Brian Lacky spreading BS on another forum

[The Red Next Door]

http://www.revforum.com/showthread.php?309-Atlee-Gets-Banned-for-Heroic-Efforts I knew this wasn't the last we will here from him.

[Communist]

http://www.revforum.com/showthread.php?309-Atlee-Gets-Banned-for-Heroic-Efforts I knew this wasn't the last we will here from him.
To Chit Chat, from Politics.

Moved.

.

[AK]

What the shit is revforum? It looks to me like revleft's deformed parasitic unborn twin.

Is there any history between the two sites?

[The Red Next Door]

It site form by people who want to create a democratically run forum instead of having an anarchist dictated bureaucracy with Lazy administrators and authoritative people like q from what i heard, he got the cc shut down, because they were too critical.

[Jazzratt]

AHAHAHAHAHA. Oh wow. I wish I'd seen that site before. I wonder how long it will be before it just peters out.

[The Red Next Door]

AHAHAHAHAHA. Oh wow. I wish I'd seen that site before. I wonder how long it will be before it just peters out.




To give a short answer to your question which goes to the heart of the matter: we're democratic in the fullest sense of the word.

In other words, any member of this community is not just a "guest" on the forum of some "owner", but they are themselves co-owners of the community. This is translated in a fully democratically run community administration.

It's pretty simple: we just believe that an active member of a community who has contributed so much of their time to building it should have the same rights as the person who put up the money to buy the place to begin with. Why? Because it is due to these active members and the time they have selflessly given for the betterment of the community that the community exists as it does in the first place. The "owners" are a non-entity, in essence, for without an active membership they are nothing.

So yeah, that's the main principle which sets us apart.

Will it attract enough people to become successful? I don't know. I hope so and I believe it has a pretty decent chance of succeeding as long as we manage to attract some high quality active members who become involved in building the community more (not that we don't already have some high quality people!), but you can never tell anything with certainty.

It does seem very logical to me for people on the revolutionary left to want to be part of a community that they have inalienable rights on and actually co-own, though. So if it does fail, it would be due to our inability to spread the message successfully instead of any faults with the underlying principles on which this community is based.

quote by revforum

[Wanted Man]

Oh, is that how the "clone forum" ended up? That's kind of nice, actually. Some cool people post there. I never got around to participating in it in the end. Too much other shit to worry at the time. I hope they'll do well. It seems to me that they don't really care about being the biggest or "successful" in that aspect.

What I don't agree with is that some people left Revleft forever to make some kind of statement. It doesn't make much of a difference, and it gets a bit embarrassing when some of them come back eventually. Of course, there were also those who had no choice in the matter because they were banned from here. Fair play to them.

Anyway, I hope they won't get completely swamped by fruitcakes like Atlee. Some people do deserve to get banned.

[gorillafuck]

I kind of want someone to explain to them why Atlee was banned (which was for being very dishonest) but I also feel like it's not worth it at all.

[chegitz guevara]

Someone did.

[Ele'ill]

RevLeft is a sweet place, but once they turn on you they are like a pack of wolves. And who knew that Florida was such a hot bed of Socialism? Thanks for introducing me to that.

I found this place through your Christian Social and Democracy Party site.

(PS if you guys want me off of here--just let me know. )



:laugh::laugh::laugh:

[Ele'ill]

It won't peter out- they'll see what happens when they don't restrict or ban people.

[Widerstand]

They need to get their design changed, shit's ugly as hell :(

[#FF0000]

I kind of want someone to explain to them why Atlee was banned (which was for being very dishonest) but I also feel like it's not worth it at all.

He posted someone's personal info.

[Ele'ill]

quote by revforum


Yeah, everyone is an owner.

It dosn't work that way on the world wild web. Let them get a couple hundred users and they'll find out what a democratic 'worker owned worker run' website looks like when there's no genuine visibility as to who is joining or any form of panel review of what their intentions are.

The internet is a horrible example of real life.


It site form by people who want to create a democratically run forum instead of having an anarchist dictated bureaucracy with Lazy administrators and authoritative people like q from what i heard, he got the cc shut down, because they were too critical.


This isn't an anarchist dictated bureaucracy..etc

This is a forum on the internet.

The internet as it is- with various cultures the way they are- require certain limitations. In real life I'd shake your hand and give you my name- on here? Fuck that shit.

[Widerstand]

Yeah, everyone is an owner.

It dosn't work that way on the world wild web. Let them get a couple hundred users and they'll find out what a democratic 'worker owned worker run' website looks like when there's no genuine visibility as to who is joining or any form of panel review of what their intentions are.

The internet is a horrible example of real life.




This isn't an anarchist dictated bureaucracy..etc

This is a forum on the internet.

The internet as it is- with various cultures the way they are- require certain limitations. In real life I'd shake your hand and give you my name- on here? Fuck that shit.

This. Democracy fails when you are totally anonymous, can have multiple accounts and can't be excluded because of Dynamic IPs/Proxys.

[gorillafuck]

He posted someone's personal info.
Oh, really? I thought it was because he was a dishonest nut. I guess those were just little sidenote aspects of him.:laugh:

[synthesis]

he got the cc shut down, because they were too critical.

That's not what happened.

[synthesis]

Seriously, though, what the fuck is wrong with this guy?

Someone tells him he was banned for being anti-choice, and he says:


Yep, I was for withering away the state control over the institution of marriage which is socialist principle, but it seems someone had been using the party platform as a purity test which is hateful intent.

:confused:

Then someone argues that it was also for "trying to defend himself for too long," and he adds:


Dumb people cannot understand why they loose their hand when poking the bear with a stick. Smart people know better and watch from a distance. A bear will defend itself until death.

The first one made no fucking sense, but isn't this literally the opposite of what he intends it to mean? Wasn't he the one poking the bear with a stick?

[Chambered Word]

Atlee Gets Banned for Heroic Efforts

Full of himself. :rolleyes:

[Il Medico]

I am going to say something extremely controversial, so brace yourselves:

Who gives a flying fuck?

[Il Medico]

Who gives a flying fuck?
No one.

[ZeroNowhere]

I must say, I love the 'True Socialists' thread they made there. Research, smeasearch!

[Adi Shankara]

This. Democracy fails when you are totally anonymous, can have multiple accounts and can't be excluded because of Dynamic IPs/Proxys.

democracy fails when a user has more say than another user...just like in real life.

[Widerstand]

democracy fails when a user has more say than another user...just like in real life.

Should everyone have equal say on all matters, no matter it actually affects them or they actually have a clue what they are talking about or not?

[synthesis]

Who judges whether or not someone else has a clue what they're talking about? And who judges them?

[Widerstand]

Who judges whether or not someone else has a clue what they're talking about? And who judges them?

What I was hinting at was a form of Technocracy. I don't particularly support Technocracy though.

[Ele'ill]

democracy fails when a user has more say than another user...just like in real life.

What is a 'say'?

In a community if someone has more 'say' but no more power than anybody else that 'say' is generally in the form of people looking up to that person because that person is the most experienced- that person has proven with their ideas-presented that they are competent and their thoughts are sound enough to positively benefit everybody involved. Those people that vote against that person's idea would perhaps need to have their situation and proposals looked at as well-