DJP
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Good supplement to this talk from Philosophy Bites:http://philosophybites.com/2015/05/quassim-cassam-on-conspiracy-theories.htmlPlus this episode of the You Are Not So Smart podcast:http://youarenotsosmart.com/2015/03/26/yanss-podcast-046-laser-eyes-and-reptilian-false-flags/
This is actually the weakess goverment we have had since the late 1970s so it will be interesting so see how successful they are in pushing any legislation through…
I'm not in favour of repeating the amount of effort that went into composing the moderation guidlines a couple of years back, but this is what they say that is relevant to the cases in hand…
Quote:2. Unless there is clear reason not to, moderators assume good faith on the part of contributors to the forums. That is, they assume that a contributor who has broken the forum rules has forgotten or misunderstood them. They allow contributors an opportunity to correct their behaviour before sanctions are applied. The action they take at this stage could be anywhere from a friendly explanation to a stern warning, posted publically or sent privately, as the situation merits. Posters who claim they were provoked need to be made to understand that provocation is not an excuse for breaking the rules. The appropriate response to provocation is to contact the moderator.11. Socialist discussions are wide ranging. ‘Off-topic’ is not rigidly interpreted, and moderators allow some side discussions that are clearly related to the main discussion and only intervene if they begin to lead the thread entirely away from its given topic.https://faq.worldsocialism.org/index.php?sid=420&lang=en&action=artikel&cat=5&id=11&artlang=enPersonally I think that moderation may have been a bit over zealous in some cases, but appreciate that the situation is one of damed if you do dammed if you don't. I certainly don't envy the task…
DOP wrote:7. That as all political parties are but the expression of class interests, and as the interest of the working class is diametrically opposed to the interests of all sections of the master class, the party seeking working class emancipation must be hostile to every other party.8. The Socialist Party of Great Britain, therefore, enters the field of political action determined to wage war against all other political parties, whether alleged labour or avowedly capitalist, and calls upon the members of the working class of this country to muster under its banner to the end that a speedy termination may be wrought to the system which deprives them of the fruits of their labour, and that poverty may give place to comfort, privilege to equality, and slavery to freedom.Vin wrote:I didn't mean to raise old issues and rake over things, nothing to be gained by that. Just thought the group may have moved on with new members who may be interested in joining us.Don't think there's any new members, just a handful left – they're slowly dying out…
nicktap wrote:but the critisism stands of this forum.AFAIK you are talking about the yahoo group not here. Welcome aboard, I hope you find your time on this website fruitfull..
nicktap wrote:[…]me deciding not to run as a candidate for the SPGBTo do that you have to be a party member and to be that you have to understand and agree with our DoP. As far as I know that's a fail on both counts…
ALB wrote:the vote is not going to be the real measure of the campaignActually I think we'll have more metrics than that. We can look at visits to the website, google search terms, and the amount of emails and information packs / free subs we give out..On the anecdotal side I've noticed a few facebook friends have been saying supportive things about the SPGB and I'm pretty sure this is because of the campaign rather than something I've said on there….
John Oswald wrote:The same goes for groups, such as the Occupy groups, etc. Does the Party actually contact them? Most people have never heard of the Socialist Standard or the SPGB.Every group and individual that is mentioned in the Standard gets contacted, as far as possible..
stuartw2112 wrote:I wonder if anyone here has read the first couple of chapters of "The Economics of Feasible Socialism" by Alec Nove? I must admit, my faith in Marxism and non-market socialism could not survive the encounter. But perhaps that's for another thread:http://digamo.free.fr/nove91.pdfWell please do start one, would be interesting to know what you think you've found.
northern light wrote:Is that so? We asked the E.C. for financial aid. Nothing extravagant, just the portion of subs our members paid in. We got diddly squat.Looking through EC minutes it's looks like something was approved, if nothing was received it'll need chasing up…
Vin wrote:Well good for you but none of our members have the ability to read minds. Why should we believe that there is £500 available???Money is always available for branches and committees to request at any time, regardless of if we are running an election or not…
stuartw2112 wrote:But all that's irrelevant to the main question (of this thread, and in the election): do you prefer a Labour or a Tory government?Would you prefer a plain poke in the eye, or a poke in the eye by someone who gloats about it later?As far as I'm cocerned there's much of difference, I'd prefer to not be poked in the eye and so, if the option arises I'd state my preference for not being poked in they eye, even if I going to get a poke no matter what…
In short everybody is (to steal the name of a book by Dan Ariely) "predictably irrational". We are all prone to make the same kinds of cognitive errors because we all share the same kind of brains. We prefer stories to statistics, we seek to confirm – not question – our ideas, we rarely appreciate the role of chance and coincidence in shaping events, we sometimes misperceive the world around us, we tend to oversimplify our thinking and we have faulty memories. (I stole these 6 points from Thomas Kida)Being aware of this doesn't make us immune but it does give us a good guideline on how to deal with our own and other peoples thinking…
