moderator1
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Reminder: 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.
And when that motivation is stunted by compulsion and compliance to instruction rather than learning, what then?ComplianceThe industrial-revolution foundation of the education system expects conformity and rewards predictable behavior, both intellectually and emotionally. We learn to comply in order to get along, to get good grades, and to be passed along to the next grade of our education. While any one teacher or administrator may encourage individuality, the presence of these pressures to be, act, and feel like all the others are unmistakable and unavoidable. The unintended consequence of this environment is that most learn to look to external rewards for motivation, directing their lives by what others do or hold valuable. Is it any wonder so many go through adulthood muddling through unfulfilling careers and relationships, and then have mid-life crises, waiting until the emotional toll becomes unbearable to finally reflect on who they really are and what they want to do with their lives? Excessive compliance is the enemy of high-level thinking.For more on how schools were initially designed to promote compliance rather than creativity or critical thinking, see A Brief History of Education.
norm_burns wrote:World of Free Access was co-written by Paul Breeze and my elder brother Ian Burns. Both had been SPGB members active in a Stoke-on-Trent branch that i believe they had formed. They did indeed feel that the terminology we use had become a burden in the light of most peoples' preconceptions about terms like 'working class'. I always thought they had resigned, but maybe they were expelled?They both resigned because the party did not accept their argument that a change in terminology would resolve the issue of misconstruing. It was pointed out that even if we decided to call ourselves 'The carpet party' we would still be faced with the problem of explaining the concept of Common Ownership and how to deal with misconstruing.If I remember correctly the pamphlet constantly reiterated common phrases to explain the proposed new terminology.
Sun, 08/10/2017 – 11:20pm (new)#31 Steve-SanFranci…1st warning: 6. Do not make repeated postings of the same or similar messages to the same thread, or to multiple threads or forums (‘cross-posting’). Do not make multiple postings within a thread that could be consolidated into a single post (‘serial posting’). Do not post an excessive number of threads, posts, or private messages within a limited period of time (‘flooding’).
Bob Andrews wrote:Anyone who wears open-toed sandals deserves all he gets. Did he flee hot-foot? I saw Coleman have a pint of beer poured over his head. Most amusing.Indefinite suspension: 1. The general topic of each forum is given by the posted forum description. Do not start a thread in a forum unless it matches the given topic, and do not derail existing threads with off-topic posts.Queries or appeals relating to particular moderation decisions should be sent directly to the moderators by private message. Forum members are free to discuss moderator’s decisions on a separate thread set up for that purpose but should not discuss moderator’s decisions on the main forum. You must continue to abide by the moderators’ decisions pending the outcome of your appeal.
Interesting insight here: https://lluisolle.quora.com/The-Catalonian-referendum-1-OctIt seems the so called referendum was not democratic.
Bob Andrews wrote:This discussion reminds me of Fitzgerald's description of his meetings with those believers of psychic phenomena: 'like conversations in Bedlam'.3rd and final warning: 7. You are free to express your views candidly and forcefully provided you remain civil. Do not use the forums to send abuse, threats, personal insults or attacks, or purposely inflammatory remarks (trolling). Do not respond to such messages.This warning will remain in force for 30 days. If there's a further breach of the rules within this period this user will be issued with an immediate and indefinite suspension. Queries or appeals relating to particular moderation decisions should be sent directly to the moderators by private message. Forum members are free to discuss moderator’s decisions on a separate thread set up for that purpose but should not discuss moderator’s decisions on the main forum. You must continue to abide by the moderators’ decisions pending the outcome of your appeal.
Reminder: 6. Do not make repeated postings of the same or similar messages to the same thread, or to multiple threads or forums (‘cross-posting’). Do not make multiple postings within a thread that could be consolidated into a single post (‘serial posting’). Do not post an excessive number of threads, posts, or private messages within a limited period of time (‘flooding’).
gnome wrote:Shame the change of venue wasn't advised sooner for as well as being advertised in the events section of this website and on our Meetup group, which can both be changed, the original National Museum venue appears in the October Socialist Standard, which can't.Someone will need to put up a sign at the Museum advising any visitors of the change of venue. BTW, are you sure the new venue isn't 29 Park Place rather than Park Road which is in another part of Cardiff entirely?My bad on both counts. Its Park Place.
I've booked a room for the next meetup at 29 Park Road, Cardiff from 12 noon to 2.00 pm on Saturday 14th October. The venue is across the road from the National Museum and there's parking available next street up or around the Civic Centre.The following items to be included on the agenda:Arrangements for candidates test.Literature.Party restructuring and reorganisation.Restructuring of Swansea BranchADM
Vin wrote:BobAndrews wrote:Mon, 25/09/2017 – 9:57am (new) Who's the babe with the red hair and shades? Bit different from the hairy, pungent feminists who at one time infested the Party.Any warning for this comment? Reminder? If not then why not?Why does this Troll receive preferential treatment?
See # 275.
Vin wrote:moderator1 wrote:Vin wrote:BobAndrews wrote:Did that ever occur to you before? Probably not, because, let's be honest, you're not too bright. Kind of a dim bulb really. The Lord Mayor of Chumpsville. You know in your heart it's true, painful as it is to admit. You are a supreme A-1 chucklehead. No you're not. You're a f**king imbecile.That's well known. I don't know anything about you. Nothing. How could I? So don't get excited The power of social media…yep.Is this acceptable moderation? The Troll received no warning. There are more. And I will be posting them here.
I posted a reminder straight after that post. Which is in line with the protocol and procedure you and others agreed to.
It is noted that you were aware of this abuse and did not issue a warning for such a serious breach.
I only issue a warning after I've issued a reminder which you and others here agreed upon to be the protocol and procedure. These changes came about because everybody, including myself, were uncomfortable with the hard moderating of issuing warnings and suspensions willy nilly.Why am I repeating all this when you are well aware of what's in place? This is trolling.
Vin wrote:BobAndrews wrote:Did that ever occur to you before? Probably not, because, let's be honest, you're not too bright. Kind of a dim bulb really. The Lord Mayor of Chumpsville. You know in your heart it's true, painful as it is to admit. You are a supreme A-1 chucklehead. No you're not. You're a f**king imbecile.That's well known. I don't know anything about you. Nothing. How could I? So don't get excited The power of social media…yep.Is this acceptable moderation? The Troll received no warning. There are more. And I will be posting them here.
I posted a reminder straight after that post. Which is in line with the protocol and procedure you and others agreed to.
Tim Kilgallon wrote:Matt wrote:Yes but the WSM_Forum is an email list and functions differently. We can put people on moderation, where their posts are screened for a period in the email lists.You are not allowed to post nor respond to hostile criticism. (You will be moderated)You are not allowed to criticise moderating decision either. (You will be moderated)Most of the members are inactive on the WSM_forum now.We can't do that moderation as in screening posts on the web forum.So the moderator has to abide by the rules of the web forum and issue warnings before suspension.The moderator should be left to deal with troublemakers and party members should resist responding to them in a similar vein.It is a simple matter to help the moderator and flag an offensive post and let the moderator deal with it, rather than attacking him and insisting he removes posters from the website.He can not do that. He can only suspend them, after warnings, as he does.Party members should and must, exercise self discipline.This would assist the moderator greatly.The problem is, and this is no fault of Brian's, that the current modertation guidance is not fit for purpose. There should be some mechanism whereby if a poster has made a posting which is so far beyond the pale, then the poster would be subject to immediate suspension. To give an extreme example, if a poster made postings insupport if ISIL, would we seeriously have to wait for three occurances to remove them from our discussion board?
The current guidance and rules are fit for purpose for dealing with spammers and trolls. For instance spammers get short shrift and are suspended immediately and reported to anti-spam. With trolls they are given every opportunity to change their behaviour when I initially issue a reminder. If that don't work then they get a warning. Bob Andrews is on his 2nd warning. LBird is currently on his 5th suspension and will face the maximum of 60 days suspension.The problem is other users feed the trolls and instead of letting me deal with such issues under the guidelines and rules assume I'm unwilling to deal with the issue and providing trolls with preferential treatment. When the fact of the matter is I have to follow our democratic procedures and protocols – agreed on here after a long discussion – and the guidelines and rules agreed on by the EC.Nevertheless, because this is an open platform – which Conference agreed on – you have to acknowledge that spammers and trolls are par for the course.
Vin wrote:Exactly my point!!. You treat trolls and spammers as you would treat legitimate users. Most moderators remove spammers and trolls as the appear. Mod said: You would like me to ignore the guidelines and rules when a particular user is not to your taste.I have no problem declaring that abusers, trolls and spammers are not to my taste. Obviously you dont mind them which is a good reason for you not to be a mod. You have ignored the rules for years with LBird and you have ignored the rules with Bob arsole. You have alway used the rules to suit yourself.I take it has escaped your notice that LBird is on an indefinite suspension – his 5th! But yet again you are making claims with no evidence. And yet again you are proving to be a distraction. I repeat "stay out of the fray" and let me get on with dealing with spammers and trolls through my remit. They will be dealt with as and when they appear on the forum and breach the rules.I have no more to say on this particular subject.
