[SocialistPunk]

Cheers Adam,I get it now. I was probably being a bit pedantic, as you referred to the word by itself and not with a "The" in front of it.I guess as a young lad growing up in the nineteen eighties the word holocaust was synonomous with the threat of nuclear war, so I never saw the horrors the Nazis inflicted on Jewish people as well as others unlucky enough to be seen as inferior, as having an exclusive religious association with the word itself. I saw and still see it as mass slaughter of people by people, whether by fire or any other means.As to the punishment thing, I remember seeing a documentary a few years back in which a concentration camp surviver said that his experience made him lose his faith, as he couldn't accept god allowing such horror to take place. I guess it made the idea of being one of gods chosen people seem a little hollow. Though he still continued to practice the religion to honour the memory of those who died.

[SocialistPunk]

ALB wrote:

Personally I don't like the word "holocaust" because of its religious connotations and don't think much of "Holocaust Day" either as that leaves out the much greater number of others who got killed.  What would be more appropriate would be a World Slaughter Day.

Hi Adam,Was wondering what you mean by the religious connotations of the word holocaust? 

[SocialistPunk]

But another song I like by Black Sabbath is more appropriate  to us lot, and the last line in the second verse sums up Dylan fairly well. But I guess Dylan is all grown-up and has left the politics of idealistic youth behind and focuses on the practicalities of the real world. Children of the GraveRevolution in their minds – the children start to marchAgainst the world which they have to live inOh! The hate that's in their heartsThey're tired of being pushed around and told just what to doThey'll fight the world until they've won and love comes flowing throughChildren of tomorrow live in the tears that fall todayWill the sunrise of tomorrow bring in peace in any way?Must the world live in the shadow of atomic fear?Can they win the fight for peace or will they disappear?So you children of the world, listen to what I sayIf you want a better place to live in, spread the words todayShow the world that love is still alive, you must be braveOr you children of today are Children of the Grave, Yeah! 

[SocialistPunk]

Never was a fan of Black Sabbath, but "War Pigs" is one of a handful of their songs I like.It very aptly mixes "satanic" horror imagery  with the subject matter. Generals gathered in their massesJust like witches at black massesEvil minds that plot destructionSorcerers of death's constructionIn the fields the bodies burningAs the war machine keeps turningDeath and hatred to mankindPoisoning their brainwashed mindsOh lord yeah!Politicians hide themselves awayThey only started the warWhy should they go out to fight?They leave that role to the poorTime will tell on their power mindsMaking war just for funTreating people just like pawns in chessWait 'til their judgement day comesYeah!Now in darkness world stops turningAshes where the bodies burningNo more war pigs at the powerHand of God has struck the hourDay of judgement, God is callingOn their knees the war pig's crawlingBegging mercy for their sinsSatan laughing spreads his wingsoh lord yeah! 

[SocialistPunk]

Vin wrote:

According to the 'Rolling Stone' Bob has a solution to unemployment.Let the billionaires step up to the mark and employ them!I thought I liked Bob Dylan but he has turned into a fucking idiot. Very revolutionary: Let the rich make profits out of the poor by using them. Fuck off Bob 

Spot on Vin, he's just another conservative, small minded, dupe. Seems all he can see for the majority of humanity, is employment. Go to work, get paid, get drunk and get laid on the weekend and then start all over again, that is if ya lucky enough to keep the job the kindly capitalists have provided for ya. What a visionary.I know very little about the bloke and his artistic contributions, was he ever some sort of revolutionary poet, musician?

[SocialistPunk]

Vin wrote:

I have started this thread as my previous one has been deleted.Russell Brand has seen the Party's video. I tweeted it to his 'Trews' twitter account and it was made a 'favourite'.  

Which Party video do you mean? Is it the euro election one?I also noticed the weird comment made by DJP, but I guess we'll never find out what was meant by it.     

[SocialistPunk]

Watch it ALB, the SPGB is already on some bizarre Islamic extremist groups watch list, claiming you lot (not me Mo' I aint one of them evil, baby eating atheists, honest) are part of the evil atheist illuminati or something along those paranoid lines.

[SocialistPunk]

Thanks for getting back moderator 1, very much appreciated.I'm not trying to tie down moderators, I just think once a moderator has made a decision regarding what constitutes a breach of forum rules, certain standard procedures could be adopted for most "punishments". Serious consideration in the form of indefinite suspensions or total forum bans, being left for the most serious breaches of abuse or legally suspect posting, spamming etc.I've already said that a standard procedure might make it easier for mods' and should help reduce accusations of bias, and anything to make a moderators job more tolerable can only be a good thing, surely.What thread should be used for any further suggestions regarding moderation? 

[SocialistPunk]

duncan lucas wrote:

I suggest you come and live in Scotland you are living in "book world "  and tal;king semantics I am talking reality . Socialism will get  nowhere if it lives in Idealism land  I dont need to read books I spent my life reading them only action is called for  I was the poorest in my street -suffered  from malutrician fainted in the school playground -served a 5 year apprenticeship on the CLyde as a maintenance engineer worked in many jobs including living in England the vast majority of English people put their share prices before humanity and vote in Cameron and co if not new labour -AKA new Tory both cut back welfare for the poor /sick/old Why dont English people not vote for Socialism ?? because of selfishness ,not SCptland 83 % are Socialist. and hate Cameron millionaire BUT they have sense of reality they believe in capitalism WITH A SMALL c . What you are doing is playing into the hands of the NWO /Banksters of divide and conquer and it works . I didnt  read about Socialism I lived it !

Hi Duncan,I was wondering what you mean by the phrase I've highlighted in bold?

[SocialistPunk]

At the risk of being "off topic", the statement below comes from the guidelines for moderators, from the link found in the  "Indefinite Suspensions" thread, post #11.11.  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.

[SocialistPunk]

Thanks once more for replying Mod 1, much appreciated. I'm not having a go at your moderation, just pointing out a potential flaw or two in the system, or to put it more accurately, lack of a standard procedure. You say that a standard procedure will be put in place, if and when other volunteers come forward to lend a hand. That sounds great, if a little lacking in foresight given the lessons of the past, except the actual guidelines refer to "moderators", the plural not singular. That to me suggests the guidelines were intended to cover all moderators, whether operating singularly on Party sites or in a team.  The three strikes and your on indefinite suspension system, is in use on this forum. I would be interested to know what the other Party sites are using, if anyone knows?

[SocialistPunk]

Thanks for getting back to me Mod' 1.I'm glad there are some guidelines for moderators, and I've used the link provided by Admin, #11 (thanks Admin), to read through them. I was a bit surprised to find that they are particularly vague when it comes to any system of dealing with rule enforcement.I understand the role of the moderator is to interpret whether or not forum rules have been broken, but I had thought some sort of system regarding warnings and suspensions would have been put in place, a standard procedure, for all moderators to follow with regards warnings and suspensions.Without a standard procedure for warnings and suspensions it is conceivable two moderators could adopt different practices regarding moderation. For example one moderator may issue more reminders before launching into warnings, while another may go straight into warnings. Then there is the issue of how many warnings and length of suspensions for similar breaches that again could differ between moderators. Imagine the potential for a messy situation whereby two moderators with different systems working different shifts, come into contact with the same offender. Does the second moderator continue with the first moderators system or use their own? With no standard procedure there is no consistency and it should be obvious to most that in the absence of consistency there is potential for confusion, misunderstandings and problems. When it comes to interpreting what is or isn't a rule breach is of course up to the individual moderator/s. Of course some will disagree with moderator interpretations of what constitutes a rule breach, that is inevitable. However with no standard procedure in place for dealing with rule breaches, moderators are left further open for potential accusations of bias. In my opinion that is something that could and should be reduced wherever possible. I might have missed something, but in the link to the guidelines for moderators, provided by Admin, I found no reference to any standard procedure. There is also the possibility that I'm talking a load of bollocks. If I am I would appreciate a heads up. 

[SocialistPunk]

moderator1 wrote:

SocialistPunk wrote:

Weirdly I was not aware of Vin's indefinite suspension when I set this thread up. It was intended with reference to LBirds recent suspension as a result of his spat with Vin.However the original question about indefinite suspensions, how long they last and how that is determined, still stands. There must be some structure that is used to determine the length of a suspension? It can't be an arbitrary process, surely?

Each suspension is determined on what is appropriate and acceptable under the given circumstances.  All posters who are supended are notified by email of their suspension and the process, if they are unaware of it, for lodging a complaint against the suspension.

Ok, so what is deemed "appropriate and acceptable"?Exactly how do moderators decide on what is acceptable, when it comes to suspension times, of different posting violations. Being "off topic" is a very mild violation, verbal abuse is more serious and then worse still there are threats. Then there are what could be described as inbetween violations such as low level "trolling". Then what about repeat offenders of "off topic" or low level "trolling". Do repeat offenders receive escalating suspension times?If I were a moderator I would be extremely uncomfortable with the idea that length of suspensions were left up to my discretion, without any guidelines.Take a hypothetical case of a forum member being suspended previously for derailing a thread with "off topic" posting, not quite sure how one person derails a thread with "off topic" posting, but for the sake of argument lets say they can. They serve their time, whatever is deemed appropriate. They come back and start once more to single handedly derail threads. They just wont shut up and no matter how much other members argue with them and tell them to go away, they continue. A number of members complain, some even call for the offender to be banned altogether. So faced with the single handed thread derailer up to their old tricks, the moderator has to suspend them again.Now, what length of suspension is appropriate for a single handed, serial, thread derailer? Does a moderator take into consideration the personal views of some forum members, in determining the length of suspension? What about other offences, how many times they were warned over what length of time, how many previous suspensions etc? Without guidelines to work within, sentencing becomes an ad hoc affair, or in other words "appropriate and acceptable under the given circumstances". But as we all know, what is "appropriate and acceptable" to some is not to others. Hence the need for agreed guidelines.

[SocialistPunk]

moderator1 wrote:

SocialistPunk wrote:

Weirdly I was not aware of Vin's indefinite suspension when I set this thread up. It was intended with reference to LBirds recent suspension as a result of his spat with Vin.However the original question about indefinite suspensions, how long they last and how that is determined, still stands. There must be some structure that is used to determine the length of a suspension? It can't be an arbitrary process, surely?

Each suspension is determined on what is appropriate and acceptable under the given circumstances.  All posters who are supended are notified by email of their suspension and the process, if they are unaware of it, for lodging a complaint against the suspension.

Arbitrary it is then.

[SocialistPunk]

Weirdly I was not aware of Vin's indefinite suspension when I set this thread up. It was intended with reference to LBirds recent suspension as a result of his spat with Vin.However the original question about indefinite suspensions, how long they last and how that is determined, still stands. There must be some structure that is used to determine the length of a suspension? It can't be an arbitrary process, surely?

[Author]

Posts