical ability but it seems on "political" grounds of unreliabilty that reflects badly on the member.Who has told you this? This is the first I have heard of it. Am I in a special section of the party without being informed but you have??

My apologies. No-one told me. I tried a guess  that there had to be a personal reason, one which was better not publicised as DJP post implied. I made an assumption. Perhaps i am totally wrong and my apologies to the IC and yourself for casting aspersions on both. As for not being above reproach, Vin, don't re-write history. I merely refer to repeated occasions over a very long time where you ended up in conflict with others in the party as a non-member, as an applicant to re-join and as a party member and forum contributor….You are not  the only sinner by all means but you were hardly a saint in the years i have been aware of you on these web-pages. If some members have concerns about offering you a position of responsibility, it is understandable if mistaken. (as an aside, i recently recall you started a thread and forgot you had, blaming it on prozac and booze, scarcely a recommendation, is it?) What we have to do is go beyond this atmosphere of friction and reach out for a settlement of it. I am sure many, including yourself, is fed up of this acrimony that has been going on for some years. I am simply trying to clear the air and pin-point what the problem is…and since as i said it is not simply the Twitter account but something that goes further back. We need to get it sorted once and for all. 

Genuinely wise words re the situaton re Vin and the IC. However it does not address of SPGB committes who appear to think that they are unaccountable ofr their actions. Regardless of the rights and wrongs in this particular case, I find tis extremely worrying for party democracy.

[Anonymous]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

 (as an aside, i recently recall you started a thread and forgot you had, blaming it on prozac and booze, scarcely a recommendation, is it?) 

That was a joke. Jesus Christ, Alan. That has nothing to with this. I said that a month ago. This goes back years This is unlike you Alan, you are changing my opinion of you.You know.  Having a laugh. I don't believe it "Scarcely a recommendation" Jesus H Christ

[Young Master Smeet]

Tim Kilgallon wrote:

A person may be unsuitable for a particular kind of job, however the management of a twitter account is a fairly straightforward job that, in my opinion, is one that any technically competent member should be able to carry out.

There I strongly disagree, the social media orperators should at least have passed the speaker's test.  The operation of a social media account has possibilities for imediate and irrepasrable reputational harm.  

Tim Kilgallon wrote:

Just a very quick and very straight forward yes or no question YMS. Do you think that officers and committees of the party should be accountable for their actions?

Yes.  And I think they are.

[Bijou Drains]

Young Master Smeet wrote:

Tim Kilgallon wrote:

A person may be unsuitable for a particular kind of job, however the management of a twitter account is a fairly straightforward job that, in my opinion, is one that any technically competent member should be able to carry out.

There I strongly disagree, the social media orperators should at least have passed the speaker's test.  The operation of a social media account has possibilities for imediate and irrepasrable reputational harm.  

Tim Kilgallon wrote:

Just a very quick and very straight forward yes or no question YMS. Do you think that officers and committees of the party should be accountable for their actions?

Yes.  And I think they are.

Then taking into account all you have said, why is their no account (hence accountability) from the IC as to why Cde Marratty (who has passed his speaker and candidate test) was turned down from taking over the official twitter account. I'm not saying I agree with or disagree with the decision, just saying I have no information about the reasoning for that decision and as such cannot hold the IC accountable for the correctness or otherwise of that decision. Do you see my point?

[alanjjohnstone]

Quote:

That was a joke. Jesus Christ, Alan. That has nothing to with this. I said that a month ago. This goes back years  This is unlike you Alan, you are changing my opinion of you. You know.  Having a laugh.  I don't believe it "Scarcely a recommendation" Jesus H Christ

ALB recently tried some irony and it fell flat because i took it literally. He suggested when someone does make a joke, add an appropriate smiley to highlight it. Irony and sarcasm rarely work on the internet. There is always those like me who won't understand it. So again my apologies for misconstrueing your post.And i have to again cite history, we had members (not you, Vin, i hastily add) with serious mental health issues who would post on the old Spintcom and Spopen lists and as i was the moderator i had to intervene and some saw that as exceeding the role of moderator. Another aspect in this debate is that as a blogger if i do go rogue there are several other members with admin authority to delete and amend any out-of-order post. (Not sure if admins can exclude other admins though) This is a safe-guard built into SOYMB blog. Getting back to the issue if the IC had worries about one person being in charge of a Party Twitter account…or even a branch Twitter account, something similar i think ccoud have been done,…or am i mistaken about Twitter tools. I see no need as YMS or the IC might of some centralised command holding the passwords, but rather control of the blog or Twitter is shared and not held by one person.  

[Anonymous]

Alan,apology accepted, we are still palsI have been informed that the IC doesn't have a problem with branch twitter accounts, so that bit has been cleared up. As for NERB I intend to suggest that at least two other members hold the password. So If I go doolally and tell a conservative party member he is a fuckin prick another member can immediately step in and apologise    

[Bijou Drains]

Vin wrote:

Alan,apology accepted, we are still palsI have been informed that the IC doesn't have a problem with branch twitter accounts, so that bit has been cleared up. As for NERB I intend to suggest that at least two other members hold the password. So If I go doolally and tell a conservative party member he is a fuckin prick another member can immediately step in and apologise    

Like fuck we will

[Anonymous]

Vin wrote:

I have been informed that the IC doesn't have a problem with branch twitter accounts, so that bit has been cleared up.

 The IC have since changed their mind ffs

[Anonymous]

Tim Kilgallon wrote:

Vin wrote:

Alan,apology accepted, we are still palsI have been informed that the IC doesn't have a problem with branch twitter accounts, so that bit has been cleared up. As for NERB I intend to suggest that at least two other members hold the password. So If I go doolally and tell a conservative party member he is a fuckin prick another member can immediately step in and apologise    

Like fuck we will

 I agree. Fuck it.  

[Anonymous]

Tim, ha ha ha relax. The Internet Committee are Ant and Dec. We have been had lol 

[Anonymous]

Young Master Smeet wrote:

 We were having internal party discussions on publicly available forums long before you turned up.  Spintcom and SPopen have always been publicly readable, and the old WSM Yahoo list was the scene of many a happy bust up.  So, no, it isn't down to you. 

No you were not. The records are there. Telling me not to raise 'internal' matters in public. It was the reason given by the EC for refusing my re entry into the party. It was why I left the party in the first place, but by all means re write history

[Author]

Posts