lindanesocialist
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Vin So the socialist standard has permission from Corbyn, Osborne etc to publish their mugshots? And any mention of any person and organistaion mentioned in the SS? Jesus must be a lot of work involvedI didn't realise they went to so much trouble. ALL the photos used and the music in the video have been checked. and paid for. Oxfom do not mind using their statistics or mentioning their name, I received permision from Adam , cde Shodeck and clifford slapper( But decided not to use him} No problem with Danny, as with most people, he always likes the videoI think the only problem maybe the us of Video clips from BBC politics program, which I did look into and most political groups use such materials but it would be easy to seek approval.
Tim Kilgallon wrote:Don't really understand how the viewers could sue, or am I being thick?Vin said: It's becoming so pretty pathetic, Tim. Have a look at other party videos, debates etc. ALL criticisms could be applied yo them. Brian and YMS have kept silence until nowI recieved permission from all concerned except Bill Martin, if he wishes to sue, that will be up to himVin was appointed at the time of video making by NERB to produce audio visual material and open Internet accounts The Socialist Standard prints pictures of many politiciians and logos of other parties and extracts from other newspapers and BBC reprorta etc etcPermission from Mr Corbyn? Or any of these people ? Ever thought Brian and YMS that these people may read the SS and sue the party? There are a million and one copyright issues in the Socialist StandardOther people's and organisation's material By the way If you do not have written permission from people like Peter Tachell and others, the party is open to prosecutionThe Video was produced my Vin anyway so the party can't be sued. It can sue me of course.
Well I meant a break from moderation, comrade, nothing else. I thought you were looking forward to that? I am sure you have already indicated such.But I agree, I have tried but I cannot avoid capitalism and the unavoidable urge to do something about. Wish I could.
moderator1 wrote:This being the case would you care to retract the allegation of bias and prejudice?To suggest you may be a little overzealous in you moderation with a member because of 'previous association' is no reflection on your inegrity of which I do not doubt, only to suggest that perhaps now that there are other mods available to remove unwanted posts perhaps you could take that well deserved break
Mod 1 in no way do I question you integrity but it appears that you removed my posts at around 9.30pm but at around 10.30pm in a PM to me MOD3 apparently had no knowledge of this removal, I have yet to here from Mod2. Do you have a copy of the emails in which the 3 mods agreed to remove the posts.?I am sure there is a simple explanation and in no way do I doubt your claim but just for clarity I would appreciate an explanation for this anomaly
That sound reasonable enough to me.Thanks mod1 Its just that one of the mods didn't know you had removed the post in a PM to me never mind I am sure this is a misunderstanding that will soon be cleared up
And just for confirmation this thread ' moderation suggestions' is not for 'moderation suggestions'?
moderator1 wrote:If another moderator was available they would have taken the same action. All such actions are agreed by a majority of the moderators.If another mod is not available then how did you come to a majority decision?
moderator1 wrote:This being the case would you care to retract the allegation of bias and prejudice?Of course your not bias . The evidence is all over this forum that you are fair and objective. I retract my ridiculous allegation. Full apologies
moderator1 wrote:lindanesocialist wrote:Suggestion: Mod 1 would step aside. He is the only Mod continually sending posts from myself to offtopic. He is clearly bias and prejudiceIf another moderator was available they would have taken the same action. All such actions are agreed by a majority of the moderators.This being the case would you care to retract the allegation of bias and prejudice?
Is this thread for moderation suggestions? If so then I am making a moderation suggestion
Mod1 this is a simple recommendation. You will find such recommendations all over the forum. If they are not allowed then tell us all This is a thread requesting moderation suggestions. I am making some suggestionsCan you explain why I cannot make moderation suggestions on a moderation suggestions thread?
Young Master Smeet wrote:Some useful definitions from Wikipedia: Sockpuppet:Quote:A sockpuppet is an online identity used for purposes of deception. The term, a reference to the manipulation of a simple hand puppet made from a sock, originally referred to a false identity assumed by a member of an Internet community who spoke to, or about, themselves while pretending to be another person.[1] The term now includes other misleading uses of online identities, such as those created to praise, defend or support a person or organization,[2] to manipulate public opinion,[3] or to circumvent a suspension or ban from a website. A significant difference between the use of a pseudonym[4] and the creation of a sockpuppet is that the sockpuppet poses as an independent third-party unaffiliated with the puppeteer. Many online communities attempt to block sockpuppets.It would be a sad reflection on a socialist party if one of its members is forced into having to be a 'sockpuppet' to express an opinion and an embarrassment to any democratic organisation. But we will let the working class decide on that issue.
