A Critique of the CC

[NovelGentry]

I'm placing this piece in Politics, because essentially that is what it is.

A Critique of the CC and the Virtual Politics of Revolutionary Left.

This is not a country! The argument rings loud, as if the strength of it could somehow be increased with the force and repetition with which it occurs. What a confusing and strange argument it is though, not by the very nature of it, but by the nature of those who would use it, a group of people who in all other instances are to see national borders as an unnecessary abstraction and division.

What are they saying with this? Without a country a community cannot exist? That no social relations exist so long as no such false-borders are drawn? That there is no measurable productive force so long as there is no map on which to draw lines?

Certainly they are right though, it is not a country. Instead, for the first time in our known history of man we have overcome these separations with such ease, and to such a significant degree, that in at least one realm of social interaction, they mean very little. And what do our proponents make of this new found social interaction... it is not a country. Certainly it is not, but let us be thankful of that.

We are, however, a community and we do have a society or at least a portion of such, isolated in our tiny virtual world... and we do have government. We have the equivalent of material governance, founded within the technical limitation of our software, and we have the equivalent of social governance, founded in what has so unquestionably come to be known as the Commie Club.

We too have labor. What are the members if not builders of the community? We too advance our means of production. Both the static means, the productive force of the software itself, and our dynamic means, the members, who with time develop the community to such a great extent that the resources for the generations to follow become more and more massive.

If most forums are an aristocracy, with a king, the forum owner, his noblemen, the admins, and their knights, the moderators, what is the commie club?

With its advancement, its increase in population, so too did there need to be an increase in other aspects of the board. To quote the guidelines, "Malte couldn't possibly do it all on his own." This very inherent advancement of which the very functionality of the board depended was not spawned from the whim of a single man, or even multiple men, but as sheer necessity. An advancement in order to achieve, with the increase in population, and the further division of labor, a working, and feasible governance.

This very real limitation of the productive forces, both static and dynamic, demands at any given time the most suitable environment for it's advancement. This is true in both in the material world and, as we have seen, our virtual world.

What has developed from this is an advancement in the "delegation of powers." We are sure to note that the commie club certainly holds within it's hands the general flow of society, or at least, the illusion of such. However, as anyone with certain age here will tell you, it is those who control those static means, the software itself... the admins, the mods, etc... it is those who hold the real power. The extent of the CC's power is one that can exact no real change.

I have been reproached for being a maniac; having a level of insanity, one which they will tell you influences me to want to "make great change within the system, and yet the same time, refuse to join the means by which to do this. How does he expect to do anything if he doesn't join the CC!"

What is this reformist attitude? Do we pronounce our solution to bourgeois democracy and their control over those static means of production is founded within that very same democracy that protects it? What is so insane about recognizing these structures for what they are? We are quite capable of realizing this outside of our virtual society, but incapable of seeing it within? No doubt, it is not a country -- but when was such a thing dependent on such a petty abstraction?

In what twisted fantasy does the CC and the prevailing bourgeois superstructure's arguments make any sense in the minds of so-called revolutionaries? Only in those minds which are so alienated by their division that they have lost a good part, if not all of their consciousness.

We have of course, outgrown the confines of the CC. Like so many social relations of our real past, we have developed at a rate which demands we shed this old structure. It has become most visible with the recent attempts we have made to take this power: the study group and the division of chit chat poll.

To what strange event do we owe this rapid advancement? To the CC of course. As in real life it is the rapid advancement of capitalism that produces the conditions for it's own destruction, it is too the rapid advancement from the CC which has set us so far head of other forums. So far ahead of even our own.

And yet our reactionary tendencies remain some of the highest. By one CC member's accounts/opinion, it is accurate to say that the majority of the CC's discussions are negative, as opposed to positive discussions such as those on whether or not a member should be inducted. At boards with half of our population it is not uncommon to find three moderators per forum, a host of administrators who have embedded themselves into the community and keep one another in check. And yet another CC member claimed they did not feel it was uncommon for certain members to be favored because of their existing position.

Has the CC achieved such a level of alienation that not only has the consciousness of it's general member been driven into the ground, but that it too cannot recognize its own pitfalls? We are told no; we are told that the down-sides of it's structure are recognized even amongst it members, yet when we seek to do anything about it or to even discuss it, we are attacked, sometimes viciously and humiliatingly by it's most hallowed protectors -- if not openly, than privately.

Do we know a solution? Is there a solution? I believe there is, and I will be more than willing to share it, so long we can keep this topic open. Show your support, CC and non-CC members alike by voicing in your response that you want this thread to remain open. Wait, and I will submit my proposal, and then you can rightfully decide whether or not I am a maniac.

[coda]

<>

[OleMarxco]

Blah-blah-blah: My two cents, and some after-fact comment.
1. Yes, I know this is not a country, this is a forum. SO WHAT?
2. We still need to stand as an example and practice what we preach.
THAT WAS PRETTY FUCKING HARD WAS IT? Power to every leftist at
registration, dictatorship of the users unlimited&#33; NO RULES&#33; :D

[Redmau5]

This whole CC business is getting out of hand. What the fuck is the problem with the CC ? I personally see no problem with it. It just seems people are getting a bit over-dramatic about it.

[FriedFrog]

I would like this thread to stay open. I may not have an experience of how this board is run, but what Novel says makes sense and I agree with it.

[RedStarOverChina]

I agree. Like I said before, I think we should let every leftist with over 100 posts participate. (spammers are another issue.)

Even if there are a few people who act insensitively(which has been an argument against democracy and anarchy for centuries), the effect of it will be dimished by the participation of the mass majority who are conscientious people.

I dont see any valid argument against this.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I want to know what NovelGentry proposes instead of the CC. It must be good, as it should ensure that cappie wankers don&#39;t run amok and that dedicated leftists get to make an impact.

[Sabocat]

Well, there&#39;s five minutes of my life I&#39;m not going to get back.


I believe Shakespeare may have said it best with the name of the play:

Much Ado About Nothing.

[RedStarOverChina]

"To thine own self be true".

[RedStarOverChina]

It took u five minutes to type that?

well if its nothing important why did u guys establish these rules in the first place?

[Edelweiss]

To compare this message board to a bougeois society with "dynamic and static means of productios" is utterly absurd and pure nonsense, and yes, shows a certain degree of insanity on your side, and it shows that you just spend too much time on the Internet. You have no idea what the CC is about, because you where never really part of it.
I&#39;m curious though for your suggestions, although I already know that they are not implementable.

[RedStarOverChina]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2005, 05:39 PM
I agree. Like I said before, I think we should let every leftist with over 100 posts participate. (spammers are another issue.)

Even if there are a few people who act insensitively(which has been an argument against democracy and anarchy for centuries), the effect of it will be dimished by the participation of the mass majority who are conscientious people.

I dont see any valid argument against this.
how is it not implementable?

[NovelGentry]

To compare this message board to a bougeois society with "dynamic and static means of productios" is utterly absurd and pure nonsense, and yes, shows a certain degree of insanity on your side, and it shows that you just spend too much time on the Internet. You have no idea what the CC is about, because you where never really part of it.
I&#39;m curious though for your suggestions, although I already know that they are not implementable.

That&#39;s a little unfair... maybe it&#39;s just my insanity, but is that really much different than politicians telling you that you have no idea what the government is about because you were never really a part of it? Do we have to experience bourgeois democracy from the inside before being able to recognize it, as well as it&#39;s flaws?

[NovelGentry]

how is it implementable?

His solution is not implementable. If you agree with my reasoning in the article it is very much because we have a limitation in the static means of production. We can only advance the board so much. If there was some dynamic way to push ideas and develop the board, that is, if the software was capable of such a thing, then it may be possible.

My proposition too includes changed to the boards. Let&#39;s be realistic about one thing, if this is a Marxist analysis the one thing that it is missing is the advance in our equivalent material means of production, the software itself. So this is not a double standard by any means, what I propose will require changes to the software -- well more, additions to it. To advance it to make sense with the type of organization I speak of.

[RedStarOverChina]

yeah i miss things when i type. I meant not implementable.


I dont think about it in economical terms but more practical ones. Doesnt matter what u say people are not happy with the way it is. People in the CC cant tell them: "everything is good and u are happy". It&#39;s up for everyone to decide.

[YKTMX]

Stupid.

To call the divide between cc member and non-cc members a "social relation" is just ridicilous.

One, because CC membership is open to anyone who is a revolutionary and two, CC members are subject the exact same rules as non-CC members.

In fact, what NG doesn&#39;t see is that is that, if the CC mirrors any &#39;real world&#39; institution then it is Soviets. What are soviets but the executive bodies of the most class conscious members of the working class, whose members are instantly recallable?

The CC is a neccessity for the smooth running of the forum. Not because we believe "power" is a neccessary evil but because things need to be administrated for them to function. The diffirence is that our administration is democratic and open to all - all can become administrators.

Obviously NG is partaking in some intellectual mastorbation here and he&#39;s enjoying himself. Nevertheless, almost verbatim, everything he avers is bollocks.

YKTMX

[NovelGentry]

yeah i miss things when i type. I meant not implementable.


I dont think about it in economical terms but more practical ones. Doesnt matter what u say people are not happy with the way it is. People in the CC cant tell them: "everything is good and u are happy". It&#39;s up for everyone to decide.

I do agree that it is very much a practical and conscious decision that belongs to the members of this board (if I didn&#39;t agree with that, I wouldn&#39;t have written the article in the first place).

What I was trying to figure out more, is how it ended up this way. Some may consider them poor analogies or insanity, but I think it&#39;s quite accurate to say we are "building" something here, and that there are definitive productive forces, namely the people themselves, who even if they are not building the resources, may actually contribute to the running of the community itself. For example, myself, who was for so long a server administrator -- attempting to ensure and fix things when they broke. To those that offered the new graphics when we underwent the name change. To those that write for the newsletter... to a whole host of people who generally make this community worth visiting.

Essentially I was trying to understand what made the board develop in the way it did. And if you analyze those things we&#39;ve built in the past, including submissions on the rest of che-lives, you can see that we&#39;ve broken out of the traditional methods already with the commie club. The question is whether or not we can take it further -- I believe we can.

[NovelGentry]

What are soviets but the executive bodies of the most class conscious members of the working class, whose members are instantly recallable?

I wasn&#39;t aware we could recall CC members. To my understanding only CC members can recall CC members.


The CC is a neccessity for the smooth running of the forum.

Just as congress/parlaiment is a necessity for the smooth running of the country?

No... it is not.


Not because we believe "power" is a neccessary evil but because things need to be administrated for them to function.

And they can be administered by the people.


The diffirence is that our administration is democratic and open to all - all can become administrators.

It appears that way, I will admit. At first glance it truly does appear that way.

[coda]

<.>

[Edelweiss]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 01:04 AM

To compare this message board to a bougeois society with "dynamic and static means of productios" is utterly absurd and pure nonsense, and yes, shows a certain degree of insanity on your side, and it shows that you just spend too much time on the Internet. You have no idea what the CC is about, because you where never really part of it.
I&#39;m curious though for your suggestions, although I already know that they are not implementable.

That&#39;s a little unfair... maybe it&#39;s just my insanity, but is that really much different than politicians telling you that you have no idea what the government is about because you were never really a part of it? Do we have to experience bourgeois democracy from the inside before being able to recognize it, as well as it&#39;s flaws?
Your "Marxist analysis" of RevLeft is kind of originel, but very inaccurate and just absurd at the same time.
In no way you can compare the CC to a borgeois government, or the RevLeft community to a borgeois democracy. RevLeft is a mesage board on the Internet. It&#39;s purpose is communication, discusion and education, which should benefit the anti-capitalist and anti-fascist resistance in real live, on a polemic sidenote I could say, something you lack of, which probaply is the cause of all that nonsense.
RevLeft can&#39;t be and shouldn&#39;t be some virtual simulation game of a communist society.

[YKTMX]

To my understanding only CC members can recall CC members.


Obviously. Does one let Right SR&#39;s vote to remove Bolsheviks from the Soviet? Of course not. The point is that the CC doesn&#39;t represent a social relations because its interests are the same as the other board members.


Just as congress/parlaiment is a necessity for the smooth running of the country?


No, just like the Congress of Soviets is neccessary for the running of a country.



And they can be administered by the people.



It is though. I&#39;m not sure of the numbers, but, I&#39;m sure CC members represent a majority of the regular posters.


appears that way, I will admit. At first glance it truly does appear that way

Mainly because it is that way.

[NovelGentry]

on a polemic sidenote I could say, something you lack of, which probaply is the cause of all that nonsense.

From the article:


We are told no; we are told that the down-sides of it&#39;s structure are recognized even amongst it members, yet when we seek to do anything about it or to even discuss it, we are attacked, sometimes viciously and humiliatingly by it&#39;s most hallowed protectors -- if not openly, than privately.

But go ahead, I&#39;m all ears.

[YKTMX]

recalled with an icepick?

I&#39;m not sure what you mean, comrade. Obviously, I see the reference but I&#39;m not certain what you&#39;re getting at.

[coda]

<>

[RedStarOverChina]

I&#39;m sure CC members represent a majority of the regular posters.

if the "irregular posters" can participate in decision making we can encourage them to post more.

[NovelGentry]

Obviously. Does one let Right SR&#39;s vote to remove Bolsheviks from the Soviet? Of course not. The point is that the CC doesn&#39;t represent a social relations because its interests are the same as the other board members.

Well if that was true then why is this conversation occuring?


No, just like the Congress of Soviets is neccessary for the running of a country.

No doubt... ... ...


It is though. I&#39;m not sure of the numbers, but, I&#39;m sure CC members represent a majority of the regular posters.

Saying the CC administers the ongoings of this site is something of a fallacy. Might I ask, did the CC vote on the marxists.org issue for the study group?


Mainly because it is that way.

No doubt again... ... ...

There are plenty past administrative "curiosities" which I have questioned and brought into the light. On one particular occasion I questioned the nature of a member&#39;s restriction, to which the admin who restricted him could supply me with no details on the CC votes, etc... after asking for enough of these details the particular admin finally agreed to unrestrict the person -- doing so apparently with no CC authorization. So what am I to think of such power? If the admin was not accountable for the unrestricting of this member, and s/he could answer no details on the restriction, was I to somehow believe that the proper course of action was taken here?

Bringing such infringements to "higher authority" yields absolutely no change either. Believe me, I&#39;ve tried that too.

Maybe we should recall the time I questioned whether or not we could get a restriction based on sexist remarks by a supposed female mostmodern feminist on the board. There was a small response that no such infringement had really taken place, common arguments included things to the effect that the patriarchal nature of our society makes it impossible for such comments to be viewed as sexism. Upon revealing this new user as a troll and a double account, the attitude promptly changed -- people weren&#39;t just saying to ban the user because of that, but now all the sudden the remarks were sexist.

[YKTMX]

Well if that was true then why is this conversation occuring?


Good question.


There are plenty past administrative "curiosities" which I have questioned and brought into the light.

I&#39;m not aware of those examples to be honest, so I can&#39;t comment.

[Edelweiss]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 01:42 AM
But, Malte, isn&#39;t is trying to or was intended to virutally simulate a Democracy?
No&#33; As YNTMX pointed out, it&#39;s intended to run of the forum in a smooth way. The CC is a dynamic process, which alyways envolves. It began as a forum for right-winger free debate, and developed to some kind of member&#39;s embassy to a co-managemnt system of "regular members". That the forum is private obviesly has security reasons. The CC allows a degree of member&#39;s co-management which you won&#39;t find on any other Internet mesage board.
I&#39;m curious how Gent will set up a system where everyone can took part in the admin work, which i guess means everyone can actually "push the triggers" without that the board would be hijacked by someone in a short period of time...

[coda]

<>

[Edelweiss]

Again what you say makes no sense at all, Gent. The CC is part of the self-regulating process of the community. If you have questions about a restriction, you can bring it up there, and discuss it. It will most likely end up in a vote. But his highness prefers to write pompous pamphlets about the bads of the CC instead.

[Edelweiss]

There was my favorite one-- the member who was getting kicked from cc for who knows what.. after he donated money to keep the site going&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

I have no idea about whom you speak, but I guess your idea is than that you can buy a CC membership?&#33;

[NovelGentry]

The CC is part of the self-regulating process of the community. If you have questions about a restriction, you can bring it up there, and discuss it.

But I can&#39;t bring it up there. I&#39;m not a member (no, this is not a request, there is a very subtle point).


But his highness prefers to write pompous pamphlets about the bads of the CC instead.

Generally speaking my comments were always reserved and isolated. For example, when the "Withering away of the Commie Club" thread appeared, I did not comment on it&#39;s horrid bourgeois nature, at least not initially. Instead I simply commented on how much I enjoyed the argument, and to what level I thought it was necessary.

No, to be quite honest, the CC was always something of a bother for me, but I never saw it as a total failure, just not a total solution. I didn&#39;t see it as a total failure until the closing of the study group thread.

[coda]

<>

[coda]

<>

[Edelweiss]

But I can&#39;t bring it up there. I&#39;m not a member (no, this is not a request, there is a very subtle point).

But again, this is absurd, Gent&#33; You are not a member because you have choosen to not take part in it.

[coda]

<>

[NovelGentry]

But again, this is absurd, Gent&#33; You are not a member because you have choosen to not take part in it.

But this is not the case for everyone. The subtle point was that all members outside of the CC, are completely dominated by the CC -- regardless of whether they will be let in or not in the future. The question of whether or not they get in is, in itself, left up to the CC.

In all honesty, if my actions over the past few days had ever been presented by a newer member, to what degree do you really think they would have been tolerated? By your own guidlines I probably should have been restricted or banned ages ago.

[Edelweiss]

That is not true, and and accusion with no grounds.
So tell me, who do you "fight" for here, for a few new newbies who can&#39;t vote before they are voted in? Is that your whole problem?

[redstar2000]

NG, can we get to the point here?

What is your proposal or proposals?

Should the CC be abolished? Should everybody be in it? Should moderators or administrators be abolished? Should everyone be a moderator or an administrator? Should no one ever be restricted to Opposing Ideologies? Should we stop banning people?


Originally posted by NovelGentry
The subtle point was that all members outside of the CC, are completely dominated by the CC -- regardless of whether they will be let in or not in the future. The question of whether or not they get in is, in itself, left up to the CC. -- emphasis added

Yes, of course, we tell them when to post and where to post and exactly what they may say and what is forbidden. And if they don&#39;t conform, then we come to their homes and drag them off to the gulag -- er, socialist re-education retreat.

:lol:

The next step in our insidious plan is to demand financial and/or sexual favors from those who want to be in the CC. :lol:

And then we conquer the world&#33;

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/evil/teu42.gif

Pardon the expression, but Jesus H. Fucking Christ&#33; :o :o :o

I thought you were writing a book, NG -- that is, doing something serious. Are you suffering from "writer&#39;s block" so severely that you have to take time off and piss around with this high school crapola?

How many times does it have to be said: THIS IS A MESSAGE BOARD&#33;&#33;&#33;

If anyone feels "intolerably oppressed" here, you can leave and find a board that makes you feel more comfortable.

Good grief, what&#39;s so hard to understand about that?

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

Note that someone did make a concrete proposal: that anyone who is a "leftist" and has made 100 posts should be admitted to the CC.

We&#39;re not going to do that for a simple and obvious reason: there are people on the board who have vaguely leftish sentiments and who have made hundreds of one-line posts without any political content whatsoever.

In our view, that&#39;s not good enough.

Is that "oppressive" and even "dominating"?

If anyone thinks it is...then I can only suggest that you take yourself off to one of the many message boards with nothing but one-line posts.

Coherence is not required...and even actively discouraged.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Edelweiss]

BTW, Gent: Many members aren&#39;t taking part in the CC, not because they have the "noble" reasons like you, but because they simply don&#39;t care about it, or about taking part in the decision making pricess on RevLeft. Believe it or not, there are people who are just coming here to use the board for what it&#39;s made for only: to learn, to discuss, to communicate, to use the board for what it is, a technical tool. But those who are interested in taking part in the CC, and the decision making process of revLeft, in more than 90% of all cases are getting allowed into it without much discussion, so I again have you to ask the question, whom are you "fighting" here for? Maybe you are just bored?

[encephalon]

Although I agree with you, NG, to a lesser extent, I don&#39;t believe revleft--or forum software in general--carries with it the necessary infrastructure to guarantee a stable method of communication in the face of adversaries intent upon disrupting such communication, unless those adversaries are excluded from wielding too much functional power. Not saying that such a system able to deal with such problems isn&#39;t possible, because I believe it is--at least in a mildly stable form; but that the infrastructure here is best suited to selective control.

Also.. half of the stuff in the CC, especially the stickied threads, are there simply because it&#39;s the only semi-safe place to have them.

With your own argument, one could very well make the connection, if it were completely open in alignment with our shared principles, that revleft would be a socialist country amidst a sea of hostile capitalist nations--a situation that I gather most of us agree is quite likely to result in absolute failure.

In my spare time, I&#39;ve been thinking of ways in which to create a new type of democratic forum, where the power is spread across all members by vote: no admins, no mods, all automation according to vote. If there were a stable way to put that into practice, I&#39;d fullheartedly support it (although the programming part of it is a bit difficult; how do you align voting issues with actual technical aspects without an intermediary party?). Even then, I don&#39;t think such a system could be placed on top of the infrastructure of a BBS, and therefore not revleft; it would have to be an entirely new project with an entirely new community, or at least a transferral of other existing communities. Even worse, majority rule is well-and-good--except in the case of a hostile party organizing a massive infiltration in order to gain majority, changing the fundamental characteristics of the board itself. With a sudden flux of hostile capitalists, revleft would no longer be revleft with shared control. In any case, I don&#39;t think it can simply be placed on top of existing board software, although it may use the same technology. It would have to be something radically different.

The truth is, such a system is saturated with practical problems, and before anyone runs off and demands a wholly decentralized system be put in place, those practical problems need to be wholly addressed; thus far, I&#39;ve not seen anyone really addressing the problems that would/could be encountered in a different system, but only criticizing the way things work now.

If you&#39;re interested in working on such a challenge, let me know--I&#39;d be happy to, at the very least, try to collaborate in figuring out and implementing the basic mechanics.. it&#39;s something I&#39;ve been pondering for quite some time now. But until someone can show a reliable, safe and concrete system with an infrastructure that works according to said ideals, it would be foolish to suddenly jump off a cliff and hope someone invents the parachute while we&#39;re midair.

That&#39;s why I&#39;ve brought up the fact that the left seriously needs to form technical groups willing to work on implementing ideas in the real world rather than just holding on to them--but thus far it has fallen on deaf ears.

[Edelweiss]

I think it&#39;s very safe to say that I certainly won&#39;t take the risk turn RevLeft/Che-Lives, something in I have invested much, much time, heard and soul, into some virtual experiment as proposed by Gent which is doomed to fail from the start. I&#39;m proud about what RevLeft has become, I cosnider RevLeft "my baby" and I&#39;m not willing to let it be ruined by something Gent has in mind, which lacks of any sense for reality.

Gent, I&#39;m very grateful for all your help you provided us with the board, but you are entirely wrong on everything you say about the CC, and you are entirely wrong about what RevLeft should become.

[NovelGentry]

Proposal For New Governance of Revolutionary Left

Immediate action:

- The establishment of a feasible system for the detection of duplicate accounts and discernment of inactive accounts is to be established.

- The general induction of all those currently out of the CC, into the CC, barring no majority disagreement from the whole of the newly inducted population, to happen immediately after the search for duplicate accounts. No further induction should happen after this period, by chance that new duplicate accounts may be made.

- The body which exists at this point, currently within the CC is to then discuss, vote, and decide on the new general rules and principles of Revolutionary Left -- a constitution if you will.

- The election of administrators, to which Malte will be the sole nominator for purposes of technical merit. This is unfortunate, but our only necessity, read on for the check/balance. A minimum of 5 administrators should always be maintained.

- The election of moderators. A minimum of 3 per forum, a maximum of 5. Recallable at any time.

- Following these guidelines, a second search, inclusive of a search for inactive accounts, whose limitation should be established by the previously mentioned membership (the inclusive CC), will be performed to remove any duplicate or inactive accounts.

- The destruction of the CC immediately following this final purge, upon which time, general legislative control (additions to guidelines and merits, development of the forums, non-emergency restrictions/bans) will be turned to the hands of all revolutionary left members, excluding OI.

- The establishment of a new forum, designed for this general discussion and official polls by the whole of the population excluding OI.

Limitations of Power:

- The immediate executive power, based on the legislative decisions of the whole is to be handed to the judgment of the moderators, who again are recallable at any time by said whole.

- Final executive power, that is, the ability to recall action itself, is granted directly to the whole.

- Administrators are to perform no action, immediate or final unless sanctioned by their their respective judicial/legislative forces. Any administrator found in violation of this, will be removed from their post immediately, and permanently.

- Administrators are to serve first and foremost the will of the people, which supersedes the will of their elected moderators on any decision. Both moderators and administrators are to be servants of the people&#39;s will, any action deemed by the whole to be unjust according to their established legislative principles will determine their immediate removal.

- Regular searches along with moderator and administrator consciousness should establish the lack of duplicate accounts.

- Restriction of members is to occur as a negation of presumed innocence. That is, OI should not be abolished, but the CC should not be established as an entity above new members, instead, new members will have to lose their rights, as opposed to being granted them after "proving their worth."

- All previous mentioned points should be discussed and fine tuned during the creation of our guidelines.

- All personal information, name, address, pictures, things that must commonly be kept away from redwatch, etc, should be a private issue and dealt with via private messages, to which each member determines the level of trust between themself and who they are talking to.

Final note:

This is not designed to be a classless society. That would be theoretically impossible so long as class society exists in the real world outside of this forum. Instead it is designed to correct the general circumstances which so alienate individuals on the board through the division of labor and power.

The responsibility of the development of the board becomes that of the people. The maintenance of OI is key for us to keep in mind, so long as the society which feeds this one, remains conflicted with class antagonisms.

The ultimate goal is to grow, as much as possible the role we all play in the actual administration and moderation of the board. If we cannot all be moderators, we should at least all have a say in what guidelines they follow for general moderation. If we cannot all be administrators, we should at least be the ones deciding what actions they take against us, and for us.

There are finer points to this, as well as further suggestions I would have, however, the general principles is design to leave that, much like everything else, up to our democratic majority.

[Edelweiss]

This is it? I must say I&#39;m a bit disapointed...:lol:
I have nothing to add to my above post in response to your propsosal.

[YKTMX]

Silly, a waste of time and quite frankly ludicrous.

I move that we forget this pointless debate and close this thread.

[NovelGentry]

That is not true, and and accusion with no grounds.
So tell me, who do you "fight" for here, for a few new newbies who can&#39;t vote before they are voted in? Is that your whole problem?


Well I asked you for your honesty, not whether you thought I was telling the truth or not. It is my belief that such would probably have been the case. There is no way for either of us to completely tell -- things simply didn&#39;t go that way.

I don&#39;t "fight for" anyone. I hope to some degree I make people think about what is occuring, what has occured, what may occur, and maybe offer enough constructive criticism and alternative methods to improve the existing system. Up until this thread, which I made you readily aware of before posting, this kind of conversation was restricted amongst the general public...

In response to redstar


Yes, of course, we tell them when to post and where to post and exactly what they may say and what is forbidden. And if they don&#39;t conform, then we come to their homes and drag them off to the gulag -- er, socialist re-education retreat.

Just because you do not flex all of your powers does not mean you do not have them.


The next step in our insidious plan is to demand financial and/or sexual favors from those who want to be in the CC.

I don&#39;t think the time that happened has to be brought back up again.


I thought you were writing a book, NG -- that is, doing something serious. Are you suffering from "writer&#39;s block" so severely that you have to take time off and piss around with this high school crapola?

No, the book is on stall due to lack of financial resources for some of the research -- I have an option coming up soon though. Thanks for your interest.


If anyone feels "intolerably oppressed" here, you can leave and find a board that makes you feel more comfortable.

Good grief, what&#39;s so hard to understand about that?

Nothing at all. And for the record, I do not feel intolerably oppressed... in fact, I feel quite tolerated. What I do feel is that this board could achieve a lot more than it does... I feel it could progress for all members, not just the "intolerably oppressed."

If you had read my personal discussion with Malte earlier, you would probably be interested to see that my interest is really in allowing this board to develop more rapidly with itself. So that these petty limitations (as what happened with the study group) do not need to arise again, as surely they will if the CC and the current mode of administration remains.


Note that someone did make a concrete proposal: that anyone who is a "leftist" and has made 100 posts should be admitted to the CC.

We&#39;re not going to do that for a simple and obvious reason: there are people on the board who have vaguely leftish sentiments and who have made hundreds of one-line posts without any political content whatsoever.

In our view, that&#39;s not good enough.

Is that "oppressive" and even "dominating"?

If anyone thinks it is...then I can only suggest that you take yourself off to one of the many message boards with nothing but one-line posts.

Coherence is not required...and even actively discouraged.

The problem with your statements about the "vaguely leftish sentiments" is that you&#39;re not taking your own advice. This is a message board, not a revolutionary vanguard or organization poised to pounce on the capitalist mechanism. And it&#39;s "not a country" where the allowance of bourgeois sentiments into our decision making is going to further oppress us... it most certainly is a message board, where even if we have all of my proposals met, we still by the grace of a single and centralized authority.

The development of the board, however, doesn&#39;t really require completely leftist views. Instead it requires a certain leftist domination, with an incredible social intolerance for those who remain vaguely leftish. But certainly, one need not be a Leftist to be able to determine, for example, if chit chat should be divided.

[NovelGentry]

In my spare time, I&#39;ve been thinking of ways in which to create a new type of democratic forum, where the power is spread across all members by vote: no admins, no mods, all automation according to vote. If there were a stable way to put that into practice, I&#39;d fullheartedly support it (although the programming part of it is a bit difficult; how do you align voting issues with actual technical aspects without an intermediary party?). Even then, I don&#39;t think such a system could be placed on top of the infrastructure of a BBS, and therefore not revleft; it would have to be an entirely new project with an entirely new community, or at least a transferral of other existing communities. Even worse, majority rule is well-and-good--except in the case of a hostile party organizing a massive infiltration in order to gain majority, changing the fundamental characteristics of the board itself. With a sudden flux of hostile capitalists, revleft would no longer be revleft with shared control. In any case, I don&#39;t think it can simply be placed on top of existing board software, although it may use the same technology. It would have to be something radically different.

I too have thought of this kind of infrastructure, but not as a reality for very much of the same reasons you existed. Thus, it is not my plan. As you can see above, my plan proposes that we establish a separation between immediate executive power, final executive power, and further, where that power lies. There should not have to be a poll on whether an admin is removed from their position in the instance they take an action completely independent from the decisions and guidelines of the members -- they should be removed, plain and simple.


The truth is, such a system is saturated with practical problems, and before anyone runs off and demands a wholly decentralized system be put in place, those practical problems need to be wholly addressed; thus far, I&#39;ve not seen anyone really addressing the problems that would/could be encountered in a different system, but only criticizing the way things work now.

Wholly decentralized is impossible as I noted in my final note. The aim should be proper checks, proper enforcement, proper separation of that power, and the establishment of a means by which to get the majority opinion.


If you&#39;re interested in working on such a challenge, let me know--I&#39;d be happy to, at the very least, try to collaborate in figuring out and implementing the basic mechanics.. it&#39;s something I&#39;ve been pondering for quite some time now. But until someone can show a reliable, safe and concrete system with an infrastructure that works according to said ideals, it would be foolish to suddenly jump off a cliff and hope someone invents the parachute while we&#39;re midair.

Agreed, and you&#39;re welcome to make suggestions to my current proposal, or invent a complete other alternative to which we can both pick, choose, and discuss over. I would hope other members get involved too.


That&#39;s why I&#39;ve brought up the fact that the left seriously needs to form technical groups willing to work on implementing ideas in the real world rather than just holding on to them--but thus far it has fallen on deaf ears.

This is a great idea, and something I would establish a poll and topic on right now if I didn&#39;t think it would get shut down.

[NovelGentry]

to encephalon:

If you are aware of any place in which we could get free hosting as a test project, with room to growh (both in terms of hard drive space and bandwidth consumption) -- I&#39;d be more than willing to start something of a project established on our ideas and/or technical modifications to existing forum infrastructures.

We&#39;d certainly need a decent size population before proving the validity of it though.

[redstar2000]

If you guys think you have a "better way" to run a message board, then go for it&#33;

I&#39;ll even join and post there...if the actual discussions are interesting.

That&#39;s a pretty important IF, by the way. No matter how innovative your software or "ultra-democratic" your forum mechanisms, no interesting discussions equates to no members.

I hope you&#39;ll avoid the fate of the other boards that have been set up as a consequence of outrage at our "oppressive behavior"...most no longer exist and the one that still does exist has become at least quasi-fascist.

At least try to avoid that&#33; :o

Good luck.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[NovelGentry]

I hope you&#39;ll avoid the fate of the other boards that have been set up as a consequence of outrage at our "oppressive behavior"...

I wouldn&#39;t consider it such a board.

[apathy maybe]

I, in principle, agree with the idea of a CC. Just not with how it is currently run.

Some members of the CC are let in when others are not, when it seems to me that they have the same qualifications.

It also seems to me that there is a lot of cronyism in the CC. I&#39;ll pat your back you pat my back. I don&#39;t know how to fix this, but I sure would like it to change.

And a question which probably doesn&#39;t belong here but I can&#39;t be bothered asking it elsewhere as I know it will be seen. What is the policy of members (i.e. not cc people) have titles?

(One thing that I would support which is not to do with the CC at all, is the deletion of all members who signed up more then 2 years ago, and have no posts. I know at least one of those is one I made, but then I think I lost the password (apathetic_maybe).)

[Hiero]

I think the big thing to worry about is the CC planned kidnappings that have been going on.

[RedStarOverChina]

Shhhh...u just might "evaporate" tomorrow. ;)

[h&s]

NovelGentry: Why do you actually care how the board is run so much? What do you think people will gain from decentralised power in a website?
Where is the exploited class on revleft? I don&#39;t see one...
The administration system on the site is the most democratic for a forum of this size already, it hardly needs improving.
There&#39;s no point wasting your time thinking about it.

[SpeCtrE]

Gent?

How come you are not in the Drama Club?

[NovelGentry]

NovelGentry: Why do you actually care how the board is run so much? What do you think people will gain from decentralised power in a website?
Where is the exploited class on revleft? I don&#39;t see one...
The administration system on the site is the most democratic for a forum of this size already, it hardly needs improving.
There&#39;s no point wasting your time thinking about it.

I think the design of the CC has become a hinderance to any decisions the people truly support. A decentralized authority is not strictly about making it "fair" -- but about how the website develops, and how rapidly it grows with the members.

If such power was decentralized, ideas could come to the forefront, be visible, be voted on, be discussed, etc. immediately. Everyone can see the reasons for or against, and everyone can make a conscious decision as to the direction the board takes and what kinds of features we develop.

For example, with the study group, the solution according to Malte was for me to go to the admins, to discuss with them the creation of a study group forum, so that I could then place the study group idea there. This is slow. If there was a means by which the demand for such a thing effectively equated directly to it&#39;s creation, our ideas could develop at the precise speed in which the develop outside of the commie club. Rather than having to develop there, then amongst the admins, then in the commie club, and then finally being realized.

I don&#39;t really waste my time thinking about it. Much of what I offer for revisions is a "light" version of what I would see a socialist state being like. For example, the administrative would effectively carry no power, but would be directed in full by it&#39;s people. It would serve them rather than command them. The ability to recall executive action is doubly important as the ability to recall executives.

No one is claiming exploitation or massive oppression. The question is whether or not the CC grows with the development of the board, or whether or not it has created a problem and a hinderance to that. Is it stagnating? I believe it is.

[h&s]

I think the design of the CC has become a hinderance to any decisions the people truly support. A decentralized authority is not strictly about making it "fair" -- but about how the website develops, and how rapidly it grows with the members.

Fair point. I do think that the current CC does hinder decisions to a certain extent, but I personally don&#39;t think it needs changing, we just need to get our ideas together.
At least your not doing this for a leftist reason, because that would be a bit sad...
Your reason is good

[ComradeChris]

I find it amusing that only a few of the members of the CC are for the reforms proposed. Like your power much? I just don&#39;t like the fact that I&#39;m being talked about behind my back (especially by people who I&#39;ve had heated arguments with). If people have a problem with me say it to my face. Don&#39;t be spreading things about me in threads I don&#39;t have access to to defend myself in. I guess my lack of acceptance into the CC has to do with the fact that Administration probably has a greater influence there; since the few people I had large arguments with (early on I may add, I&#39;ve changed immensely) were the Administration (ie. Comrade RAF).

And the CC&#39;s arguments are basically what you say they are, just variations of, "This is a forum not a country." :rolleyes:

[NovelGentry]

At least your not doing this for a leftist reason

I find this very much to be leftist reasoning.

[flyby]

there are many parts of this thread that I don&#39;t understand, so forgive me if I get something "off."

But i do have some thoughts:

1) First, we live in a time where it is extremely important that we focus on what matters. The fucking monsters and empire builders of U.S. imperialism are on a rage -- conquering countries, brutalizing and torturing people. And, here in the U.S., they are literally and aggressively moving to impose a whole new and ugly kind of rule -- full of christian fundamentalism, reborn male supremacy, faithbased ignorance, and (hiding not so far in the background) raw white racism.

We need to be talking about how to defeat all of that -- how to reach and mobilize the millions of people who are horrified and infuriated by this. And we need to be discussing how to use these heavy times and events as a period of preparation for revolution -- for a profound and liberating change.

And if we have differences among ourselves, and over this message board, lets discuss them IN THE CONTEXT of all the important things we need to be about.

2) Mao said that we should not treat "contradictions among the people" as if they are "contradictions between the people and the enemy." We should treat each other as brothers and sisters. We should not be petty or focused on small personal bullshit. We should be looking at the bigger picture and our communist goals -- and helping each other keep on a lofty plane.

3) We should recognize how valuabe message boards like Revolutionary Left or Another World is Possible (http://awip.proboards23.com) are -- and be discussing how to make them even more valuable.

How do we help each other actually become communists -- which means "the emancipators of humanity" -- we need to connect our theory with practice. We need to identify which lines and politics lead no where, and which ones have the serious potential of helping us make revolution and move on to a new world.

How do we reach out to other people -- in society and on the internet.

4) I personally believe that the internet is a very important medium for revolutionary work. I think we need to be going into all kinds of arenas and breaking through the censorship and brainwash of this fucked up society. We need to be making revolutionary ideas broadly available, and helping many many more people (literally millions) think in new ways about what kind of change we can make.

I would love to see more discussion about revolutionary strategy.

For example -- how do we drive this bush regime from power? How do we prepare revolution in non-revolutonary times? What are our enemies preparing and how do we thwart and defeat them?

5) So, i realize there are "issues" among people on this site. There may be valid complaints about the CC -- I don&#39;t have any, but i can imagine that some people may have valid ones. But lets keep it in perspective.

If we make changes, lets measure those changes by how it will help make this message board a more powerful center of radical thinking and action. Once you start thinking of the questions of "reform" or the criticisms of past practice IN THAT LIGHT -- then it is much more possible to reach real unity around plans and approaches that will mean something.

[NovelGentry]

and be discussing how to make them even more valuable.

And this is precisely what this is about.


How do we help each other actually become communists -- which means "the emancipators of humanity"

I&#39;m not sure it does mean that.


If we make changes, lets measure those changes by how it will help make this message board a more powerful center of radical thinking and action. Once you start thinking of the questions of "reform" or the criticisms of past practice IN THAT LIGHT -- then it is much more possible to reach real unity around plans and approaches that will mean something.

Agreed.

[flyby]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 05:26 PM


How do we help each other actually become communists -- which means "the emancipators of humanity"

I&#39;m not sure it does mean that.
In an earlier discussion, someone said to me that they thought internet debate was irrelevent, and they basically did it cuz it was fun (and rather obviously cuz they get an ego fluff out of it.)

But I think we should actually be struggling with each other to rise above the muck and the bullshit.

The people of the world need for us to be (and become) serious communist revolutionaries.

They NEED for something to emerge in the fucked-up U.S. -- something that challenges the system, that has a vision of liberating humanity.

And I think we should help each other get there and stay there.

Now, as sonofrage keeps telling me, there are many kinds of so-called "marxists." so i was trying to be specific about what I meant: when I say "communists" i mean we should be striving to be the emancipators of humanity.

Communists are not people who say "my nationality first" or even "my class first." They are not (or at least should not be) just tireless activists who run from leaflet to leaflet without ever helping the masses of people to see what is really up (in a historic sense) on the Planet Earth Today.

We are in the early stages of a world historic revolution that will end all oppression -- abolish classes, male supremacy, the domination of one nation over another.

And we need to be focused on creating a "living link" -- between the communist future we are fighting for, and the present struggle that we are deeply involved in.

That is what I mean when I said we need to "help each other actually become communists -- which means &#39;the emancipators of humanity&#39;"

And because i believe in this: i think we should dispense with petty personal grievances and ego. We should not be about that.

If there is a way this message board can serve the revolution (and serve the people of the world) better -- then spell it out. But lets not cannibalize each other, or erect fantastical infrastructures and procedures.

Marx and Engels wrote "We have nothing to lose but our chains -- we have a world to win&#33;"

Lets struggle with each other to have that kind of sweep, lofty vision and stone-materialist seriousness.

[NovelGentry]

In an earlier discussion, someone said to me that they thought internet debate was irrelevent, and they basically did it cuz it was fun (and rather obviously cuz they get an ego fluff out of it.)

But I think we should actually be struggling with each other to rise above the muck and the bullshit.

The people of the world need for us to be (and become) serious communist revolutionaries.

They NEED for something to emerge in the fucked-up U.S. -- something that challenges the system, that has a vision of liberating humanity.

And I think we should help each other get there and stay there.

Now, as sonofrage keeps telling me, there are many kinds of so-called "marxists." so i was trying to be specific about what I meant: when I say "communists" i mean we should be striving to be the emancipators of humanity.

Communists are not people who say "my nationality first" or even "my class first." They are not (or at least should not be) just tireless activists who run from leaflet to leaflet without ever helping the masses of people to see what is really up (in a historic sense) on the Planet Earth Today.

We are in the early stages of a world historic revolution that will end all oppression -- abolish classes, male supremacy, the domination of one nation over another.

And we need to be focused on creating a "living link" -- between the communist future we are fighting for, and the present struggle that we are deeply involved in.

That is what I mean when I said we need to "help each other actually become communists -- which means &#39;the emancipators of humanity&#39;"

And because i believe in this: i think we should dispense with petty personal grievances and ego. We should not be about that.

If there is a way this message board can serve the revolution (and serve the people of the world) better -- then spell it out. But lets not cannibalize each other, or erect fantastical infrastructures and procedures.

Marx and Engels wrote "We have nothing to lose but our chains -- we have a world to win&#33;"

Lets struggle with each other to have that kind of sweep, lofty vision and stone-materialist seriousness.

I understand what you&#39;re saying. My point is that I don&#39;t think we should ever consider ourselves "emancipators of the working class." This creates something of an illusionory dependence for the working class on what you may only be able to consider our proper course of action.

I understand within your ideology you may very well see the communist movement as such, but the "we" you speak of is rightfully, and essentially can only be, the proletariat as a whole, not distinctly the communist movement.

What we, as in communists, should do, is strive to destroy this separation, even if it is in word alone. We are not their emancipators any more than they are ours.

[flyby]

we are the emancipators of humanity in the sense that this is WHAT WE ARE ABOUT: Emancipating humanity&#33; We are not about anything else.

Or to put it another way:

You may say we should never consider ourselves "emancipators" -- I&#39;m saying the opposite: we should never FORGET that this is what we are about. And that is a heavy responsibility with many implications for what we do and how we think and how we act.

The process of emancipation is obviously not something we (the communists) do alone. That is not the point here. (Though some people think that is always the ONLY point -- and that really means that they don&#39;t think there is any need for communists, since they NAIVELY think "the masses" could JUST DO IT without leadership or vanguard organization.)

So the question I am raising is "what are communists about"?

We need to stand on the mountaintop and see the sweep of history -- we need to take as our goal nothing less than the emancipation of humanity.

And then, based on that and holding firm to that, we also need to come "down off the mountain," go deep among the people and the struggle, and REPRESENT the future within the present.

And i am raising that here, in this thread, cuz i think a lot of that is missing.

Far too often, secondary things are allowed to obscure and overwhelm the most important things. And if you agree with me, then help me fight for this sweep and vision.

Time is seriously running out in the U.S., we have both openings and great dangers -- and we have a lot to think through and do.

[coda]

<>

[T_SP]

I have to come out and say I agree with NG totally, I not only think Gents proposals are sensible but they are also essential to the growth and development of this board&#33;

[RedStarOverChina]

Count me in.

[Fidelbrand]

When the cc is being held above the consideration of other & all leftists and the movement iteself

Exaggerated imagination there.


and irrespective to the dissension it&#39;s causes and oblivious to how it deflects away from the important endeavor

An administrative body in a leftist message board beholds itself from the important endeavor? Can you show some some logical co-relation(s)there?

Do members in CC just sit back and relax ...... and enjoy their flight to despotism and non-activism? :D


and thus breaks solidarity and focus

Yield whinnings for solidarity for those who are (still) not elected democratically by those were let in the CC democratically?

I believe administration is necessary rather than utopian freedom ranted amid hostilities we are facing. This applies both in a socialist country or any (even) apolitical message boards. The CC is a living proof of a benign democracy, if not yet a full-blown one.

breaks solidarity and (even) focus...........? :blink: As aforementioned, please reply if I did not dismantle your line of "logic", or else, I remain to say that you are emotionally exaggerating the problem.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2005, 04:09 PM
We are, however, a community and we do have a society or at least a portion of such, isolated in our tiny virtual world... and we do have government.
No, we have a message board, and a board administration.

You have something of a legitimate gripe - that is, I also disagree with one of Malte&#39;s actions.

But don&#39;t blow it into a huge thing.

If you have a better proposal for how to organize board administration, I haven&#39;t seen it.

[Fidelbrand]

Novel Gentry said ,
"This is not designed to be a classless society. That would be theoretically impossible so long as class society exists in the real world outside of this forum."

True? Doesn&#39;t that contradict his own alignment of arguments for democratization of RL?

My comment for Novel Gentry:
I personally value his ardent passion for utopian democracy. Good and constructive grief, but not enough to rock the CC nor RL.

[Fidelbrand]

I see the cry and despair for revolution when revolution cannot be realised in reality yet....

The suggestions made are valued and should be valued, but the sentiments involved are arcanely magnified.

Peace and solidarity as always...
http://www.anvilfire.com/21centbs/stories/PPW/images11/PPW-ch11_handshake2.jpg

[coda]

<>

[Elect Marx]

Alright, let me take a shot at this...

I will address what I see as NG&#39;s central points and then his suggestion:


Originally posted by NovelGentry
If most forums are an aristocracy, with a king, the forum owner, his noblemen, the admin’s, and their knights, the moderators, what is the commie club?

This is all built on an assumption&#33; I will admit that sometimes admin&#39;s/mod&#39;s are not fully held accountable but generally they are and if people like you would act in the CC where leftists are welcome, we would be all the better off. Calling the structure here aristocracy is insane. I think I could "call for the head" of any admin any day, if I had a reason to do so and would likely get support. IF this was an aristocracy, I would be banned for suggesting I ever might do such a thing, justifiable or not; so proving the absurdity of your claim.

Just the other week I made a suggestion to Malte and he took it seriously as he would likely seriously consider your propositions if you weren’t making absolutely absurd claims.

I have had slight conflicts with Malte and some administrators in the past as occur sometimes between any people trying to cooperate, but never with any significant lasting disputes. In fact, I have received apologies on occasion, when I felt I was responded to rather harshly or whatever the situation might have been. Would you get that from a king? From a rigid hierarchy?


What is this reformist attitude? Do we pronounce our solution to bourgeois democracy and their control over those static means of production is founded within that very same democracy that protects it? What is so insane about recognizing these structures for what they are? We are quite capable of realizing this outside of our virtual society, but incapable of seeing it within? No doubt, it is not a country -- but when was such a thing dependent on such a petty abstraction?

Reformism? This is a method of interaction between leftists, we have no state to change, only how we operate the board. Is organizing with other leftist reformism? This is yet another absurd claim. Like others have said, you have refused to join the CC and know little about how it operates. Why have you done so? You refused an opportunity that ALL LEFTIST using the forum to any significance have. The CC is the dedicated leftists working on as democratic a form as they can and we make great strides to reconcile the difference; frankly, no thanks to you. I know many mod’s that are willing to change things in the CC and are not attached to any hierarchy you claim. These comrades I discuss issues with have very similar views to mine (anti-authoritarians to start) and do their best to demonstrait leftist egalitarianism.

I can understand making a case against the CC and I can even understand some good reasons why you are but the absurdity that founds you arguments is irrefutable.


Proposal For New Governance of Revolutionary Left

Immediate action:

- The establishment of a feasible system for the detection of duplicate accounts and discernment of inactive accounts is to be established.

Many people would be FOR that.


- The general induction of all those currently out of the CC, into the CC, barring no majority disagreement from the whole of the newly inducted population, to happen immediately after the search for duplicate accounts. No further induction should happen after this period, by chance that new duplicate accounts may be made.

Now I must ask you as so many others have: Are you insane? DO you have any idea what this would do? The forums are often clogged up by people that have a GENERAL idea of political matters, not to mention political newbies, THEN you have TROLLS.


- The body which exists at this point, currently within the CC is to then discuss, vote, and decide on the new general rules and principles of Revolutionary Left -- a constitution if you will.

Isn&#39;t this basically what we do? Why won&#39;t you help&#33;?


- The election of administrators, to which Malte will be the sole nominator for purposes of technical merit. This is unfortunate, but our only necessity, read on for the check/balance. A minimum of 5 administrators should always be maintained.

You would likely have support in the CC for this...


- The election of moderators. A minimum of 3 per forum, a maximum of 5. Recallable at any time.

Most mod&#39;s where elected I believe...


- Following these guidelines, a second search, inclusive of a search for inactive accounts, whose limitation should be established by the previously mentioned membership (the inclusive CC), will be performed to remove any duplicate or inactive accounts.

Again, all you had to do is submit it to the CC, which you turned down.


- The destruction of the CC immediately following this final purge, upon which time, general legislative control (additions to guidelines and merits, development of the forums, non-emergency restrictions/bans) will be turned to the hands of all revolutionary left members, excluding OI.

- The establishment of a new forum, designed for this general discussion and official polls by the whole of the population excluding OI.

Why not just use the CC for this? I have already stated why "all revolutionary left members," being involved is absurd.


Limitations of Power:

- The immediate executive power, based on the legislative decisions of the whole is to be handed to the judgment of the moderators, who again are recallable at any time by said whole.

- Final executive power, that is, the ability to recall action itself, is granted directly to the whole.

How is this different, aside from the member base?


- Administrators are to perform no action, immediate or final unless sanctioned by their their respective judicial/legislative forces. Any administrator found in violation of this, will be removed from their post immediately, and permanently.

This is loosely the case.


- Administrators are to serve first and foremost the will of the people, which supersedes the will of their elected moderators on any decision. Both moderators and administrators are to be servants of the people&#39;s will, any action deemed by the whole to be unjust according to their established legislative principles will determine their immediate removal.

- Regular searches along with moderator and administrator consciousness should establish the lack of duplicate accounts.


How is this different? This is a lot of fluff.


- Restriction of members is to occur as a negation of presumed innocence. That is, OI should not be abolished, but the CC should not be established as an entity above new members, instead, new members will have to lose their rights, as opposed to being granted them after "proving their worth."

Okay, so basically the CC would have NO security?


- All previous mentioned points should be discussed and fine tuned during the creation of our guidelines.

- All personal information, name, address, pictures, things that must commonly be kept away from redwatch, etc, should be a private issue and dealt with via private messages, to which each member determines the level of trust between themself and who they are talking to.

Exactly, no security and how would we discuss secure matters?


Final note:

This is not designed to be a classless society. That would be theoretically impossible so long as class society exists in the real world outside of this forum. Instead it is designed to correct the general circumstances which so alienate individuals on the board through the division of labor and power.

The responsibility of the development of the board becomes that of the people. The maintenance of OI is key for us to keep in mind, so long as the society which feeds this one, remains conflicted with class antagonisms.

The ultimate goal is to grow, as much as possible the role we all play in the actual administration and moderation of the board. If we cannot all be moderators, we should at least all have a say in what guidelines they follow for general moderation. If we cannot all be administrators, we should at least be the ones deciding what actions they take against us, and for us.

There are finer points to this, as well as further suggestions I would have, however, the general principles is design to leave that, much like everything else, up to our democratic majority.

This is rather utopian and you do have some good ideas but also glaring flaws.

[Anti-establishment]

fuck it i&#39;m in favour

[RedStarOverChina]

Good&#33; I was starting to wonder if we are indeed a group of rebels.

[Fidelbrand]

Well, I don&#39;t know how to put it another way for you to understand as I said you&#39;re oblivious to the dessension a commie club causes.

If I (we) were oblivious, we wouldn&#39;t be having discourses among ourselves right now.
I still think the issue of dissenion is exaggerated, would you elaborate at least a little more?


Solidarity is an "action." How can you have solidarity or trust with a group of people who are operating in a McCarthyite mentality with the witchhunts.

Solidarity of course is an action, and I still don&#39;t see how our beliefs are tilted to a negative end with the operation of the cc existing in this message board. How is it operated in a McCarthyite mentality? ... And witchunts is too strong a word, I guess. :blink:


Where is the board adminstration in the cc?
There are people making preferences and deliberating on the procedural and substantive aspects of the board as a whole.


All I have seen when I was there are posts initiating members.
Is this the case? :lol: Man, are you serious? Stop exaggerating.


Intiating them for what? Hell knows.
They are valued for their dedication and their rationality and adherence to the cause of this board and the leftist movement, and due to their deliberative capacity, to comment and make suggestions to various issues in the running of the site.


Seems to me initiating members so to conduct these witchhunts, which is in all reality what they are as I have seen it for myself

Exggerated irreality.



Surely, you don&#39;t need a club to tell someone you don&#39;t like their politics or particular line of thinking. Just fucking tell them&#33;&#33;&#33;

We don&#39;t use the club to tell someone whether we dislike their politics or not. The cc members assess whether there is a need to restrict cappies to OI because this is a leftist forum. We do it in a non-savage way. Administration, collection of opinions and polls to administer the board. "Just fucking tell them" means tyranny of the majority in some sense, and the cc does not do this.



Geez, you know.. if you want to add a forum.. just put up a damn thread and take the vote there. What is the big fucking deal&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

Geez, seems that we need some utopian democracy without worrying about Marx&#39;s economic centrism ...that is YES&#33; WE have unlimited resoruces AND as long as any members set a poll democratically and rest on a collectively democratic decision, we all fucking go for it, right?

this is utopian transfomation into dystopian shit.



It is actually you people in the cc that are making a big deal of the commie club.
I think is the other way round.

Those
1)in RL for some time but not admitted,
2)and those who got chucked out
3) and those who find administrative-democratic decisions boring wants a illusive freer body to rant when they withdraw from cc , saying "I quit&#33; and cc is shit and lets revolt and revolutionize the whole site&#33;"..........http://www.morethanwords.it/studenti/allemoticons/Evil_teu49.gif

are the ones who would like to stigmatize the cc with their misuse of correct concepts within a wrong context&#33; http://www.morethanwords.it/studenti/allemoticons/Computers_comp18.gif

[NovelGentry]

This is all built on an assumption&#33; I will admit that sometimes admin&#39;s/mod&#39;s are not fully held accountable but generally they are and if people like you would act in the CC where leftists are welcome, we would be all the better off. Calling the structure here aristocracy is insane. I think I could "call for the head" of any admin any day, if I had a reason to do so and would likely get support. IF this was an aristocracy, I would be banned for suggesting I ever might do such a thing, justifiable or not; so proving the absurdity of your claim.

I didn&#39;t call the CC an aristocracy, reread the critique.


Reformism? This is a method of interaction between leftists, we have no state to change, only how we operate the board. Is organizing with other leftist reformism? This is yet another absurd claim. Like others have said, you have refused to join the CC and know little about how it operates. Why have you done so? You refused an opportunity that ALL LEFTIST using the forum to any significance have. The CC is the dedicated leftists working on as democratic a form as they can and we make great strides to reconcile the difference; frankly, no thanks to you. I know many mod’s that are willing to change things in the CC and are not attached to any hierarchy you claim. These comrades I discuss issues with have very similar views to mine (anti-authoritarians to start) and do their best to demonstrait leftist egalitarianism.

My reasons for not joining the CC have been made clear long before this. Needless to say, you say I know little about how it operates cause I refused to join, while it never occured to you that maybe I refused to join because I know very well how it operates.


Now I must ask you as so many others have: Are you insane? DO you have any idea what this would do? The forums are often clogged up by people that have a GENERAL idea of political matters, not to mention political newbies, THEN you have TROLLS.

You don&#39;t need a general or even specific idea about political matters in order to help out with the advancement of this forum. As for the trolls, certainly we could easily get a majority to reject their induction.


Isn&#39;t this basically what we do? Why won&#39;t you help&#33;?

Well no, it&#39;s not what you do. The induction of existing members is founded on the idea that we are all capable of making fair decisions as to the development of this board, only when we have proven that we can&#39;t, should we be rejected. The CC works in the principle of saying that people must prove themselves capable.

Furthermore, if you read the whole proposal before responded, you would realize I call for the abolition of this separation soon after. This action is merely the means by which our new system is ordered by the existing membership to it&#39;s fullest possible degree.


Most mod&#39;s where elected I believe...

You&#39;ve completely missed the point to that change.


Again, all you had to do is submit it to the CC, which you turned down.

You&#39;re treating these as separate actions, as if I just want duplicate checks done. This shows your misunderstanding as to the process which is laid out, furthermore, it shows a vast inability for you to logically follow the action to their results.

The point of the initial check is to ensure one vote one member for the initial creation of our guidelines -- it is done before we would induct everyone, to ensure the induction is only of unique members. The point of this check is to ensure once again that only unique members exist outside of this organization for when the power is spread to all, this way, we know that capitalists have not gone and made 10 accounts to all the sudden vote on the abolition of OI immediately when this power is relinquished.


Why not just use the CC for this? I have already stated why "all revolutionary left members," being involved is absurd.

And you made a fundamental flaw in assuming people have to be a political geniuses in order to govern themselves.


How is this different, aside from the member base?

Generally speaking admins and mods are above the CC -- there have been countless examples given throughout this thread, as well as a reference to the "favoritism" (of sorts) which was noticed by several CC members who I have talked to.


This is loosely the case.

:lol: :lol: :lol: Far too loosely.


How is this different? This is a lot of fluff.

Both administrators and moderators here don&#39;t really have a general consciousness of a) the will of the membership b) the content of the members (by which I mean things such as duplicate accounts).

This is proven very much in not only my previous anecdotes, but those of others as well. Generally speaking, the functions of this board are not enough. Admins should be selected from those who are technically capable of performing the proper database searches and queries to ensure these kinds of checks are in order. I would be more than happy to train such people who would like to hold such positions to help serve this board.


Okay, so basically the CC would have NO security?

The CC would not exist.


Exactly, no security and how would we discuss secure matters?

Securely. Personally I don&#39;t recommend you discuss "secure matters" over this medium without any encryption. I guess that depends what you consider secure matters though. If you&#39;re talking about things like real names, addresses, pictures maybe... well this is all personal and private information -- and it should be dealt with privately. You can actually send private messages to other members you know...

A lot of people here like to presume the CC is secure... because fascists and neo-nazis are "too stupid" to not blurt out their idiotic trash... and incapable of pretending to be leftist. I&#39;ve never heard more naive statements.


This is rather utopian and you do have some good ideas but also glaring flaws.

Well no, there&#39;s nothing utopian about it. It is all extremely technically feasible, it&#39;s all extremely socially feasible... there&#39;s only one aspect that I&#39;m certain holds such changes back.

[RedStarOverChina]

Fidelbrand, as much as I like u and ur smilies, I&#39;m gonna have to disagree. :(

I really dont think joining the CC is that big of a matter, which is why I will resign at an appropriate time. For that matter, this whole forum isnt that big of a deal.

But the big deal in this is that when we see injustice we cannot look away and be forced to tolerate it, no matter how small of an injustice it is. Yes it is a small matter in many ways. But that doesn&#39;t mean we shouldn&#39;t rebel again it. An injustice is an injustice is an injustice--an injustice needs to be addressed and rebelled against. I find it degrading towards my character be forced to look away when faced with injustice, even when it does not have anything to do with me.

To be honest I dont care what&#39;s the outcome of this: either I get banned/restricted, or we all have universal sufferage, doesnt matter. But there is no way I would keep my mouth shut against my will and bow to the the pressure of authoritarianism.

I have betrayed my class, rebelled against my school, and revolted against my relatives. Frankly I can&#39;t resist doing it again against the big guys in this forum. Only this time, I REALLY have nothing to lose.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 04:08 PM

This is all built on an assumption&#33; I will admit that sometimes admin&#39;s/mod&#39;s are not fully held accountable but generally they are and if people like you would act in the CC where leftists are welcome, we would be all the better off. Calling the structure here aristocracy is insane. I think I could "call for the head" of any admin any day, if I had a reason to do so and would likely get support. IF this was an aristocracy, I would be banned for suggesting I ever might do such a thing, justifiable or not; so proving the absurdity of your claim.

I didn&#39;t call the CC an aristocracy, reread the critique.
I didn&#39;t say you did, reread my quote.



Reformism? This is a method of interaction between leftists, we have no state to change, only how we operate the board. Is organizing with other leftist reformism? This is yet another absurd claim. Like others have said, you have refused to join the CC and know little about how it operates. Why have you done so? You refused an opportunity that ALL LEFTIST using the forum to any significance have. The CC is the dedicated leftists working on as democratic a form as they can and we make great strides to reconcile the difference; frankly, no thanks to you. I know many mod’s that are willing to change things in the CC and are not attached to any hierarchy you claim. These comrades I discuss issues with have very similar views to mine (anti-authoritarians to start) and do their best to demonstrait leftist egalitarianism.

My reasons for not joining the CC have been made clear long before this. Needless to say, you say I know little about how it operates cause I refused to join, while it never occured to you that maybe I refused to join because I know very well how it operates.

Would you stop assuming my motives? This is pure slander; your statement prove you are confused about the function of the CC and I never said you didn&#39;t know how it works, you simply have a very poor understanding of this or how to articulate it.



Now I must ask you as so many others have: Are you insane? DO you have any idea what this would do? The forums are often clogged up by people that have a GENERAL idea of political matters, not to mention political newbies, THEN you have TROLLS.

You don&#39;t need a general or even specific idea about political matters in order to help out with the advancement of this forum. As for the trolls, certainly we could easily get a majority to reject their induction.

Yes, you do; if you don&#39;t understand the politics you spend more time asking questions than adding to the discussion and that is more disruptive than you even hint to. NOT TO MENTION that if TROLLS even had the tiny window you would introduce, RL would be DEAD within a week by Comrade-Che alone.



Isn&#39;t this basically what we do? Why won&#39;t you help&#33;?

Well no, it&#39;s not what you do. The induction of existing members is founded on the idea that we are all capable of making fair decisions as to the development of this board, only when we have proven that we can&#39;t, should we be rejected. The CC works in the principle of saying that people must prove themselves capable.

Yes, let us assume everyone is here to help until we are fucked... What you are suggesting is a TROLL PARIDISE.


Furthermore, if you read the whole proposal before responded, you would realize I call for the abolition of this separation soon after. This action is merely the means by which our new system is ordered by the existing membership to it&#39;s fullest possible degree.

I read the whole damn thing and it was redundant&#33; SO, that would accomplish nothing?



Most mod&#39;s where elected I believe...

You&#39;ve completely missed the point to that change.

Care to explain? This form of "you don&#39;t understand," is getting rather old; is this some sort of distractionary technique?



Again, all you had to do is submit it to the CC, which you turned down.

You&#39;re treating these as separate actions, as if I just want duplicate checks done. This shows your misunderstanding as to the process which is laid out, furthermore, it shows a vast inability for you to logically follow the action to their results.

Blah blah blah; yes I am inept; on with the fucking point maybe?


The point of the initial check is to ensure one vote one member for the initial creation of our guidelines -- it is done before we would induct everyone, to ensure the induction is only of unique members. The point of this check is to ensure once again that only unique members exist outside of this organization for when the power is spread to all, this way, we know that capitalists have not gone and made 10 accounts to all the sudden vote on the abolition of OI immediately when this power is relinquished.

This sounds like a reformation of the CC to your ideal structure; this is an old idea.



Why not just use the CC for this? I have already stated why "all revolutionary left members," being involved is absurd.

And you made a fundamental flaw in assuming people have to be a political geniuses in order to govern themselves.

I didn&#39;t say that. Is this the only way you can "win" debates? You are becoming rather transparent and shooting yourself in the foot.



How is this different, aside from the member base?

Generally speaking admins and mods are above the CC -- there have been countless examples given throughout this thread, as well as a reference to the "favoritism" (of sorts) which was noticed by several CC members who I have talked to.

So you do not think we can use the CC to improve these conditions? Why not?



How is this different? This is a lot of fluff.

Both administrators and moderators here don&#39;t really have a general consciousness of a) the will of the membership b) the content of the members (by which I mean things such as duplicate accounts).

So they need to interact with the membership more perhaps?


This is proven very much in not only my previous anecdotes, but those of others as well. Generally speaking, the functions of this board are not enough. Admins should be selected from those who are technically capable of performing the proper database searches and queries to ensure these kinds of checks are in order. I would be more than happy to train such people who would like to hold such positions to help serve this board.

Great, a little reformism.



Okay, so basically the CC would have NO security?

The CC would not exist.

You suggested a very similar alternative; that was my point.


A lot of people here like to presume the CC is secure... because fascists and neo-nazis are "too stupid" to not blurt out their idiotic trash... and incapable of pretending to be leftist. I&#39;ve never heard more naive statements.

I agree.



This is rather utopian and you do have some good ideas but also glaring flaws.

Well no, there&#39;s nothing utopian about it. It is all extremely technically feasible, it&#39;s all extremely socially feasible... there&#39;s only one aspect that I&#39;m certain holds such changes back

Indeed it could be done but I have stated reasons why it would fail.

[Anarchist Freedom]

well im sorry you dont like it. But Last I checked at most other forums the user dont even have a say in the boards decisons. I can not stress this enough THIS IS A FUCKING MESSAGE BOARD&#33; my lord who gives 2 hoots if its "oppressive". At least you have the ability to make decisons for the board unlike EG or other leftist boards here you can make the decisons. the criteria for getting into the CC is so god damn easy. Your a commited leftist with over 100 posts wow your in&#33; well how fucking hard can that be? Not very hard. Now just relax and stop trying to be an internet revolutionary we have better things to do that start a website revolution.

[RedStarOverChina]

IT IS A FUCKING MESSAGE BOARD&#33; just give people what they want and they&#39;ll be happy. Why make a huge fuss?

[Don't Change Your Name]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2005, 10:09 PM
Certainly they are right though, it is not a country. Instead, for the first time in our known history of man we have overcome these separations with such ease, and to such a significant degree, that in at least one realm of social interaction, they mean very little. And what do our proponents make of this new found social interaction... it is not a country. Certainly it is not, but let us be thankful of that.

We are, however, a community and we do have a society or at least a portion of such, isolated in our tiny virtual world... and we do have government. We have the equivalent of material governance, founded within the technical limitation of our software, and we have the equivalent of social governance, founded in what has so unquestionably come to be known as the Commie Club.
So does your representative "alternative", with the difference that:
a) well, it&#39;s exactly that
b) members do not make decisions themselves (even if the CC nowdays looks like a "government" for those who aren&#39;t inside the CC since it&#39;s access is regulated by those who are already inside it, like some kind of "first come first serve" thing).
c) the "class society" you are imposing requires a more "serious" approach on a stupid forum, and giving an even smaller group of individuals more power



We too have labor. What are the members if not builders of the community?

We are the spammers of it, if you want a less silly analogy. :rolleyes:


If most forums are an aristocracy, with a king, the forum owner, his noblemen, the admins, and their knights, the moderators, what is the commie club?

HAHAHAHAHA&#33; Poor Gent&#33; His analogies show him as an insane "revolutionary" that doesn&#39;t know the difference between "managing a stupid internet forum" and "exploiting the masses through a complex class system with almost every possible way to control the masses, from made up morality through religion to opressive economical arrangements".

Listen up, a forum is created by a minority which wants to give the forum a certain usage, ideology or objective (in this case, it&#39;s something like "a forum for revolutionary leftists which more or less agree with me to debate and talk and shit"), and thus will try to do so. If you don&#39;t like that, create your own forum or go to another.

Oh, and claiming that somehow admins and mods are "evil" is useless. They are there to be useful, such as to restrict evil members or move posts.


With its advancement, its increase in population, so too did there need to be an increase in other aspects of the board. To quote the guidelines, "Malte couldn&#39;t possibly do it all on his own."

Neither can everyone who creates a forum. It&#39;s nice to know that nowadays "anyone can be a king" :rolleyes:


This very inherent advancement of which the very functionality of the board depended was not spawned from the whim of a single man, or even multiple men, but as sheer necessity. An advancement in order to achieve, with the increase in population, and the further division of labor, a working, and feasible governance.

This very real limitation of the productive forces, both static and dynamic, demands at any given time the most suitable environment for it&#39;s advancement. This is true in both in the material world and, as we have seen, our virtual world.

Stop pretending to be a revolutionary in the 19th century. It makes you look silly.


What has developed from this is an advancement in the "delegation of powers." We are sure to note that the commie club certainly holds within it&#39;s hands the general flow of society, or at least, the illusion of such. However, as anyone with certain age here will tell you, it is those who control those static means, the software itself... the admins, the mods, etc... it is those who hold the real power. The extent of the CC&#39;s power is one that can exact no real change.

Yeah, so?


I have been reproached for being a maniac;

This self-important post doesn&#39;t help your public image.


having a level of insanity, one which they will tell you influences me to want to "make great change within the system, and yet the same time, refuse to join the means by which to do this. How does he expect to do anything if he doesn&#39;t join the CC&#33;"

What is this reformist attitude?

Changing the issue, eh?


Do we pronounce our solution to bourgeois democracy

Your alternative is closer to a "bourgeois democracy".


and their control over those static means of production is founded within that very same democracy that protects it?

:rolleyes:


What is so insane about recognizing these structures for what they are?


In what twisted fantasy does the CC and the prevailing bourgeois superstructure&#39;s arguments make any sense in the minds of so-called revolutionaries? Only in those minds which are so alienated by their division that they have lost a good part, if not all of their consciousness.

Why don&#39;t you mention that your "alternative" is pretty much the same thing than modern bourgeious "democracy" and that it won&#39;t change the power the admins and mods have to do whatever you consider to be wrong that (it seems) made you get even angrier against this forum&#39;s "establishment", and that it completely ignores how silly your "ruling class" analogy for this forum is and how it will always be like that in basically any forum?


We have of course, outgrown the confines of the CC. Like so many social relations of our real past, we have developed at a rate which demands we shed this old structure. It has become most visible with the recent attempts we have made to take this power: the study group and the division of chit chat poll.

Yeah, let&#39;s all be admins&#33;


To what strange event do we owe this rapid advancement? To the CC of course. As in real life it is the rapid advancement of capitalism that produces the conditions for it&#39;s own destruction, it is too the rapid advancement from the CC which has set us so far head of other forums. So far ahead of even our own.

This is the kind of things that explain why capitalism hasn&#39;t dissapeared yet :rolleyes:


And yet our reactionary tendencies remain some of the highest.

Yeah, including yours. Well put. :lol:


By one CC member&#39;s accounts/opinion, it is accurate to say that the majority of the CC&#39;s discussions are negative, as opposed to positive discussions such as those on whether or not a member should be inducted. At boards with half of our population it is not uncommon to find three moderators per forum, a host of administrators who have embedded themselves into the community and keep one another in check.

Then we need more admins and mods. So what?


And yet another CC member claimed they did not feel it was uncommon for certain members to be favored because of their existing position.

Please don&#39;t tell me it&#39;s my critique of how some admins can sometimes more or less ignore what the CC claims. That won&#39;t change with your alternative anyway. It can if the CC is given more respect, which is another thing.


Has the CC achieved such a level of alienation that not only has the consciousness of it&#39;s general member been driven into the ground, but that it too cannot recognize its own pitfalls? We are told no; we are told that the down-sides of it&#39;s structure are recognized even amongst it members, yet when we seek to do anything about it or to even discuss it, we are attacked, sometimes viciously and humiliatingly by it&#39;s most hallowed protectors -- if not openly, than privately.

:lol:


Do we know a solution? Is there a solution? I believe there is, and I will be more than willing to share it, so long we can keep this topic open. Show your support, CC and non-CC members alike by voicing in your response that you want this thread to remain open. Wait, and I will submit my proposal, and then you can rightfully decide whether or not I am a maniac.

Oh&#33; I&#39;m desperate to hear your &#39;representative&#39; "democracy" crap about everyone picking up "special members" that will act as a board and...welll, some shit like that which you said the other day on the chatroom.

Either way, I propose myself as part of that "vanguard". Let the days of terror and oppression begin&#33; :o


Some may consider them poor analogies or insanity, but I think it&#39;s quite accurate to say we are "building" something here, and that there are definitive productive forces, namely the people themselves, who even if they are not building the resources, may actually contribute to the running of the community itself.

Yeah, today Malte paid me 3 dollars when I produced 10 for him. Malte&#39;s getting rich with this forum thanks to me posting :lol:


For example, myself, who was for so long a server administrator -- attempting to ensure and fix things when they broke. To those that offered the new graphics when we underwent the name change. To those that write for the newsletter... to a whole host of people who generally make this community worth visiting.

The problem with you is that you take this seriously because of your role here.


I wasn&#39;t aware we could recall CC members. To my understanding only CC members can recall CC members.

Blah blah blah...are you ever gonna understand that the CC doesn&#39;t make decisions over those who are outside it unless it disagrees with them? Should we have homophobic members "recall" CC members because they took some action against him/her?

The answer is NO. Deal with it.


Just as congress/parlaiment is a necessity for the smooth running of the country?

No... it is not.

Just as your idea?

Forums ALWAYS look "authoritarian". That&#39;s why the OI cappies complain about them being on the "gulag". As I already mentioned, forums have an aim, like "talking about revolutionary politics", "speaking about religion", "talking about science", "debating about music". This place is for "revolutionary leftists", who have been given an "advantage" over not-so-trustworthy-members because they&#39;re the ones this forum&#39;s for. If you don&#39;t like it, it&#39;s because a) you haven&#39;t proven to been "good enough" in "their" eyes, or b) this forum&#39;s not for you and you&#39;re better leaving it. Your fundamentalist mindless idealism won&#39;t change that.

[NovelGentry]

IF this was an aristocracy, I would be banned for suggesting I ever might do such a thing, justifiable or not; so proving the absurdity of your claim.

Well what do you propose my "claim is" if not implying that it was that it is an aristocracy?


This is pure slander; your statement prove you are confused about the function of the CC and I never said you didn&#39;t know how it works, you simply have a very poor understanding of this or how to articulate it.

This seems more born of our disagreement on the way it does work than our disagreement on how to articulate that. The arguments I hold against the CC are those which I have previously stated, if you disagree with that, it is not because they are poorly articulated, but because you do not believe that to be the way it actually works.


Yes, you do; if you don&#39;t understand the politics you spend more time asking questions than adding to the discussion and that is more disruptive than you even hint to. NOT TO MENTION that if TROLLS even had the tiny window you would introduce, RL would be DEAD within a week by Comrade-Che alone.

Seeing as I propose we increase the amount of admins, mods, etc, I&#39;m not really sure how you make this assumption. Trolls would be dealt with quicker, there would be more consciousness, but at the same time more accountability for any false moves.


Yes, let us assume everyone is here to help until we are fucked... What you are suggesting is a TROLL PARIDISE.

If trolls are going to invade the board, and some do in individual actions, they will continue to do so regardless of whether there is a CC. We are not abolishing the means or the nature in which they are dealt with, simply changing the method of how to accomplish that.


Care to explain? This form of "you don&#39;t understand," is getting rather old; is this some sort of distractionary technique?

You point out that they are already elected. The goal was not to ensure they are elected, it was to increase the number. Look at the current number of moderators, as well as the "one way" nature of their actions. If you increase these numbers you will have more reasonable action, and frequently enough to deal with not only the sudden influx of trolls that you imagine, but also to deal with the regular increase in membership.


Blah blah blah; yes I am inept; on with the fucking point maybe?

The immediate actions are to be taken as a series of events to establish the new system, not as separate functions of the new system itself. You critiqued them as separate functions, pointing out that the CC would not have an issue with establishing a means by which to detect duplicate accounts easier... no they wouldn&#39;t, but the necessary function of doing so is a dependence of the change I&#39;m proposing, not an independent action.


This sounds like a reformation of the CC to your ideal structure; this is an old idea.

It is abolition of the CC.


I didn&#39;t say that. Is this the only way you can "win" debates? You are becoming rather transparent and shooting yourself in the foot.

I will certainly agree the term genius was overdoing it. But it is this kind of thinking I&#39;m referring to:

"if you don&#39;t understand the politics you spend more time asking questions than adding to the discussion and that is more disruptive than you even hint to."

The overwhelming majority of issues will be those of advancing the board. There will no longer be the issue of CC induction since this right is applied to all evenly. Means for restrictions and bans would certainly be established in the original creation of the guidelines, to which the moderators have immediate executive action on. Thus, the issue would rarely be whether to restrict or ban someone, but whether or not the guidelines were upheld, and whether to grant amnesty to that individual. Since moderators are elected, held accountable to recall both in person and in action to the body of the members, they would not be capable of abusing their power.


Great, a little reformism.

in what way?


You suggested a very similar alternative; that was my point.

Again, we most certainly agree on exactly what the CC does.


I agree.

Then you should agree your previous points about the "security" of the CC are moot.


Indeed it could be done but I have stated reasons why it would fail.

And I have stated reasons why your reasons are meaningless. We can sit here all day and say that we&#39;ve stated reasons, we will no doubt disagree continually, and no doubt some will agree with me while others will agree with you. I am debating the reasons... there is no need to continually point out that you&#39;ve stated them.

[coda]

<>

[NovelGentry]

and giving an even smaller group of individuals more power

The technical limitations of this board mean that the actual authority and power is always centralized. CC or otherwise. What authority we willfully uphold, and what authority is granted to the membership by that initial authority is what we would be changing. The current mode of the CC is a very limited pseudo-authority, as anecdotal evidence (including that which T_SP has made a point of in the CC just recently), proves this.

What I propose would extend the grace of that authority to a large portion of the message board, more, it would ensure that authority is kept in check. What I propose will make all members conscious of any such abuse, because it is no longer a "CC" issue, but a board issue. More, those members will have a direct say, and if their say is to remove that authority, it is the duty of those with the actual authority (the technical privelege) to demote, for example, their fellow admin, as they serve that decision first and foremost.

If you think the CC works like this, even with the existing people in there, you are delusional.


HAHAHAHAHA&#33; Poor Gent&#33; His analogies show him as an insane "revolutionary" that doesn&#39;t know the difference between "managing a stupid internet forum" and "exploiting the masses through a complex class system with almost every possible way to control the masses, from made up morality through religion to opressive economical arrangements".

Well know, I think we all here, including myself, are quite aware of the very real difference between the two. We are to aware of the gravity of the real world examples. The analogy was not designed to compare them in this sense, but to compare them in political structure alone.


Listen up, a forum is created by a minority which wants to give the forum a certain usage, ideology or objective (in this case, it&#39;s something like "a forum for revolutionary leftists which more or less agree with me to debate and talk and shit"), and thus will try to do so. If you don&#39;t like that, create your own forum or go to another.

While it may be conceived and initially created by a minority, it is the members who make it what it is.


Oh, and claiming that somehow admins and mods are "evil" is useless. They are there to be useful, such as to restrict evil members or move posts.

I don&#39;t ever recall using the term evil... nor do I ever recall making moral arguments.


Stop pretending to be a revolutionary in the 19th century. It makes you look silly.

The parallels drawn between the style and nature of this work and earlier works pertaining to class struggle were done so consciously and purposefully to create something of a theme piece.


This self-important post doesn&#39;t help your public image.

Well no... this was designed to refute the idea that my best bet of changing the CC is to work within it. The reason I mentioned my specific case was because the evidence of these arguments, unless previously removed, is still available and visible in the CC.

I believe it was one of CyM&#39;s comments.


Changing the issue, eh?

Yes, there were multiple points I wanted to touch upon in the essay. Generally speaking in order to do that I have to "change the issue" from one point to the next.


Your alternative is closer to a "bourgeois democracy".

A system in which the general public designs the legislative guidelines, votes directly on them? Can not only recall elected representatives but judicial officers? Can recall executive action? I&#39;ve never seen such things in bourgeois democracy.


Why don&#39;t you mention that your "alternative" is pretty much the same thing than modern bourgeious "democracy" and that it won&#39;t change the power the admins and mods have to do whatever you consider to be wrong that (it seems) made you get even angrier against this forum&#39;s "establishment", and that it completely ignores how silly your "ruling class" analogy for this forum is and how it will always be like that in basically any forum?

Well on one thing we agree, that it will not change the power the admins and mods have. As I believe I have mentioned, ONLY changes in the technical structure of the forum itself, what I equate to the "static means of production" can do this.

That is no easy task for a board with relatively few "techies" -- but it is something I would certainly take on if I felt any initial grounds could be made to create the circumstances to do so.


Yeah, let&#39;s all be admins&#33;

This is not supposed to equate to a classless society.


This is the kind of things that explain why capitalism hasn&#39;t dissapeared yet

Well yes, if you consider yourself a Marxist (which I&#39;m fairly sure you don&#39;t), but if one does, it does explain it. Certainly my statement is a simplified presentation of that material outgrowth, but essentially it explains the basic principle.


Then we need more admins and mods. So what?

Yes, a lot more. Three times as many mods at least, and I&#39;d say double the admins.


Please don&#39;t tell me it&#39;s my critique of how some admins can sometimes more or less ignore what the CC claims. That won&#39;t change with your alternative anyway. It can if the CC is given more respect, which is another thing.

Well no, it&#39;s not a critique, it was the testimony of a "witness" so to speak. Furthermore, it&#39;s not the issue of ignoring what the CC claims, it is the issue of being favored in the CC, both amongst the existing CC members, and amongst fellow admins/mods.

Under the system I propose, the only way this can repeat itself is if a majority favors the admin/mod.


The problem with you is that you take this seriously because of your role here.

Well yes, I do take it seriously (to a certain degree) and it is certainly because of my role here. As should anyone with the same role take it seriously. My role is that of a board member, what is yours?


Blah blah blah...are you ever gonna understand that the CC doesn&#39;t make decisions over those who are outside it unless it disagrees with them? Should we have homophobic members "recall" CC members because they took some action against him/her?

The answer is NO. Deal with it.

No, we should have a majority of people decide whether or not such homophobia was even expressed, and then grant that person immunity if these members find that such was not the case, as opposed to a single mod/admin taking action, and then fear of opposing that for being labelled a homophobe as well.

Such fears have been expressed to me by others.


Just as your idea?

My idea is an advancement which I believe will help this board progress alongside itself and it&#39;s members. I see the CC as a hinderance to that. No doubt if the technical limiations of forum software and the consciousness of the people on this board were to progress even more, my ideas would too be a hinderance.


Your fundamentalist mindless idealism won&#39;t change that.

Certainly not if I hadn&#39;t even given it a shot. But hey, maybe it will change it... we don&#39;t really know yet.

[Redmau5]

Can we not just have some sort of vote on the matter, those in favour of the current way of running things and those against ?

[RedStarOverChina]

oh no. That&#39;s considerd heresy under authoritarianism.

[NovelGentry]

Can we not just have some sort of vote on the matter, those in favour of the current way of running things and those against ?

Well no... we can&#39;t do that. In case you haven&#39;t been following things, that is precisely what we are discussing. If we could have such votes and change the board in a more dynamic fashion, then we&#39;d probably already have a system like the one I propose.

[Redmau5]

What about a poll ?

[RedStarOverChina]

lol Makaveli, pay attention.

[NovelGentry]

What about a poll ?

To what end? If you want to go start a poll go start one in chit-chat (the only place we really can)... but I&#39;m not taking responsibility for your actions (although I may vote). But if they shut down a study group poll, what do you think is going to happen to one that proposes changes in the forums structure? More, even if they don&#39;t shut it down, the results are in no way even obliged to affect what actually happens.

[Latin America]

I have to say that to a certain point I agree with Novel Gentry, sorry to say it but I have experienced the unfairness of the CClub myself.

Also please people quit saying "If you don&#39;t like it, then leave" this is not very helpful, we need to discuss the problems not try to cover them.

[RedStarOverChina]

Originally posted by Latin [email protected] 1 2005, 08:23 PM
Also please people quit saying "If you don&#39;t like it, then leave" this is not very helpful, we need to discuss the problems not try to cover them.
this is the problem, LA. we are trying to expose the problems when they are trying to pass it on as "alright". Well if this many people are discontent about it, it&#39;s not alright&#33;

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by RedStarOverChina+--> (RedStarOverChina)Well if this many people are discontent about it, it&#39;s not alright&#33;[/b]

Members discontented with the CC

Novel Gentry -- repeatedly refused to be a member of the CC.

Indigo -- resigned from the CC (twice).

OleMarxo -- lost very close vote to be admitted to the CC at this time (too much spamming).

FriedFrog -- has never been nominated for CC membership (only 138 posts in more than a year).

RedStarOverChina -- resigned from the CC earlier today.

ComradeChris -- thinks that people talk about him behind his back.

T_SP -- resigned from the CC (twice).

Anti-establishment -- has never been nominated for CC membership (user for one month; 34 posts).

And that&#39;s it: "this many people" turns out to be 8 people.

What I don&#39;t know that would be useful in this context is the number of active posters in the last month or so...but it would certainly be somewhere between 10 times and 100 times the number of "discontented people".


Indigo
I&#39;ve even seen it done with private conversations on MSN where somebody has said something and it&#39;s posted to the CC for vote. And a lot of the time, the person is misunderstood, taken out of context, or confused. but innocent of the accusations against him, nonetheless.

I think you know, Indigo, that the CC does not do that anymore; I personally argued very hard to stop using chat to "indict" people. T_SP -- one of your "allies" on this question -- did try to use "chat evidence" against another member and we rejected that&#33;

No one is held "accountable" for what they say in "chat" precisely because it&#39;s nearly impossible to understand the context of such babble -- and because some of the participants may well be drunk, high, or both.

People arouse the dreaded wrath of the CC because of what they actually post.

I think that&#39;s fair. :)

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Anarchist Freedom]

I think the CC is just fine at least I have the chance to make decisons for the board. Why do you ***** about it so fucking much? who gives a rats ass its a message board. If Im correct over at EG they dont let you make decisons for the board. So why are you *****ing your given an opportunity to make decisons take it. Show your a leftist earn the members trust have over 100 posts know how the board works viola you are now in the CC. <_<

[coda]

<>

[NovelGentry]

If Im correct over at EG they dont let you make decisons for the board. So why are you *****ing your given an opportunity to make decisons take it.

Because we&#39;re not EG... nor are we other message boards. The CC has already established how we are different. I thought I made this point fairly clear in my original critique. I feel, however, that the membership has advanced beyond that -- that we are now different from ourselves so to speak.


Show your a leftist earn the members trust have over 100 posts know how the board works viola you are now in the CC.

Apparently you&#39;re not aware of my past.

[coda]

<>

[codyvo]

Originally posted by [email protected] 31 2005, 11:40 PM
It is though. I&#39;m not sure of the numbers, but, I&#39;m sure CC members represent a majority of the regular posters.

&#33;Hello&#33;

Not that I have any desire to join, but in about two minutes I came up with this list of people who post less frequently than me and are in the Commie Club:
-JazzRemmington
-Spectre
-Latin America
-ApathyMaybe
-Intifada
-Anarchist Freedom

Plus bunches of others. No offense to you, you guys did nothing wrong.

[encephalon]

for the love of fuck, the CC really doesn&#39;t hold much power, if any. The admins still act on their own, as do mods. 99% of the time the CC is filled with little more than petty arguments about the meaning of some word that varies from one person to the next. And ultimately, the only ones who&#39;s opinion matters is the admins. It&#39;s like chit chat with half the bullshit. It&#39;s nothing special. People are really making the CC out to be something it postively isn&#39;t.

[RedStarOverChina]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 09:56 PM
And that&#39;s it: "this many people" turns out to be 8 people.


What I don&#39;t know that would be useful in this context is the number of active posters in the last month or so...but it would certainly be somewhere between 10 times and 100 times the number of "discontented people".
Only 8 people? I would beg to differ (of course i dont want to be the one to turn them in)

Well how many workers in the factories are rebellion against their bosses? Not too many. Is it because their kindly bosses treat them well? I highly doubt it. People are not willing to speak their mind because some powerful reactionaries would persecute them.

But if u wanna be the reactionary u seem to speak against, u&#39;d better be ready for some resistance.


ComradeChris -- thinks that people talk about him behind his back.

He has every reason to believe that because thats what you do in CC.

Let&#39;s see some of the stanch supports of ur authoritarianism principals(just as examples) :

Anarchist Tension -- Calls himself anarchist but repeatedly exercise censorship and persecution against dissidents.

Redstar2000 -- perversely abuses his power by persecuting others while exercising censorship.

El Infiltr(A)do -- Believes that if u dont agree with him, u r "stupid and a threat for any society."


Hmmm. Why do they oppose change? I wonder.

[NovelGentry]

for the love of fuck, the CC really doesn&#39;t hold much power, if any. The admins still act on their own, as do mods. 99% of the time the CC is filled with little more than petty arguments about the meaning of some word that varies from one person to the next.

Hey, someone else got the point I was trying to make&#33;

[codyvo]

Encephalon:Like I said I have no desire to join, and if given a choice I would likely just remain one of the Members. Although I would like to see what it is all about, just to check it out.

Also, it is a very abstract and difficult idea but I personally think we should add more democratic policy to this site, than is being proposed, like elections for the moderators of forums. I know you may say "oh the ones that are mods are the mods because they&#39;ve spent time here, are loyal and know how to be a moderator." But we can have a transition period where the former moderator trains the soon to be moderator, if any of the old ones would even get voted out which they probably wouldn&#39;t.

Anyways, I know the Admins have the final say, and rightfully so it&#39;s their site, but I just had to share my idea.

[RedStarOverChina]

I just had to share my idea.

No, no sharing ideas&#33;

:lol:

See what happened to the last guy who shared his ideas:
Trashed (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=36046&st=0&#entry1291875348)

Edit: Red, my mistake for accidentally trashing LA&#39;s thread in this sensitive period. i was moving threads around at late night (check the time GMT + 8.) and was too tired after a whole day at school. Salute and excuses owed to all those who found this issue bothering them. I had no intention to trash La&#39;s thread.

Fidelbrand.

[Fidelbrand]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 07:16 AM
Fidelbrand, as much as I like u and ur smilies, I&#39;m gonna have to disagree. :(

I really dont think joining the CC is that big of a matter, which is why I will resign at an appropriate time. For that matter, this whole forum isnt that big of a deal.

But the big deal in this is that when we see injustice we cannot look away and be forced to tolerate it, no matter how small of an injustice it is. Yes it is a small matter in many ways. But that doesn&#39;t mean we shouldn&#39;t rebel again it. An injustice is an injustice is an injustice--an injustice needs to be addressed and rebelled against. I find it degrading towards my character be forced to look away when faced with injustice, even when it does not have anything to do with me.

To be honest I dont care what&#39;s the outcome of this: either I get banned/restricted, or we all have universal sufferage, doesnt matter. But there is no way I would keep my mouth shut against my will and bow to the the pressure of authoritarianism.

I have betrayed my class, rebelled against my school, and revolted against my relatives. Frankly I can&#39;t resist doing it again against the big guys in this forum. Only this time, I REALLY have nothing to lose.
RedStarOverChina, it&#39;s fine to disagree with each other and I believe we are mature to discuss and debate and not let the outcome taint our friendship. :)

I understand all that you have wrote, and I agree with you. But your reply and disagreement to my post is just like a declaration of your leftist belief ..... little was quoted to state why you disagree with me.

[Fidelbrand]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 09:06 AM
The heavy policing of the board, the exclusion of members to a select worthy few to a private forum destroys solidarity which is more important to the leftist movement than the commie club. If you do not think so your perspective and priorities are screwed up and then it&#39;s your politics that is in question. some of us would like to see the revolution taken to the streets and actually mobolize actions with comrades, international and affinity groups. You can&#39;t do that when the situation is created around exclusion and distrust. And the distrust goes both ways.

There have been witchhunts -- when SOME feel it their duty to gather info about another member, because of "a questionable remark or unorthodoxed ideology" which is then presented to a "jury" of cc members to vote, whether cc members or other board members is irrelevant -- that is a witchhunt. I&#39;ve even seen it done with private conversations on MSN where somebody has said something and it&#39;s posted to the cc for vote. and a lot of the time, the person is misunderstood, taken out of context, or confused. but innocent of the accusations against him, nonetheless. i am sure those people coming to conduct the study group aren&#39;t going to be checked out for their qualifications as the members here are.

Nothing that is done in CC cannot be done on the main board. These aren&#39;t life and death decisions you are making that need specialization. it&#39;s clear who the right wingers are, put them in OI. anything else just vote on the main board if need be if it&#39;s even necessary&#33;&#33;&#33; Why not just the administrators put up a forum if he sees a generated interest in it. or take it down if there isn&#39;t? do you need to create a commie club for that&#33;&#33;&#33;

Is this the wrong place for revolutionaries to gather?
You haven&#39;t reply my post and start shitting around with your blathering of "witchhunts"~ :lol:

Your possible reply (?): "Wow&#33; Dictatorship&#33; Do I have to reply you? You re-incarnated Stalin&#33;"
My possible reply: " No, you don&#39;t have to. But you are dodging away from my replies and starting new posts in whining and shitting unconstructively. In a normal and rational context, when someone disagrees with you, you either say "you are right" or you offer your counter-arguments.

Even Novel Gentry is trying to make some constructive steps, but you are just focusing in the critique, and worse yet, your flood of emotional exagerations did not come with logical replies (and you chose to ignore them when you found out that shit in your pants)

http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php...80&p=1291875133 (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?act=Post&CODE=06&f=4&t=35980&p=1291875133)

[RedStarOverChina]

RedStarOverChina, it&#39;s fine to disagree with each other and I believe we are mature to discuss and debate and not let the outcome taint our friendship.

Of course not. I know you are a good guy judging by ur actions and not by ur position on this issue. In fact, I judge everyone accordingly.


The CC is a living proof of a benign democracy, if not yet a full-blown one.

I wouldn&#39;t say thats exactly true. If its a democracy we&#39;d have different opinions, no? When only a fraction of the population participate in decision making is called oligarchy, not democracy.

There is little exaggeration in saying that CC members are actively engaged in meaningless witch-hunt---I was there, I know. During my days in CC I was engaged in it once too and I felt ashamed of myself right afterwards.

While u r addressing the need for change, I think u ignored the source of the problem. This whole system is rotten.

[RedStarOverChina]

I dont wanna analyze it further and there is nothing more to analyze, in all fairness. For me, this is more of a "follow my heart" thing. Whats going on isnt justifiable and thats that. I stand firmly against anything unjust, no matter how big or how small. I simply cant look away. Not any more.

[Fidelbrand]

RedStarOverChina,

Differentiated opinions and pluralistic arguments are essential to any democracy. In the cc, there is not an army of "All YES" or "ALL No". The polls are democratically posted and democratically ran.

As regards to "only a fraction of the population participate in decision making is called oligarchy, not democracy". i understand your concern.

But few important points have to be cautioned,

The cc members are urging to include more members in it. Also, they (cc members) are valued for their dedication and their rationality and adherence to the cause of this board and the leftist movement, and due to their deliberative capacity, to comment and make suggestions to various issues in the running of the site.

The "witchchunt" (though we disagree upon the intensity of this word) is necessary. Malte stated a number of times that this is a leftist message forum, and better yet, members presiding in this forum agreed. The "spotting" (I prefer this word, but anyways~) is needed to keep the board clean of reactionaries in whitewashing the whole forum.

:)

[RedStarOverChina]

But then shouldn&#39;t EVERYONE participate in the witch-hunt?
Shouldn&#39;t the witch-hunt at least be transparent to the general public?
Shouldn&#39;t the accused have a chance to defend himself?
Shouldn&#39;t the "leaders" allow freedom of speech and NOT close down polls or cconversations that they feel could be used against them?

[Edelweiss]

It&#39;s really sad that people are actually buying into Gent&#39;s nonsense rhetoric.
I hope you&#39;ll see one day how absurd and ridiculous this whole argument is for any leftist whose activism goes beyond starting petty rebbelions on Internet message boards. Gent&#39;s attitude is highly counter-productive and unconstructive, and adds nothing to the improvement to this board. The suggestions made by Gent would, if actually implemented, ruin this board within days, turning it into the mad burocracy Gent is critisising so harshly. Furthermore the board would be taken over by Nazis, Stalin kiddies, or bored nerds within weeks. That would be the end of RevLeft as we have it now. Gent and everyone else is free to leave this board, and try to build your stupid political simulation game (cause that would be precisly what it be, and anyone who isn&#39;t spending his whole live on the Internet can see that) somewhere else.

[Fidelbrand]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 04:41 PM
But then shouldn&#39;t EVERYONE participate in the witch-hunt?
Shouldn&#39;t the witch-hunt at least be transparent to the general public?
Shouldn&#39;t the accused have a chance to defend himself?
Shouldn&#39;t the "leaders" allow freedom of speech and NOT close down polls or cconversations that they feel could be used against them?
Red,

1. Theoretical speaking, Yes. But As aforementioned, experienced and elected cc members who accumulated a certain number of posts or presented a certain degree of rationality in articulating leftist thoughts are elected in the cc with ease. I (personally) think they are more competent to decide who should be spotted and restricted. Therefore I disagree with the notion of everyone (varyng degrees to the "LEFT", varying degrees of rationally deliberating in judgmental issues, etc.)

2. As elaborated above.
And, troublesome right-wingers and capitalists are paper-tigers who like to see themselves burnt, then, whine about "Oh, i was restricted&#33; See how stainist they are&#33;". Most if not all come here for fun in wrecking our forum. Historically speaking, there have been only a few cases where they defend themsleves through PMs to admins.

Secondly, they are warned why & for what they are restricted for Link (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=7192). Deductively, it may even be said that the cc is even over-democratic in a sense that we take one more step in restricting people - we sometimes leniently set up polls in determining whether there is an immediate for restriction.

In conclsuion, they are warned, and they knew why they are rsricted, and yet, they have means to defend if they are "mis-interpreted"

3. This has been rare. And we have to remember that admins are not Gods but human beings who make mistakes. As long as I&#39;m in the cc, I&#39;ll make effort (and in fact, many cc members voice their opinions when these sporadic mistakes happen) to highlight these mistakes and have them checked and corrected accordingly.

[Edelweiss]

One more thing, which people like T-SP and Red seem not to understand: Open polls outside the CC would be much less representative than polls now in the CC. Open polls can be manipulated with ease. With the CC we have implemented a relatively secure system which allow represantative polls about board decisions.
The CC is the most secure, effective, democratic and represantative members co-management system which is realisticly possiable on a board with the size of RevLeft. It&#39;s simple as that. Most other boards don&#39;t even allow discussions about admin discussions. If you don&#39;t want to destroy what we have created here, than I suggest everyone to stop this insanity now.

[coda]

edit:: Not involved anymore.

[Edelweiss]

The conclusion would be to entirely close the CC than, and run RevLeft like any other board, indigo, it should be obvious that what gent suggested can not be implemented.
However indigo, your argument is not consitent. On the side you complain that new members are not allowed in fast enough into the CC (as has been said most leftists ARE allowed into the CC, nearly all polls are positive, it&#39;s just a question of time in most cases), but than again you complain that newer members than you dare to participate in the CC, because that&#39;s what they do, there&#39;s nothing wrong when a newer member than you is complaining about sexist, homophobic, anti-semitic comments etc. of another "leftist".

[Fidelbrand]

If you were honest with yourself you would admit that the large majority of posts are on and about members, nominating them....

Right.


or getting rid of them

The Admins do that with experienced rationality or else, otherwise, discussed among the cc members.


very dubious ways.

How? please exaplain/elaborate.


I know it&#39;s true, because I was in there until I took myself out just last week and I was there previously and long before you arrived here just a few years ago. Hey, if you want to get all authoritarian here, ---- Let&#39;s play the senority card.

What were your names? Or did you use this name all the way?
"Get all authoritarian here"..... as anticipated, knew you would arrive at this buzzword.


Becauses, next to Malte, I am the longest continous member of the Che-lives/ Revolutionary-Left boards, "christianed" this site with it&#39;s very first post. invested five years on Malte&#39;s Boards, know the whole entire board history -- every thing that has happened on this board and the other board and have posted on no other boards in the meantime.

Now see..... who&#39;s doing it?
Stop fiddling with the senority card. http://www.morethanwords.it/studenti/calshop/wink14.gif


That my friend is loyalty to the Che-lives site. can&#39;t say the same for all of you. Even some of the adminstrators and mods post on other boards, even the enemy boards. And with as long as I&#39;ve been here have never treated any of the new members as a second class citizens or tried to exert any power over anybody in the time I&#39;ve been here and have had no real problem with any member besides one incident with the unpleasant comrade RAF.

ok....... I promise you I read it all. It&#39;s all emotional narration of your personal development in che-lives/RL.


So, I just think it&#39;s fucked up that you newer members are so reactionary in your dealing with other leftists here, the non-cc members, that you would create such a disunity by pulling this power bullshit limiting their membership to the board.

Members in RL, in meagre time, gets included in the cc by democratic elections from experienced members. Disunity is better than disillusionment. Disunity needs time to be bridged. And most of all, the disunity you talk about is not a big issue. If it is country, it may pose as a problem because political resources/status is not distributed as equally as possible (For you as a leftist we share our critique towards such a (capitalist) country, right? ). But this is a message board............ temporal and inmaterialistic inequality in a message board will not lead not affect our lives, as a country would do to its citizens. Get a grip, and stay cool and stop stirring the pot.


You may know communist theory, but you don&#39;t know shit about it&#39;s practice

Let me put it this way:
We both may know communist theory. But for you, your head is blosoming thoughts of instant revolutions AT ALL TIMES, without paying attention to the dialectics and evolutionary stages we need to attain democracy and emnacipation. You want it now&#33; NOW&#33; .......... in an unrealistic way&#33; That&#39;s stupid, but I admire your urge. 12-14 year old rebels usually resort to such upright rebellions, and most importantly, 1) without anticpating the effects of their actions, and 2) without constructive comments made after illogical critiques.

[coda]

..........

[coda]

<..

[Edelweiss]

Indigo, I have no idea whwre you see a "segregation between old members and new members in some power hoarding". You accuse the Cc members of motives, which simply aren&#39;t there.

You surely remember the old CC system: All potential members had to ask an admin for permission into the CC. With the votes on CC membership we have made the CC more democratic, although I admit that there is some truth in it that the focus of the CC forum has who will be admitted and who not. But, in the end the votes have made the CC and the community in general more democratic.

[coda]

I see a segregation between new/ overlooked members and those of who are in the
cc. I think the system would work fine if those members overlooked with 800 posts were in there and most everything that was decided was focused on the betterment of the site.

Now, I am going to dis-involve myself from this and focus on the real issues going on.

[RedAnarchist]

Indigo, it would probably work much better like that, but many members have actually left the CC or have no wish to join the CC. What about these members?

[Edelweiss]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 01:01 PM
Indigo, it would probably work much better like that, but many members have actually left the CC or have no wish to join the CC. What about these members?
Indeed, as I said in an earlier post, many members simply have no interest in joining the CC as an co-managment system, but have interest in using the board for what it&#39;s made for: discussion, learning, communicating.
Only very few strange individuals like Gent are developing a passion or obsession about the administative issues of RevLeft...

[RedAnarchist]

If they are so obsessed about something which in life is quite insignificant, then i am concerned about the amount of time they spend on the Internet. This is a forum, for intelligent, civilised debate. Most of the memmbers are articulate, intelligent left-wingers. If they see getting into the CC as any kind of achivement, then its kind of sad, and they would really need to cut down on their Internet usage, and achive something in real life, which will be of real significance.

[Anarchist Freedom]

I agree with you. Honestly this isnt an oppressive message board we dont shoot you and starve your family. This is an internet where nothing more then VIRTUAL words are exchanged this isnt even real life where speaking of here where talking about a message board. So when you guys decide to pull your heads out of your asses and realize that what your doing is counter productive to start this whole internet revolution bullshit. Ill be glad to help you until then please move along.

[Edelweiss]

The problem here is that Gent is a bit like a child who just learned something new and wants to try it out now in the real world. What he learned is Marxism, and since Gent&#39;s real world mainly conists out of the Internet, he is "trying it out" on Revleft now. Means: developing a crazy "Marxist" analysis of the structure of this board and is trying to start the "revolution" here...

[RedAnarchist]

Which cannot happen, as the Internet is not a country.


I think Gent has gotten way too addicted to the Internet. Maybe we could temporarily ban him for a week or two, just to help him? Sounds harsh, but he spends quite a lot of time here and if he couldnt access the site he might be able to drag himself away from the computer and experience something more real.

[NovelGentry]

Keep em coming... no doubt if you convince them how insane I am, either as a subsequent conclusion from my ideas or as a means by which to destroy their value, you will have a solution. More, no such actions would occur in the future... who else would ever want to go through the humiliation?

The truth is, I don&#39;t really care what you think is occuring in my mind. That is not really at issue here -- my ideas are not designed as a means for simple acceptance. As I explained directly to you the other day Malte, this is about being able to advance the board, to grow the resources and functions of it with those who have "surpassed" it&#39;s current mode.

You say that some simply wish to take part in the discussion and communication that occurs here -- well that is precisely what this is about, being able to develop that, so that it is not always the same old stuff. The study group was an amazing idea for this, and no doubt there are other amazing ideas that are in peoples heads or will be in the future. Changing the board structure allows us to develop those as rapidly as possible.

[NovelGentry]

Which cannot happen, as the Internet is not a country.

I thought I addressed this in my critique.


I think Gent has gotten way too addicted to the Internet. Maybe we could temporarily ban him for a week or two, just to help him? Sounds harsh, but he spends quite a lot of time here and if he couldnt access the site he might be able to drag himself away from the computer and experience something more real.

No doubt you are a psychologist and since we know each other oh so well outside of this board, no doubt you are qualified to understand the depth of my real experiences.

EDIT: Is there maybe a real reason you want to ban me?

[RedAnarchist]

No, i dont want you banned for any major reason, just maybe temporraily to help you a little. You&#39;re intelligent, youre left-wing. Its just that you need to cut down on the amount of time you spend on the Internet, thats all. Theres a whole world out there, you know.

[NovelGentry]

No, i dont want you banned for any major reason, just maybe temporraily to help you a little. You&#39;re intelligent, youre left-wing. Its just that you need to cut down on the amount of time you spend on the Internet, thats all. Theres a whole world out there, you know.

Oh I&#39;m quite familiar with the real world. Would you like to point out what kinds of things I&#39;m missing out on?

[RedAnarchist]

For a start, are you active politically in the real world?

[Edelweiss]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 05:12 PM
Keep em coming... no doubt if you convince them how insane I am, either as a subsequent conclusion from my ideas or as a means by which to destroy their value, you will have a solution. More, no such actions would occur in the future... who else would ever want to go through the humiliation?

The truth is, I don&#39;t really care what you think is occuring in my mind. That is not really at issue here -- my ideas are not designed as a means for simple acceptance. As I explained directly to you the other day Malte, this is about being able to advance the board, to grow the resources and functions of it with those who have "surpassed" it&#39;s current mode.

You say that some simply wish to take part in the discussion and communication that occurs here -- well that is precisely what this is about, being able to develop that, so that it is not always the same old stuff. The study group was an amazing idea for this, and no doubt there are other amazing ideas that are in peoples heads or will be in the future. Changing the board structure allows us to develop those as rapidly as possible.
Yes, but your ideas are simply not possible to realize. This popmpous political propsal , trying to start that petty rebellion here, was completely unneccessary and just plain mental mastrubation on our costs. Concrete technical suggestion would have been constructive, like a public commens and suggestions forum (a very simple but effective idea). But what you have suggeted simply wouldn&#39;t work, and was not useful for, nor any other admin or mod. Frankly, dealing with that was a big waste of time.

[NovelGentry]

For a start, are you active politically in the real world?

That completely depends on what you mean by "active politically." Do I run in elections? No. Am I in a party/union? No. Do I hang up flyers and pretend that makes me politically active? No. Do I boycott wal-mart? No.

Do I discuss with real people with real problems? Yes. Do I attempt to increase the consciousness and awareness of people of issues they may not know about (Belize, Venezuela, the reality of Cuba, Argentina factory takeovers and the IMF involvement in shutting them down, the current issue on the US harboring terrorist Posada Carriles)? Yes.

[NovelGentry]

Yes, but your ideas are simply not possible to realize. This popmpous political propsal , trying to start that petty rebellion here, was completely unneccessary and just plain mental mastrubation on our costs.

Well it is certainly your opinion that it was completely unnecessary. But that kinda differentiates the difference between us here... I don&#39;t believe forwarding my proposal to the CC would have really gotten any fair discussion or debate, so I made it public, for you to see and see if you agreed with, as well as for others.

As far as "trying to start that petty rebellion here" -- I have done no such thing. I can only presume you&#39;re talking about the recent drop outs from the CC, etc. I have been contacted privately by a number of individuals over the past few days, none of which I have directly said anything of the nature "you should drop out of the CC." To the contrary, many of them were in effect telling me they were going to drop out, or asking if I knew if others were going to drop out. I have inquired as to whether people are going to, because I was asked by one member if I had any idea of the extent of it.

[NovelGentry]

I would just like to add, I&#39;m well aware my techniques are not the "normal" leftist techniques. They don&#39;t include a large sign and flyers with raised fists, hammers and sicles, anarchist symbols, etc all over them. I&#39;m not particularly fond of one line slogans, and I do feel I should make people receptive to the idea first rather than just going out and badgering them with it.

[codyvo]

Originally posted by codyvo+Jun 2 2005, 04:05 AM--> (codyvo @ Jun 2 2005, 04:05 AM)
[email protected] 31 2005, 11:40 PM
It is though. I&#39;m not sure of the numbers, but, I&#39;m sure CC members represent a majority of the regular posters.

&#33;Hello&#33;

Not that I have any desire to join, but in about two minutes I came up with this list of people who post less frequently than me and are in the Commie Club:
-JazzRemmington
-Spectre
-Latin America
-ApathyMaybe
-Intifada
-Anarchist Freedom

Plus bunches of others. No offense to you, you guys did nothing wrong. [/b]
Not to mention:
-313C7 iVi4RX
-Severian
-XPhile2868
-Depaver
-CommieGirl
-Noxion
-AnarchoRebel
-El Infiltrado

[Anarchist Freedom]

Whenever you want to stop your mini crusade against virtual oppression we will be waiting. If you guys want to make a change so much go try this on another message board.

[NovelGentry]

Whenever you want to stop your mini crusade against virtual oppression we will be waiting. If you guys want to make a change so much go try this on another message board.

Well Mr. Designated Leftist Stoner -- you have still yet to grasp what this is all about.

[Edelweiss]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 05:31 PM

Yes, but your ideas are simply not possible to realize. This popmpous political propsal , trying to start that petty rebellion here, was completely unneccessary and just plain mental mastrubation on our costs.

Well it is certainly your opinion that it was completely unnecessary. But that kinda differentiates the difference between us here... I don&#39;t believe forwarding my proposal to the CC would have really gotten any fair discussion or debate, so I made it public, for you to see and see if you agreed with, as well as for others.

As far as "trying to start that petty rebellion here" -- I have done no such thing. I can only presume you&#39;re talking about the recent drop outs from the CC, etc. I have been contacted privately by a number of individuals over the past few days, none of which I have directly said anything of the nature "you should drop out of the CC." To the contrary, many of them were in effect telling me they were going to drop out, or asking if I knew if others were going to drop out. I have inquired as to whether people are going to, because I was asked by one member if I had any idea of the extent of it.
gent, don&#39;t be canting. You could have easily contacted me or another admin personally with your propasal. You didn&#39;t. You posted it here with the intention to get supporters which should pressure the adminship to abolish the CC and drastically change the structure of the board, everything deeply political justified, with the strange Marxist analysis and absurd comparisons behind it, you basicly wanted to bring your imagined means of production (the board software) in the hands of "the people", if I got you right. That would be a revolution in your own logic.

[NovelGentry]

gent, don&#39;t be canting. You could have easily contacted me or another admin personally with your propasal. You didn&#39;t. You posted it here with the intention to get supporters which should pressure the adminship to abolish the CC and drastically change the structure of the board, everything deeply political justified,

Well yes, because such a thing is not possible sending it to you, or another admin, or the CC.

But still, this is completely dependent on their support for it, to which I could not have any knowledge unless I posted it publically.


with the strange Marxist analysis and absurd comparisons behind it, you basicly wanted to bring your imagined means of production (the board software) in the hands of "the people", if I got you right. That would be a revolution in your own logic.

Yes -- precisely why I wrote it as I did.

EDIT: I should note, I thought you were talking about the existing opponents of the CC who are now dropping out. There is no real way for us to wage any revolution or rebellion... such a thing would be impossible with no system of doing that. Theoretically I could have taken over these "means of production" with my previous access... but I didn&#39;t. Much of this was directed towards knowing where people stand, what grew out of that is not so much in my control. That is the point I&#39;m trying to make.

[Hegemonicretribution]

Wow that was an intense half hour or so. Anyway, I would just like to say I don&#39;t think you are mad, quite intelligent, but deffinately misguided NovelGentry.

In even the "freest" societies today democracy does not exist. Children cannot vote (newbies), foreigners can&#39;t vote (cappies) mad men can&#39;t (those way more authoritarian than is comfortable/legal) and those that haven&#39;t registered (not yet in the c.c). Oligarchy at best based on definitions. I don&#39;t like drawing parallels that don&#39;t exist as such, but as an analogy you get the point.

I personally believe that children (newbies) should have the vote, however experience/ common sense prevents this. In these cases at least I believe that special exceptions should be made. Those that do prove themselves should be voted in. Post based admission (last time I remember it being tried) resulted in spam posting for membership and the admission of American Kid and many other left leaning, but not fully left members, being included in what, in some cases did not interest them.

Because of the nature of the board infiltration would be easy, and I believe that in general the views of the C.C. are acceptable by most. The vote of anyone with an agenda would not be. Capital punishment, or closed borders immgration, if put to a referendum would pass in most countries. I am sure that within a week the deletion of the whole board would occur here.

Everyone else has apparently said it is not a country, well even if it was, due to the nature it still wouldn&#39;t happen. Keep trying though.

I guess I have just rambled for a while here, but when in Rome...
If to have credibility with those in opposition I would have to leave the C.C then that would be fair enough. However I think that would just prove me melodramatic, as I can&#39;t as everyone else has said here, see the big thing about a board designed for maintanance.

[NovelGentry]

In even the "freest" societies today democracy does not exist.

I don&#39;t recommend we aspire to limit ourselves according to the freest societies today.


I personally believe that children (newbies) should have the vote, however experience/ common sense prevents this. In these cases at least I believe that special exceptions should be made. Those that do prove themselves should be voted in. Post based admission (last time I remember it being tried) resulted in spam posting for membership and the admission of American Kid and many other left leaning, but not fully left members, being included in what, in some cases did not interest them.

A lot of this depends on how you view the board structure, and what it&#39;s ultimate goals should be. If you view the board structure as a means by which to ensure political limitation on those who do not agree politically, by all means, keep the CC. If you view the board structure as a means by which the board itself is developed, then there needs to be change. The CC claims to be a reasonable means to develop the board, I no longer believe it is. It has, however, proven to be an extremely capable means by which to ensure political limitation -- which I do not necessarily disagree with.


Because of the nature of the board infiltration would be easy, and I believe that in general the views of the C.C. are acceptable by most. The vote of anyone with an agenda would not be. Capital punishment, or closed borders immgration, if put to a referendum would pass in most countries. I am sure that within a week the deletion of the whole board would occur here.

This is unreasonable. The deletion of the entire board would be still extremely dependent on those who actually can execute such actions -- more, in order for it to be executed it would have to be sanctioned, meaning you believe a majority of people would vote for this board to be deleted. The only concentrated group that would do such, OI, is not given any political emancipation under my proposal. My propsal demands increased consciousness amongst all of us to detect and remove duplicate accounts, trolls, etc by changing the means by which we are capable and increasing the amount of people responsible for being conscious of such things, namely, moderators.


If to have credibility with those in opposition I would have to leave the C.C then that would be fair enough. However I think that would just prove me melodramatic, as I can&#39;t as everyone else has said here, see the big thing about a board designed for maintanance.

If one thing is certain it is that people have completely mistaken this for a far grander "scheme" than it is. There is no "credibility with those in opposition" other than your personal credibility with them, which is completely independent from one another. I have an extreme amount of respect for various members, and their credibility in my eyes is not determined by whether or not they agree with me, and particularly not whether they have or haven&#39;t quit the CC.

There is nothing credible about blindly following something. With that said, if someone agrees with this in full, I don&#39;t see why they wouldn&#39;t leave the CC.

[Guerrilla22]

Wow, Novel sure put quite a bit of time and effort into writing about the cc. I can only wonder why such effort was put into writing about a forum on an online community.

[NovelGentry]

Wow, Novel sure put quite a bit of time and effort into writing about the cc. I can only wonder why such effort was put into writing about a forum on an online community.

Well if you bothered to read the other responses you would surely know it&#39;s because I&#39;m an insane maniac who should be temporarily banned to help deal with my internet addiction.

[Guerrilla22]

The only thing about the CC. its stupid that if you disagree with someone nowadays these little kiddies go straight to the cc forum and make a thread calling for your removal.

[RedStarOverChina]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 12:43 PM
Wow, Novel sure put quite a bit of time and effort into writing about the cc. I can only wonder why such effort was put into writing about a forum on an online community.
our "leadership" put the same if not more amount of energy trying to stop people from talking about it.


Only very few strange individuals like Gent are developing a passion or obsession about the administative issues of RevLeft...

Like I said...I dont care much for the out come. If I were interested in administative issues I would have stayed in CC and kept kissing ass untill the day I become an ass myself. :lol:

I do it just to be myself. and I am being myself; brutally being myself.


The CC is the most secure, effective, democratic and represantative members co-management system which is realisticly possiable on a board with the size of RevLeft. It&#39;s simple as that.

U and I both know that aint true...


One more thing, which people like T-SP and Red seem not to understand: Open polls outside the CC would be much less representative than polls now in the CC.

Ok then. I shall agree with u on that, if u make CC transparent to the "commoners". Is there anything wrong with that? People who are being talked about behind their back deserve a chance to defend themselves.

Malte I dont get it. Its gonna be ur forum at the end anywayz so why not try to make people happier? it&#39;s not like the proles are gonna rob u of ur website if u treat them too nicely.

[resisting arrest with violence]

NovelGentry is right about the need to rearrange the structure of the C.C.
If such actions are not implemented there will be agents provocateurs who will insinuate and infiltrate themselves into the C.C. (who&#39;s to say that they have not already done so?)and destroy the C.C. forever.

[Holocaustpulp]

I have not sensed anything overbearing about the "commie club" (though I haven&#39;t been here long), and I do believe websites do need to have certain administrative powers. However, restrictions should not be present on this forum.

- HP

[Edelweiss]

our "leadership" put the same if not more amount of energy trying to stop people from talking about it.

Lie&#33; I could simply delete or close this thread.

I doubt Gent&#39;s suggestions are making the "proles happier", it&#39;s sad how you are buying into Gent&#39;s nonsense rhetoric. It would simply destoy the board, like I have said many times before now. Making the CC transparent wouldn&#39;t do any good either, you have been inside, and you know why...


U and I both know that aint true...

Unfortenetly for you this is very true. I&#39;m very convinced about that.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 09:13 PM

Making the CC transparent wouldn&#39;t do any good either
What could it hurt

[Edelweiss]

Originally posted by CompaneroDeLibertad+Jun 3 2005, 12:17 AM--> (CompaneroDeLibertad @ Jun 3 2005, 12:17 AM)
[email protected] 2 2005, 09:13 PM

Making the CC transparent wouldn&#39;t do any good either
What could it hurt [/b]
The CC is a non-public forum for for very good reasons. Beside the votes on CC membership, we are discussing things there which aren&#39;t suspposed to be seen by non-leftist members.

[Hegemonicretribution]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 05:30 PM
This is unreasonable. The deletion of the entire board would be still extremely dependent on those who actually can execute such actions -- more, in order for it to be executed it would have to be sanctioned, meaning you believe a majority of people would vote for this board to be deleted. The only concentrated group that would do such, OI, is not given any political emancipation under my proposal. My propsal demands increased consciousness amongst all of us to detect and remove duplicate accounts, trolls, etc by changing the means by which we are capable and increasing the amount of people responsible for being conscious of such things, namely, moderators.

Maybe I exagerated here, but the prospect is real. You say OI would remain but people could infiltrate easily. They are not going to be called "A.Hitler" because they are not without intelligence.

If the prospect of getting in was easier, then many would join, and under your accountability, admin could be asked to close the site. Of course they robably won&#39;t but then you are going back on everything you stood for, only now people are more pissed off because they have had the freedom. There is no problem giving an inch, unless it is t someone who will want to take a mile.

The nearest example I can think of is that of a gay society. The aim was to be entirely democratic. A rugby club (homophobic, all though I can&#39;t remember where exactly from) all joined the society and voted to close it down. The society was doomed, they could try and ignore the vote and be against everything they stod for so no longer exist. Or take the vote and no longer exist. Even if it was not deletion, it could be something.

When I came here I knew nothing of the C.C. and cared about it less. It is something that exists. Say it was abolshed and the site ran solely by Malte and a few appointed admin would that be better?

[NovelGentry]

Maybe I exagerated here, but the prospect is real. You say OI would remain but people could infiltrate easily. They are not going to be called "A.Hitler" because they are not without intelligence.

People can infiltrate easily regardless. Assuming they&#39;re going to be named A. Hitler just because they believe they&#39;ll get restricted anyway is foolish. If they&#39;re gonna call themselves A. Hitler their gonna do it either way.

If they&#39;re going to pretend to be leftist then "crack the whole thing open" they&#39;ll do that too.


If the prospect of getting in was easier, then many would join, and under your accountability, admin could be asked to close the site. Of course they robably won&#39;t but then you are going back on everything you stood for, only now people are more pissed off because they have had the freedom. There is no problem giving an inch, unless it is t someone who will want to take a mile.

The prospect of "getting in" is not easier, it doesn&#39;t exist. There is nothing to "get into" under my proposal.

This is why certain guidelines are established immediately, to ensure there are always "protections."


The nearest example I can think of is that of a gay society. The aim was to be entirely democratic. A rugby club (homophobic, all though I can&#39;t remember where exactly from) all joined the society and voted to close it down. The society was doomed, they could try and ignore the vote and be against everything they stod for so no longer exist. Or take the vote and no longer exist. Even if it was not deletion, it could be something.

Well maybe they too should have established certain irreversable guidlines.


When I came here I knew nothing of the C.C. and cared about it less. It is something that exists. Say it was abolshed and the site ran solely by Malte and a few appointed admin would that be better?

No, it would be nearly impossible, and even less would get done.

[Edelweiss]

No, it would be nearly impossible, and even less would get done.

You have no idea how frustrating such comments are for me, and possibly the other admins and mods. We all have worked hard to improve RevLeft, there is always place for improvement, but they way you decribe it, is just not true. RevLeft/Che-Lives has been contstantly been improved over the time. It&#39;s not the static place you decribe it. I&#39;m sorry this place doesn&#39;t suit your own personal ideas for it, and I&#39;m sorry RevLeft isn&#39;t what you want it to be. But RevLeft wasn&#39;t created to suit your own needs. The logical way to go would simply be to just contact an admin with your real ideas, or join the CC and discuss your ideas there. Instead you don&#39;t even bring up your ideas, and propose your stupid proposal here which have nothing to do with the improvemnts you seem to have in mind. I just can not see any sense at all in that.

[NovelGentry]

You have no idea how frustrating such comments are for me, and possibly the other admins and mods. We all have worked hard to improve RevLeft, there is always place for improvement, but they way you decribe it, is just not true. RevLeft/Che-Lives has been contstantly been improved over the time. It&#39;s not the static place you decribe it. I&#39;m sorry this place doesn&#39;t suit your own personal ideas for it, and I&#39;m sorry RevLeft isn&#39;t what you want it to be. But RevLeft wasn&#39;t created to suit your own needs. The logical way to go would simply be to just contact an admin with your real ideas, or join the CC and discuss your ideas there. Instead you don&#39;t even bring up your ideas, and propose your stupid proposal here which have nothing to do with the improvemnts you seem to have in mind. I just can not see any sense at all in that.

Well the RevLeft guidelines need updating then. I never said this board was static.

Saying such a thing is not meant to be "frustrating" it&#39;s meant to be realistic. Are you trying to say that this board could operate as quickly with half the admins and mods? That doesn&#39;t make any sense... they would be overrun with work and things would be "even slower." It is not an insult, it&#39;s cold hard truth, the less people you have to spread those tasks amongst the more tasks per person and the more bogged down they become -- it becomes even worse if these admins are not regularly available.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2005, 08:45 PM
Are you trying to say that this board could operate as quickly with half the admins and mods? That doesn&#39;t make any sense... they would be overrun with work and things would be "even slower." It is not an insult, it&#39;s cold hard truth, the less people you have to spread those tasks amongst the more tasks per person and the more bogged down they become -- it becomes even worse if these admins are not regularly available.
Unfortunately, this is a good point that is already a discussion point in the CC&#33;

Your conglomeration of ideas is simply confusing and frustrating; you could very much simplify your ideas but you don&#39;t. You state them redundantly, with entirely irrelevant add-ons and then you attack the people that point out flaws.

If you would have joined the CC and pitched in, you would have likely been able to make a difference but now you are not only fucking yourself but people that see some of the benefits in your tangled web of an agenda.

I don&#39;t understand what makes you think you are the one to give this mandate but I will tell you as only one person that has tried and successfully helped to made changes around here: you haven&#39;t tried to reason with the people putting their effort into this site, you haven&#39;t offered suggestions in a respectful way and you aren&#39;t helping anyone by seeding conflict here.

[apathy maybe]

Originally posted by redstar2000+--> (redstar2000)
Members discontented with the CC
...
And that&#39;s it: "this many people" turns out to be 8 people.
...
People arouse the dreaded wrath of the CC because of what they actually post.
[/b]
Well me. But I feel no strong desire to abolish it. Just make it work better. Not that I know how.
Also I&#39;ve seen people kicked out for what they didn&#39;t post, rather what it was imagined that they had posted, or because of personal grudges. (I seem to recall AK47 (now Enigma) being kicked out at one stage, but that could just be my bad memory.)

Originally posted by [email protected]

Not that I have any desire to join, but in about two minutes I came up with this list of people who post less frequently than me and are in the Commie Club:
...
-ApathyMaybe
...

While it is true that you have more posts per day then I, unless someone did something that I don&#39;t know about, I&#39;m not a member of the Commie Club.

I resigned after seeing a lot of witch hunting, and stupidity and finally seeing one person who I had respect for, kicked out for no apparent reason. I have no desire to rejoin at the moment, and can continue to view the contents of (or at least know what is in it) the CC through my vast network of spies. You never know who might be a member.

Oh and can someone answer my question or should I post it elsewhere? And the other thing.


apathy maybe

And a question which probably doesn&#39;t belong here but I can&#39;t be bothered asking it elsewhere as I know it will be seen. What is the policy of members (i.e. not cc people) hav[ing custom] titles?

(One thing that I would support which is not to do with the CC at all, is the deletion of all members who signed up more then 2 years ago, and have no posts. I know at least one of those is one I made, but then I think I lost the password (apathetic_maybe).)

[codyvo]

Originally posted by Apathy Maybe+Jun 3 2005, 06:32 AM--> (Apathy Maybe @ Jun 3 2005, 06:32 AM)
codyvo

Not that I have any desire to join, but in about two minutes I came up with this list of people who post less frequently than me and are in the Commie Club:
...
-ApathyMaybe
...

While it is true that you have more posts per day then I, unless someone did something that I don&#39;t know about, I&#39;m not a member of the Commie Club.

I resigned after seeing a lot of witch hunting, and stupidity and finally seeing one person who I had respect for, kicked out for no apparent reason. I have no desire to rejoin at the moment, and can continue to view the contents of (or at least know what is in it) the CC through my vast network of spies. You never know who might be a member. [/b]
Sorry, Im pretty sure you were a member when I said that, if not, my mistake.

[Che1990]

Why is everyone so bothered? What specifically has the CC done to upset everyone? As far as I can see the board is being run ok.

[ComradeChris]

Originally posted by Malte+Jun 2 2005, 06:30 PM--> (Malte @ Jun 2 2005, 06:30 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2005, 12:17 AM

[email protected] 2 2005, 09:13 PM

Making the CC transparent wouldn&#39;t do any good either
What could it hurt
The CC is a non-public forum for for very good reasons. Beside the votes on CC membership, we are discussing things there which aren&#39;t suspposed to be seen by non-leftist members. [/b]
So people think I&#39;m a non-leftist?

And once again, my suspicions are being aroused (if not validated) that people are discussion my beliefs behind my back.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by ComradeChris
And once again, my suspicions are being aroused (if not validated) that people are discussion my beliefs behind my back.

Guess you&#39;ve nailed us -- the "Bash ComradeChris" thread in the CC is 14 pages long and growing&#33; :lol:

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Anarchist Freedom]

Yep want an exerpt Comrade Chris?



What a little ***** that comrade chris. AHAH he doesnt know where secretly talking about him and many other members of the board behind his back rahahaha. I feel so elitist ehhh I love it&#33;

[RedStarOverChina]

True. No one in CC is secretly *****ing about "commoners", just like how us commons never make fun of our great leaders in private.

[Elect Marx]

This is getting sad; someone should close this thread...

[Edelweiss]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2005, 07:42 PM
True. No one in CC is secretly *****ing about "commoners", just like how us commons never make fun of our great leaders in private.
How naughty&#33; :lol:

[ComradeChris]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2005, 01:42 PM
True. No one in CC is secretly *****ing about "commoners", just like how us commons never make fun of our great leaders in private.
Where could we anyway? The rest of forums are public.


Guess you&#39;ve nailed us -- the "Bash ComradeChris" thread in the CC is 14 pages long and growing&#33;

Who said anything about bashing me? But you&#39;re obviously talking about me like you know what I believe. I&#39;m glad you find yourself funny.

But honestly, of the two of you attempted to use sarcastic wit in response to my concerns, I think you were the best of the two... How sad :( .

[Karl Marx's Camel]

You like the Khmer Rouge, Chris?

[ComradeChris]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2005, 06:25 PM
You like the Khmer Rouge, Chris?
What does that have to do with this thread?

[RedStarOverChina]

Originally posted by ComradeChris+Jun 4 2005, 05:22 PM--> (ComradeChris @ Jun 4 2005, 05:22 PM)
[email protected] 4 2005, 01:42 PM
True. No one in CC is secretly *****ing about "commoners", just like how us commons never make fun of our great leaders in private.
Where could we anyway? The rest of forums are public.


Guess you&#39;ve nailed us -- the "Bash ComradeChris" thread in the CC is 14 pages long and growing&#33;

Who said anything about bashing me? But you&#39;re obviously talking about me like you know what I believe. I&#39;m glad you find yourself funny.

But honestly, of the two of you attempted to use sarcastic wit in response to my concerns, I think you were the best of the two... How sad :( . [/b]
:P u should come to the chat room once in a while, buddy.

http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?act=IRCchat


How naughty&#33;
Didn&#39;t you mean to say "detestable"? :D