Political parties on the forum

[????]

What's the solution? It's already getting right on my t!ts and it's only going to get worse this year. Any ideas? A seperate thread for each party? (though the tories don't even seem to bother on here).

Don't get me wrong, I'm happy with political threads and posters having viewpoints and stated affiliations such as DavidC and MamoraM - but it's all the extension of the Southwark Council debating chamber stuff that PISSES me off. Is it just me?

Personally, I'm just going to start being anatagonistic, sarcastic and aggressive...well even more than normal.

[KalamityKel]

I don't like it either. It's another free opportunity for winning favour, seeming like they (the parties concerned) care for the community, leading us in to a false sense of wanting etc. grrrr must they use the forum in such a manner? :(

I dunno *shrugs*

[SeanMacGabhann]

damned if they engage, damned if they don't

Whilst I don't want to see the place overrun with electioneering, it strikes me as as good a place as any to ask questions and judge the answers. Sneering and shite-stirring as a default option only contributes to the problem* and does nothing to help. It's all too easy to carp from the sidelines but unless you are going to roll up your sleeves and get involved yourself? what's the point?

* the problem being voter disenfranchisement, or at least that's what I read

[????]

It's not really engagement Sean, it's applying party line and party political point scoring to a local forum. Engagemant on a forum like this is either getting involved in debates in ways such as political posters we know and love do. Or offering a true service say as JB does.

It's not appearing at elections with the party line, 'telling us' from on high and slagging 'the other lot off'

They, one party, in particular are great at that from TJMPs occasional non-replying missives including false claims of success on say the school budgets success (which was apparently cross party) to the latest set of piling into a useful point of genuine political engagement with political tit-tat.

They don't know better than me, you or other forumites.... go away with their preachy we know best crap or come and engage properly. The recent stuff looks like "Strategy for South Southwark results from Brainstorm session - 'Get on EDF, undermine Liberal Democrats, tell um stuff we think they'd like to hear...free meals for all kids yup great for all that nappy valley place".

I'm probably missreading but it sometimes seems to me that you have a slightly subservient tone to the political classes I think they are largely visionless, out of touch, directed to by those that must be obeyed from on high...no wonder we don't get proper debates on Newsnight, Question Time, etc. Profesionall politicians...I spit on them.

Plus I have a bad taste in my mouth about that post about non-contact with JBarber from a newbie who has since gone...probably someone with an odd grievance but.....

[SeanMacGabhann]

"Subservient tone to the political classes" - that's an odd one, and I know you and I have touched on it before, but I genuinely fail to see a separate class lablled "political" - So I just don't buy into the same "us" and "them" thing to begin with

I do see people - not any different to you or me - who are willing to take control of the levers of power and try to make a change. As it happens I probably disagree with the people who are doing that much of the time and find the whole concept of politicing, which you describe well enough in your first few paragraphs, distasteful but equally I can see why people and parties need to do this

You can say if you like that people are abandoning the political process because of how they perceive the parties to be bickering idiots - but what I see is the reality that any party which tries to abstain from this process is judged as weak by the very people who claim to dislike it - so yeah, "the political classes" have to get their hands dirty.

So I refute completely that I am subservient to anyone - but I do respect the fact that in lieu of a better political system, this creaky democracy is as good as we have got. So unless you or anyone has any better ideas I'm not as willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater as you might be

"visionless, out of touch, directed to by those that must be obeyed from on high"

Sometimes all of these things must be true but not all of the time. and the last time this country had a party full of the opposite, it was the shambles that was Old Labour. I suspect that any party that let all of it's members dpeak at will would be judged, by we the public, as barmy and not allowed anywhere near power

So I do think that people are not visionless or out of touch, but doing the best they can within the boundaries of what is doable

I genuinely think the people of this country are by and large responsible for the current political status quo - and not any of the individuals in power

And why do you have a bad taste about the Barber/Iamhere incident? You feel he was run out of town by a mob?

[????]

I'd made the alteration before your post Sean - I didn't mean the original to be as strong by any means, hopefully it's clearer what I was thinking. They are politicians they are up there to be criticised and scrutinised MORE than us mere mortals which Is why the expense thing riled me especially the 'oh everyone's at it' tone that them good old 'metroplitan elites' seemed to adapt as defence. I've met a few reasonably famous politicians...not impressed, I dunno wot the answer is but I'm not going to just accept being told rather than engaged with or blatant idiocy because of party lines 9see drugs debate etc)

The reverse...I am suspiscious of Iamhere's providence

[SeanMacGabhann]

Whilst I definitely agree they are elected and therefore open to scrutiny, that doesn't make us mere mortals or them elevated. Fair enough you haven't been impressed by politicians you have met but is there any reason you would be? Are you expecting to be swept away on a wave of charisma ? What would have impressed you?

Nobody wants to be told rather than engaged with but when you are serving a constituency or a country then by definition a large proportion of that constituency is going to feel they have been "told" something and another part is going to feel they have been listened to whenever any change happens

I don't feel "told" anything in particular tho - I'm open to examples and I'll tell you how I feel about them. You mention drugs debate but do you think the political parties are tha authors of drug policy in this country?

As for iamhere - glad you think the same way I do

[????]

..and back to solutions for the forum

Technically they should be in the 'business' sections, especially given there marketing approach to politics! (unpractical I iknow)

Technically why should their signatures be allowed when say Sue's or Peckham Roses aren't?

As for engagement, did they have the manners to approach Admin and ask where and how they should be? I suspect not becuase given their tendancy to self importance I suspect they though we'd all be absoulutely delighted to have their politics on here. The internet and forums do have a capability to change engagement but not if it's all Pravda like.

How about a link to party websites and then just letting them on to the forum to dicsuss and even start political threads but as individuals. The tedious debates and prepepared 'stuff' about how much the council spent on paperclips can be avoided as that just end up as politicians arguing at each other with their various lines on it.

All my opinion obviously.

[Huguenot]

I share with Quids the concern about the party line approach to communication, but disagree with the perceived outcome.

I suspected Barber's original intention with his local councillor thread was to gain electoral advantage by emulating Barry Jones. In spite of that the thread emaulated Barry's contribution that regardless of intent it becaome a genuine public service.

Apart from the odd snooty comment, Barber steered clear of party political comment and mellowed to the extent that he became (almost) one of the community.

The two Labour apparatchiks also started with the party line, but quickly found themselves undone and have likewise altered their approach.

The most poor taste maneuver was to attempt to hijack the local councillor thread, and with predictable results. They were howled down and have pulled away. It ironically gave them a very poor reputation as being spiteful and petty, which wasn't going to help their chances of being elected.

So in both cases the outcome was that engagement with the forum modified their activity, and consequently made them both more accountable and more representative.

All power to that!

... and I don't think they're a business either. I think they provide public services as the most 'ED issue' possible.

[louisiana]

The one that's really getting to me is VikkiM, Victoria Mills. Any opportunity to slag off an opponent, and she's in there, like some crazed Mrs Rochester on a party political paranoia jag.

I shall now definitely *not* be voting Labour. Well done Victoria, you take the gold star for 'behaviour likely bring politicians into disrepute' (6)

[PeckhamRose]

I certainly think anyone who has political power ie a councillor or MP or someone who is in their post thanks to a political party should be made to say so (in their signature?).

I have enjoyed reading the posts above and learned from them.

[Administrator]

We have not really made a decision on what to do on the forum about the political parties. If they can come on here and debate about East Dulwich issues then that is fine, but we do not want them advertising and electioneering (someone has been told off for this already, and duly apologised). The James Barber thread is actually useful to people in East Dulwich and he knows not to use it to advertise politics, it is simply to help people in East Dulwich.

We cannot monitor all threads so if you notice blatant advertising please do report it, it is appreciated.

[????]

Thanks for the update and guidance Admin, cheers

[Moos]

Perhaps a formal debate in the Drawing Room closer to the elections would be useful and interesting?

[louisiana]

Something like an Oxford Union debate perchance Moos? :-S

[Moos]

Dunno louisiana, never been to one. :)

But since the parties appear to have a sincere desire to discuss topics of national importance and/or bash the living daylights out of one another, why not a debate?

Alternatively, start a Manifesto thread on which each party could submit a piece of no more than 1000 words, following which forumites could submit questions to the Chair who could co-ordinate a Q&A session, with each party being given the opportunity to answer each of the questions.

[louisiana]

Moos Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Dunno louisiana, never been to one. :)

>

> But since the parties appear to have a sincere

> desire to discuss topics of national importance

> and/or bash the living daylights out of one

> another, why not a debate?

So maybe more like world mudwrestling as seen on certain TV channels :))

>

> Alternatively, start a Manifesto thread on which

> each party could submit a piece of no more than

> 1000 words, following which forumites could submit

> questions to the Chair who could co-ordinate a Q&A

> session, with each party being given the

> opportunity to answer each of the questions.

[????]

I really like moos' manifesto idea. How about it admin?..... but 500 words please :))

[KalamityKel]

And a ban on abbreviations :)

[The Chair]

I have noted the above suggestion and had had the same thought myself.

Elections are not until May 6th so a bit closer to the time I shall set up such a thread for formal electioneering to be conducted. I need to have a think about formatting first though.

Thank you for your support.

[tomchance]

Administrator, presumably this means no mention of political parties in signatures, elected politicians included? I got rapped on the knuckles for this and have left my signature out since, but would appreciate a clarification.

[Huguenot]

Tom, chap, I do think it's not going to further your chances of electoral success by attempting to wheedle a 'plug' on a technicality.

You mentioned on one of the threads that you didn't want to let on you were a candidate for the Green party. This is simply deception and misrepresentation. That's all.

That you attempted it at all possibly implies that you believe manipulation to be reasonable. I'm sure you don't, it's called a 'gaffe'.

I'd love to debate Green Party local and national policies. Why don't you go to the Drawing Room and start a thread called 'Green Party local and national policies'? The recent 'parties vs policies' thread reveals that most people share your agenda, so you won't be unwelcome. Please be sure to declare your interest!

[KalamityKel]

I was thinking a similar thing with regards to Toms's thread... perhaps you may want to consider re-naming it to something a little more directed to your cause? Seeing as other parties are doing similar things without admin controlling them (no negative reflection meant admin) I don't see why there should be a problem

[tomchance]

Huguenot, I am neither trying to wheedle a plug nor deceive anyone, I'm not sure where that hostility comes from.

Which thread are you referring to when you say that I tried to deceive people?

I'm asking not because I want to while away my evenings plugging my candidacy, or debating every aspect of Green Party policy, but because I sometimes find this forum a useful place to exchange views and don't want to get on people's nerves.

[KalamityKel]

Administrator Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We have not really made a decision on what to do

> on the forum about the political parties. If they

> can come on here and debate about East Dulwich

> issues then that is fine, but we do not want them

> advertising and electioneering (someone has been

> told off for this already, and duly apologised).

> The James Barber thread is actually useful to

> people in East Dulwich and he knows not to use it

> to advertise politics, it is simply to help people

> in East Dulwich.

>

> We cannot monitor all threads so if you notice

> blatant advertising please do report it, it is

> appreciated.

VikkiM 's constant advertising at the end of each post adding a link to a direct link... As signatures were stopped is this particularly fair to others?

I have already reported this but I see the user still with links.