steve
Member
Posts: 12,682
|
Post by steve on Apr 26, 2023 22:07:13 GMT
RafwanAs you were Stevie B I would have been quite happy to b a or c!
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,682
|
Post by steve on Apr 26, 2023 22:09:59 GMT
pjw1961 I think the point is most of the daft bastards who voted to shoot themselves in the foot while allowing the wealthiest to continue to hide their wealth can hardly complain when the result was entirely to be predicted.
|
|
|
|
Post by eor on Apr 26, 2023 22:44:19 GMT
Will very much miss @sotonsaint, @crofty and jayblanc. Maybe a break, at least until the locals wouldn't be a bad idea Think it need a bit more than a week away to crack a habit like this one :-) Yeah you lot have been disparagingly referred to as "the geekzone" for a very long time here. There have also been a lot of (somewhat grudging) "ok, that *is* good" admissions over the years in response to posts read out from here. And that's from someone who has little interest in politics but really really appreciates pompous fools of any stripe getting cleverly skewered. |
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Apr 26, 2023 22:57:27 GMT
The trick capitalist apologists have used over the years has been to equate the small business owner to large scale enterprise, giving them the soubriquet "entrepreneurs" to glamorise them and separate them from workers. The reality is that those self employed in small businesses along with the workers in the private and public sectors that have no leverage in the economy are all being sh*t upon to ensure the preeminent profits of big business and the merchant bankers that fund it's ability to maintain market dominance. The need for solidarity from those whose work, rather than speculation, funds their existence, need to make common cause against the monopolistic gambling class that currently run the country through their proxies that sit in numbers 10 & 11 Downing Street |
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Apr 26, 2023 23:55:17 GMT
*** ADMIN *** 1. As once again stated, any sanction taken against any member, short of a temporary or permanant ban will stay between me and said member unless said member CHOOSES to make it public. 2. Members should *** NOT *** be encouraged or cajoled into revealing such details. 3. For the record, yes, I have sanctioned both LOC and ROC members in our time here. I would guess that slightly more LOC members have been sanctioned, but, could not swear to this without going back through all my communication. 4. In the event of a ban, the member concerned is told exactly why and if temproary, for how long. Firstly given that the issue of "quoting" was not fully resolved then I hope you don't mind me breaking down the above into 4 points to make it easier to reply to each point. I've just added numbers in red, no other changes. 1. I'm confused. So if mercian (being the current example) was banned then you would a/ make that info public OR b/ it would stay between you and mercian ? 2. Is that a new rule that I can repost onto the 'General Rules' thread to keep all the rules in one place? Will sanctions be applied if any encouragement or cajoling applies (and would that apply to various other examples that I can provide of other 'cajoling')? 3. You say "for the record" which usually means there is a "record" that can be can checked and verified. Given you don't want #2 and noting #1 then can you at least appreciate why there is a "perception" of moderator bias. 4. Again, is that new? It didn't apply to me (the one person that we all know was banned*). As I have already stated then if you ban someone then they can no longer access 'pro boards' (and not just this forum, the whole of proboards) so they will not know how long you have banned them for. You never told me how long you would ban me for in advance of banning me but perhaps you now do? * By all means ban me again. It is your site, your rules, with you as judge, jury and executioner. PS IMO "rules" and "clarity" are important. I'm quite happy to use whatever actual rules are in place and as per my comments WRT to "Raabgate" then when there is a lack of clarity in the rules then clarity should (IMO) be given by those making the rules. I also think "examples" of acceptable and unacceptable behaviour are useful (and English law is based on "case" law as not every possible situation can be 'imagined' until someone tests the existing laws/rules and "precedents" are then available) Let me be as clear as I can. Point 1 : Any sanction short of a ban stays between myself and the member concerned unless the member concerned chooses to make such information public. If a member is banned, even if temporarily, this is made public. This is done to prevent speculation as to why the banned member has disappeared. Point 2 : My post re-not cajoling other members into revealing if they have been sanctioned is to tell members that this is not something I want to see on here. There is currently no direct rule for this, simply because, up until now there has been no need for such a rule - and I hope that there will be no need for such a rule in the future. That said, if I see such examples, I will regard it as both trolling and putting pressure on other members. The short version - don't do it. As for board rules generally, while all members are free to post opinions and thoughts - nd indeed I often ask for members input on such things, members do not have the ability to amend, change or add to the board rules as they please. Point 3 : I could, if I so wished, go back through my admin notes, messages etc, tot up all the sanctions I have given out since we started and for which members. I am not going to do this. I admin this place as fairly as I can and each members political leanings has no bearing on it. I could, with a few clicks, ban those I disagree with for the slighteat of infringements. I don't. I am trule sorry to hear that there is perception of bias in how this place is run, but, it is simply not the case. Point 4 : Simply not true. When you were given a two day suspension, I wrote to you telling you that you had been suspended for two days and telling you why. I know that you got the message because you replied to it. As to whether a ban here would also apply to other forums hosted by Proboards, I don't think so, but, I genuinely don't know. the PS : I'm sure that members can post here without "testing boundaries", however, sometimes previously unthought of situations can arise. The rules regarding mis-quoting other members - that I still intend to bring in, are an example of that. |
|
|
|
Post by EmCat on Apr 27, 2023 0:31:27 GMT
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,457
|
Post by neilj on Apr 27, 2023 3:32:42 GMT
More criticism of Braverman and no one can describe Gullis as being 'woke'
When will Sunak take action to reign this dangerous cultural warrior in
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,457
|
Post by neilj on Apr 27, 2023 3:42:59 GMT
Sunak needs to grow a spine and get rid of the liar who us stoking up hatred
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,457
|
Post by neilj on Apr 27, 2023 4:40:19 GMT
Could be way off mark here, but can't see Sunak going for it...fertile ground for Labour though
|
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,457
|
Post by neilj on Apr 27, 2023 6:00:48 GMT
Brexiters got Brexit, they drove Brexit though, they controlled the type of Brexit they got
It's time for them to own it and stop blaming others for their mistakes
|
|
|
|
Post by alec on Apr 27, 2023 6:25:15 GMT
Cant quite believe I'm hearing a Tory Home Secretary campaign against the police for being woke warriors.
This is what the revolution eating it's children looks like.
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,682
|
Post by steve on Apr 27, 2023 6:32:57 GMT
alecYes we were always the Tofu eating wokerati on the TSG! Meanwhile I see Mercian and Danny are still posting on the previous thread which is novel.
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Apr 27, 2023 6:40:42 GMT
...Point 4 : Simply not true. When you were given a two day suspension, I wrote to you telling you that you had been suspended for two days and telling you why. I know that you got the message because you replied to it. As to whether a ban here would also apply to other forums hosted by Proboards, I don't think so, but, I genuinely don't know. the PS : I'm sure that members can post here without "testing boundaries", however, sometimes previously unthought of situations can arise. The rules regarding mis-quoting other members - that I still intend to bring in, are an example of that. Once again, if someone is banned by 'admin' then they can not access any messages you send on proboards for the duration of the ban. Once I saw that account was blocked I tried again the next day and saw it was still blocked. I hence assumed the ban was permanent and so didn't try to access my account again for several weeks. If someone can't access their account then how do they know how long they've been banned for? In order for someone to know how long they've been banned for then you need to tell them BEFORE you ban them (and maybe you now do) - otherwise they'll just see they can't access their account and hence not be able to see any message you wrote to them. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,682
|
Post by steve on Apr 27, 2023 6:46:14 GMT
I've included a section from a recent email to lib dem activists and candidates the entire email is several pages long and wouldn't really be relevant here but I thought the extract might be of some interest to people here as an analysis of the issues raised at the local elections by the electorate and some insights into potential impacts at the general election.
"This is the first big electoral test Sunak has faced as Prime Minister, and it will decide who controls tens of billions of public expenditure.
It will shape millions of people’s lives.
So what’s our strategy?
What are voters telling our activists on the doorstep? And what will it mean for politics more widely?
Stephen, this is one of our longer ‘explainer’ emails, aiming to give you - as a Liberal Democrat member and supporter - the inside take on our thinking.
We hope it’s interesting and useful.
Conservative HQ is trying hard to manage expectations
CCHQ is briefing lobby journalists that they are on track to lose more than 1,000 seats. And Conservative strategists are trying to pin the blame for this on Truss and Johnson.
They’re also telling their own members they’re in trouble.
A Conservative leaflet with the heading 'Conservatives in Crisis'
It’s easy to see why. They want to set the bar as low as they can.
Sunak’s Conservatives still trail Labour in the polls.
But they are starting to close the gap, and over the next 12 months inflation is expected to fall sharply. Conservative prospects will improve when that happens.
Conservative HQ also expects their voter ID changes to have a bigger impact on a general election than a local one. (The kinds of voters these changes are designed to disenfranchise are less likely to vote in local elections.)
Sunak just wants to get through this one - and hope people forget once the Coronation coverage starts.
Early signs
Our volunteers in England have knocked on 805,342 doors and spoken with more than 300,000 people already this month.
This gives us a deep insight into what’s happening.
There is no love for the Conservative Government.
We’re seeing lots of leaflets where Conservative councillors are putting their own names first and almost hiding the party brand. Many of their former voters are staying at home, or switching directly to vote Liberal Democrat. And Conservative activist numbers are down too.
That’s not exactly a surprise: our campaigns in Westminster byelections have shown we understand better than anyone how to win over decent, fair minded Conservative voters.
Totemic issues
Local issues are important in this campaign. And what’s cutting through is the state of people’s local NHS, dentistry and sewage.
People aren’t getting a fair deal.
These three issues have become totemic because they show just how broken the Conservatives have left our country. "
The rest related to internal liberal democrat strategy and impact which isn't really relevant here but I thought it was pretty thorough on impact of the current political situation.
My own experience is similar also there really wasn't anything positive or negative said about the Labour party, that being said they should if they meet expectations pick up the ward in standing in from the Tories.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2023 6:46:15 GMT
...Point 4 : Simply not true. When you were given a two day suspension, I wrote to you telling you that you had been suspended for two days and telling you why. I know that you got the message because you replied to it. As to whether a ban here would also apply to other forums hosted by Proboards, I don't think so, but, I genuinely don't know. the PS : I'm sure that members can post here without "testing boundaries", however, sometimes previously unthought of situations can arise. The rules regarding mis-quoting other members - that I still intend to bring in, are an example of that. Once again, if someone is banned by 'admin' then they can not access any messages you send on proboards for the duration of the ban. Once I saw that account was blocked I tried again the next day and saw it was still blocked. I hence assumed the ban was permanent and so didn't try to access my account again for several weeks. If someone can't access their account then how do they know how long they've been banned for? In order for someone to know how long they've been banned for then you need to tell them BEFORE you ban them (and maybe you now do) - otherwise they'll just see they can't access their account and hence not be able to see any message you wrote to them. Mark, can't you just ban Trevor for being an annoying Twat? |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,682
|
Post by steve on Apr 27, 2023 6:54:07 GMT
nickpIn the previous iteration of UKPR Anthony restricted some posters, including me, who he considered too political, bizarre on a politics forum ,from posting.Sometimes with and sometimes without prior " warnings" His restrictions tended to be primarily on those with left leaning views , but it didn't prevent people from viewing the forum, in my case the semi ban lasted over two years. I wouldn't want anyone's voice to be so stifled here even if they are annoying .
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Apr 27, 2023 6:59:20 GMT
It seems to me that Warne is deliberately trying to destroy this board. Many of the good posters have now left or are only posting on rare occasions. I enjoyed the board in the past but as I said recently it was starting to cause anxiety for me. Was put on antidepressants this morning and following yesterday and todays happenings I am now feeling totally uptight. Therefore while not deleting membership, I shall only look at the board on rare occasions when something interesting such as an election is occurring. A big disapointment after following UKPR for about 15 years. Impossible to blame you for that. When I was a lurker for about 5 years on UKPR I used to skip certain posters completely of whom Warne was one and I was happier for it I suppose. As a member I feel compelled to at least skim read most things. Might I again suggest you/others do so again? If you/anyone needs a reminder of how to "ignore" someone on UKPR2 then I'm happy to help. There is freedom of speech (subject to the rules) and freedom to read whatever you/others want and hence also not read whatever you/others don't want to read. Freedoms that each individual can choose to make quite easily using the 'privacy' function of proboards.
You are not compelled to do anything - either as a lurker or a member. For full disclosure then I'll repeat that I'm reading all the posts on the new thread and giving everyone a 'clean slate' (eg see a discussion between Danny and myself on page1). I will however 'Report Posts' that are IMO examples of ongoing breaches of rule#2 in the General Rules and also where they exhibit 'cajoling' as a form of 'bullying'. I assume other people make use of the 'Report Post' function, hopefully with the aim of making this board a place for constructive discussion of polling and other issues. |
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Apr 27, 2023 7:16:20 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by hireton on Apr 27, 2023 7:26:28 GMT
Some YouGov polling on Scottish attitudes to the monarchy and the coronation:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2023 7:26:46 GMT
nickp In the previous iteration of UKPR Anthony restricted some posters, including me, who he considered too political, bizarre on a politics forum ,from posting.Sometimes with and sometimes without prior " warnings" His restrictions tended to be primarily on those with left leaning views , but it didn't prevent people from viewing the forum, in my case the semi ban lasted over two years. I wouldn't want anyone's voice to be so stifled here even if they are annoying . I was nearly always banned by AW. He was about as politically neutral as, say, Colin. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,682
|
Post by steve on Apr 27, 2023 7:33:54 GMT
neilj Braverman fails to provide data to back her claim about small boat migrants being more likely to be engaged in crime Suella Braverman, the home secretary, was also asked to justify her claim about people arriving in the UK on small boats being disproprotionately criminal in a briefing with journalists earlier. She replied: Not in all cases, but it is becoming a notable feature of everyday crime-fighting in England and Wales. Many people are coming here illegally and they’re getting very quickly involved in the drugs trade, in other forms of exploitation. Asked whether that claim was based on empirical evidence, she said: I consider police chiefs experts in their field and authoritative sources of information. That's interesting as no police chiefs have ever said publicly that asylum seekers are more likely to be involved in crime and given that they are often detained its difficult to see how they could be. So another groundless and easily disproved lie from our home Secretary. With a functional government even a normal right wing one she would be out, here the rest of the regime just dumb down with her.
|
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Apr 27, 2023 7:34:25 GMT
Mark, can't you just ban Trevor for being an annoying Twat? “His 'philosophy' seemed to consist of anything that would be particularly annoying to the powers that be without being so shocking that they would fire him. He got the reputation among the students as an original and a rebel without having to pay the penalty for actually being either.” Orson Scott Card, Heartfire |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,136
|
Post by domjg on Apr 27, 2023 7:56:30 GMT
Brexiters got Brexit, they drove Brexit though, they controlled the type of Brexit they got It's time for them to own it and stop blaming others for their mistakes I mean, what can you say? These people are unhinged. They will literally claim black is white. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2023 7:58:59 GMT
The trick capitalist apologists have used over the years has been to equate the small business owner to large scale enterprise, giving them the soubriquet "entrepreneurs" to glamorise them and separate them from workers. The reality is that those self employed in small businesses along with the workers in the private and public sectors that have no leverage in the economy are all being sh*t upon to ensure the preeminent profits of big business and the merchant bankers that fund it's ability to maintain market dominance. The need for solidarity from those whose work, rather than speculation, funds their existence, need to make common cause against the monopolistic gambling class that currently run the country through their proxies that sit in numbers 10 & 11 Downing Street THis extraordinary post with its dated concept of "workers" in the age of technology ,hammers home the chasm in perception and understanding of UKplc/ltd between you & I. So no point in diving into the underlying philosophies . But perhaps you will allow a few factual responses:- A- The UK Small Business sector * ( 0 to 49 employees) -accounts for :- +5,465,320 businesses-99% of all businesses +12.9 million employment-48% of all business employment. + £1.4bn sales-34% of all business sales They are not all "self employed". Their entrepreneurship is the foundation stone of UK plc/ltd-not a "soubriquet" ( sic) B- Debt is not the pre-eminent source of funding for UK companies. Debt to Equity ratio is around 70% to 80% ** C- "Merchant Bankers" don't fund large companies. Large Company funding is made up as follows ***:- Market based securities ( bonds) -46% Large UK Banks-15% Non Bank Loans-13% Crossborder borrowing-13% Foreign banks-13% By contrast *** 89% of SME borrowing was from Banks ( 55% from Large Banks_) * ONS-2022 data **-CPA *** 2020 data -Bank of England |
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on Apr 27, 2023 8:05:09 GMT
THis extraordinary post with its dated concept of "workers" in the age of technology ,hammers home the chasm in perception and understanding of UKplc/ltd between you & I. So no point in diving into the underlying philosophies . But perhaps you will allow a few factual responses:- A- The UK Small Business sector * ( 0 to 49 employees) -accounts for :- +5,465,320 businesses-99% of all businesses +12.9 million employment-48% of all business employment. + £1.4bn sales-34% of all business sales They are not all "self employed". Their entrepreneurship is the foundation stone of UK plc/ltd-not a "soubriquet" ( sic) B- Debt is not the pre-eminent source of funding for UK companies. Debt to Equity ratio is around 70% to 80% ** C- "Merchant Bankers" don't fund large companies. Large Company funding is made up as follows ***:- Market based securities ( bonds) -46% Large UK Banks-15% Non Bank Loans-13% Crossborder borrowing-13% Foreign banks-13% By contrast *** 89% of SME borrowing was from Banks ( 55% from Large Banks_) * ONS-2022 data **-CPA *** 2020 data -Bank of England You are right, we disagree fundamentally, I will not engage in a battle of statistics I agree with Ben Disraeli and Andrew Lang on this |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,457
|
Post by Danny on Apr 27, 2023 8:10:55 GMT
"CCHQ is briefing lobby journalists that they are on track to lose more than 1,000 seats. And Conservative strategists are trying to pin the blame for this on Truss and Johnson." Recently on the last thread there was a poll' on leader popularity over time. Sunak's popularity is still below Johnson's at the end of his time. Plus some recent evidence any recovery Sunak created has flattened out. The advantage of Truss for Sunak was that he was a clear improvement on his predecessor. Might have been interesting to see what happened had he replaced Johnson directly. However, the same idea does seem to apply here, that we might have seen the worst of the inflation spike so even a bad situation looks better. Against this, Brexit continues to drag down the Uk economy which is a constant effect likely to continue for decades. And its not at all clear the effects of fuel price surges and other lockdown effects are ever going to return to the previous situation. The world fuel shortage was created by the world policy to stop developing new resources because of the drive to decarbonise. But if you use denial of fuel to push renewables, that essentially requires price hikes as the mechanism to drive people towards renewables. Enegy price hikes were a hidden but deliberate part of the plan. And then, we have the unique british problem that our government has been pressurising downwards wages for 13 years. Creating massive pushback which is now added to the infaltion demands of wage rises. Some groups could easily justify 40% pay rises to catch up. And they are already getting at least part of this, which will push inflation higher and sustain it. Meanwhile the BofE seems to believe increasing interest rates so as to bankrupt UK firms will shrink the size of the economy, reducing tax take, but also freeing up more workers so that supply can push down wages. As the bank says, its plan is to make people accept being poorer. The problem of course is that for the last ten years it was only certain sectors getting poorer while others still saw wage growth. Noteably the parasitic finance industry, which does not create any tangible goods whatsoever. Meanwhile both brexit cutting off supply of immigrants, residual brexiteer/conservative kick resisting allowing a new supply either from europe or anywhere else, those who can afford it cutting back hours, those who do no feel up to it cutting back hours in our aging population, growing demand for physical labour in a number of sectors such as care, are all factors still keeping down labour supply. Its quite questionable whether government upping the retirement age will when it comes through increase labour supply much, what with all the categories who will retire early anyway. and yet the crown has never seemed less useful to the young. Perhaps because it sided with the government to push through Brexit. Except all these are controlled by central government. Labour has withdrawn from any sort of controversial politics since it lost in 2010. And even in that election it refused to defend its own economic success, which in retrospect was fantastic compared to how con have done. Even then labour was fighting itself in that election. It has never stopped attacking its own leaders ever since. But nor will it stand up for left wing policies. Which leaves the libs as the defender of the left. Which is how they did well in 2010, before of course blowing it by supporting the conservatve government. People did not vote lib because they wanted con. So in 2015 there being no point voting lib to get con, they simply didnt vote lib. Have libs recovered from this? Maybe, and maybe the best effort has been achieved by lab and con to rehabilitate libs as the best of a bad lot. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,457
|
Post by Danny on Apr 27, 2023 8:19:34 GMT
I do get peeved by people who just post links without an explanation. Only needed a brief one. Hopefully an accurate one (no, Im not talking about you). Curtis points out that back in 2019 when many of these elections were last run, con were also doing badly. Not so badly as now, but don't expect a conservative landslide collapse. Also that because neither lab or con was doing very well back then, there were quite a few others elected. These might not fare so well this time. Or they might do better! Something of a wild card more dependant on local circumstances. |
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,457
|
Post by Danny on Apr 27, 2023 8:22:42 GMT
Some YouGov polling on Scottish attitudes to the monarchy and the coronation: As with youth not supporting a monarchy which delivered them brexit, So scots arent going to support a monarchy which delivered them Conservative government and Brexit. In the 20th century the monarchy decided to preserve itself by always supporting the government of the day. The problem is, that the government nowadays is normally opposed by a majority of the people. The strategy is failing significantly. |
|
neilj
Member
Posts: 6,457
|
Post by neilj on Apr 27, 2023 9:22:58 GMT
Even Dan Hodges can see the problem
|
|
|
|
Post by moby on Apr 27, 2023 9:42:51 GMT
The trick capitalist apologists have used over the years has been to equate the small business owner to large scale enterprise, giving them the soubriquet "entrepreneurs" to glamorise them and separate them from workers. The reality is that those self employed in small businesses along with the workers in the private and public sectors that have no leverage in the economy are all being sh*t upon to ensure the preeminent profits of big business and the merchant bankers that fund it's ability to maintain market dominance. The need for solidarity from those whose work, rather than speculation, funds their existence, need to make common cause against the monopolistic gambling class that currently run the country through their proxies that sit in numbers 10 & 11 Downing Street They are not all "self employed". Their entrepreneurship is the foundation stone of UK plc/ltd-not a "soubriquet" ( sic) Yeah right....that 'foundation stone' is riven with cracks that no statistics will cement over and if the UK is a PLC, we're run as well as the CBI. Lets face it, the current business model doesn't work, wb61 is spot on. |
|
