lindanesocialist
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Vin said An email exchange that members could be party to in a democratic organisation as it involves a member being banned for life.Such a decision should not be made by an exchange of emails of a few mwmbers
vin saidCapitalism and other kids stuffSubtitled"If you saw a young kid in a gutter ritual past and ignored and told you it was taken to hospital OK im doctor you probably know the worlds most virtuous around touristic person but probably you probably know most anti social either what would you do min ago or domething to" lol but never been an issue until now. Paddy, Vin? Nothing to do with it
moderator2 wrote:Mod2- You have waited this long and since you have now asked a direct question of us, you will get an answer…in due course.Where and when will this be discussed ? I would like to attend As all meetings of the socialist party are open to the public or is this one secret
Vin said lolTerrible isn't it, I prefer the regional accent. But subtitles are removed by the viewer if he or she is internet savvy click settings bottom right Don't understand why this problem has never been an issue with 'capitalism and other kids stuff' et etc
SocialistPunk wrote:The issue of Vin's indefinite suspension was set in motion before my joining the IC and is now in the hands of the EC. So what my views are, have no bearing on my role as a moderator.I don't see the relevance of the suspension with Vin being a Party member. There does not exist a separate set of rules, on this forum, for non party members and Party members.As a member of the IC you have a say – a vote – on who remains or is suspended. I merely ask for the records: Are you in favour of Vin's permament ban from all party forums?Brian has clearly stated his view and it is a matter of record and posterity that he has completely silenced another member. Do you support this as a member of the Internet Committee?
Vin saidIf there are problems wit the video, they can be altered/changed/replaced. I can take on board criticisms and change things.The realities of capitalism can be removed but in my opinion humble opinion they are the driving force for change and the basis of socialism.
Young Master Smeet wrote:I've avoided commenting on the video, — I don't think much off it — because too many cooks spoil the broth. I only mentioned my opinion in the context of a general procedural approach that needs to be considered.vin said: Fair enough, but do you think the party needs a video introducing itself to the world?
Young Master Smeet wrote:More generally, repeated conference resolution that we should put the positive case for socialism (so no starving babies pictures of the Shave the Children kind).Vin said:YMS Do you think that the video was in part rejected because it displayed some of the horrors of capitalism? This was not mention by the EC Nor has any member objected until now.
Vin said:Youtube does not have to be publicly accessible. Youtube videos can be set as 'puplic' or 'private'. 'Private' can only be viewed by the people who receive the link from the owner of the account. Which is what I did first time around. Party forums and EC and General Secretary.Unlike the other videos which were and are available to the general public without priot EC consultation. As I have said all along my actions regarding the making of the video have been more democratic than past ventures. In fact based on the methods suggested by cde Shannon sometime ago on one of the party's 'chat rooms'.I was nominated on the AV committee and submitted the link to video to the EC and was rejected from the AV committee for doing so. 'Arse from elbow' comes to mind.
moderator1 wrote:As for Vin's permanent ban I know I'm in favour of it and so it seems are the EC according to the last minutes.I can't find reference to this in the EC Minutes. I would appreciate a reference. Or withdraw your statement
vin said: Resolution 6. 6th AUGUST 2016. “The EC notes that a number of Committees of the Party already have the authority of the EC to produce and disseminate audio-visual material and maintain websites in accordance with their Terms of Reference.”Carried 4 – 0 with 3 abstentions. Resolution 7 “That the motion deferred from July EC: “That all members be reminded that in accordance with Rule 17 any publications except leaflets and handbills are to be authorized by the EC prior to publication (including on public websites such as YouTube) and be requested not to publish in advance of any such authorization any items which may be reasonably construed as published by SPGB.“ [Cox and Browne] be adopted.”Carried 6 – 0 with 1 abstention.Are these EC resolutions contradictory? Does resolution 6 make a new rule? According to resolution 6 the AV committee has the authority to produce and disseminate audio- visual material…… I will submit the video to the AV committee (cde Tim Killgallon) and request any edits before publication.
moderator1 wrote:lindanesocialist wrote:Who are the three moderators. Are they on the IC and do they agree with the Vin's (SPGB member) permament ban from party forums, lists ?Stephen Davison, Brian Johnson (myself) and Alan Johnstone are the three moderators and yes we are all on the IC as per terms of reference. As for Vin's permanent ban I know I'm in favour of it and so it seems are the EC according to the last minutes.
As members of the EC do not attend this forum it will be interesting to find out what they base their decision on. SP and AJ. Are you in favour of a permanent ban from all party forums for Vin?
