Saturday, March 30, 2024

Moderation problems, and a bit more on Craig Murray

At time of writing, there are almost 200 comments on the previous thread - in one sense that's a good thing, because it demonstrates how widely-read Scot Goes Pop is.  But yesterday was a nightmare day from a moderation point of view, because there were several dozen more comments that had to be deleted.  An anonymous commenter had falsely accused me on Thursday night of posting anonymously on the thread myself, and I warned him that if he kept making that accusation, he would no longer be welcome to post here.  Needless to say, he did keep making the accusation, so I started blanket-deleting his comments, which is the only way to "ban" someone on the Blogger platform.  He then tried to take advantage of the fact that it is difficult to distinguish between different anonymous commenters, and started posing as an innocent participant who was having comments deleted for no other reason than that they were supportive of Craig Murray - which makes no sense, because if you read through the thread, there are as many comments that are supportive of Craig (indeed perhaps slightly more) than there are critical of him.

I made abundantly clear in the previous blogpost that I was not having a go at Craig, and personally I have no problem whatsoever with him standing as a Workers Party of Britain candidate in England.  The point I was making wasn't really about Craig at all, it was about the fact that Alba are clearly prepared to interpret their rules generously in his case, and my hope that "the little guy" will in future benefit from similar flexibility and tolerance in equivalent situations.  As I said, my fear is that Alba is becoming a bit too authoritarian, and it's not hard to think of instances where lesser-known members have had the book thrown at them for far, far less than what Craig has done.  The solution to that is not to throw the book at Craig, it's to be consistent and chill out a bit when dealing with rank-and-file members.  

Based on what I've seen happen in the past, my strong suspicion is that if anyone who is not a Craig Murray or a similarly prominent figure had announced an intention to stand for the Workers Party, they would have been deemed to have "publicly resigned" from Alba - in other words they would have been to all intents and purposes banned from the party, and wouldn't have been allowed to rejoin without advance permission from the NEC.  The reason for that is the Workers Party registration with the Electoral Commission, which shows it as being active in Scotland and therefore an opponent of Alba.  Interestingly, Craig implied in a couple of comments on the previous thread that he is using his candidacy as leverage with George Galloway to try to get assurances from him that the Workers Party will not stand in Scotland and will no longer campaign against independence.  But, again, I'm not sure Alba would have cut that sort of slack with a less prominent person - there would just have been a knee-jerk ruling that the rules had been broken and that would have been that.

In a nutshell, I think the blind eye that has been turned to Craig's decision is a good thing and should be the template for the treatment of rank-and-file Alba members in future.  Nobody joins a political party, particularly a fledgling small party, to be subject to military-style discipline.  Alba will not thrive as a Leninist sect that keeps its members in constant terror of stepping out of line. It needs to be an open, welcoming party that gives its members room to breathe and that is enjoyable to be part of.

But so convinced was our anonymous troll chum that I was waging some sort of anti-Murray campaign that he re-posted exactly the same comment fifteen or twenty times last night.  He seemed to be refreshing the page every two minutes to see if I had deleted it, and as soon as I did, he re-posted it yet again.  To give myself a break, I temporarily changed the settings to only allow comments from people signed in to a Google account.  Needless to say the troll was not brave enough to put a name to his comment, and he stopped for a while.  But as soon as I changed the settings back this morning, he started all over again.

Believe it or not, I do have better things to do with my Easter weekend than to moderate blog comments every few minutes.  I very much want to keep pre-moderation switched off, but that's going to require a bit of responsibility from the people leaving comments.

45 comments:

  1. Absolutely agree . Hae these eejits got nae mair tae dee than annoy folk?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sorry James but the proliferation of anonymous posts has turned the comments section into a binfire. Several people are abusing the privilege to post nonsense which they are too embarrassed to claim ownership of or are multiple posting to create the impression that their opinions are resonating with others. It's a great pity but I think you should revert to those with a Google account. It's easy enough to set one up after all and not too much to ask.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was in favour of it myself, back in the GWC days. But I mist admit it soon stopped me from bothering to comment, and made SGP a weekly or so visit to just catch up on the posts above the line. Human nature tends towards laziness, and Blogspot really hates my phone.

      Delete
    2. Believe me I get what you're saying and have had my own problems with the blogspot platform but I'm inclined to take the opposite view and just read the main article from now on. The assortment of trolls and wacko (not you I'm sure😄) that dominate the comments now makes btl incomprehensible at times.

      Delete
  3. I think the problem with Scottish politics is that it's becoming such a navel gazing bin fire of egos and disrupters that no one can achieve much at all anymore. Craig Murray has a huge profile, UK wide and internationally, and has been a stalwart for freedom of speech, Assange, justice etc. He can very possibly win standing in England on that, plus a pro Palestine stance. Whereas had he stood in Scotland for Alba, he'd have been instantly assailed from all sides - unionists, SNP loyalists and a large number of "Alba supporters" who'd leap on him for not being sufficiently pure on women's rights which, as with Yvonne Ridley a few weeks back would then be magnified by far right and Zionist accounts. Sadly, that's where we are in Scotland, in a situation were strong Scottish indy people can make more impact in England than trying to deal with the invariable scrum of nonsense they'll be pulled down with here.

    In terms of Alba themselves, Craig clearly have the conversion with Alex and it was agreed mutually it was an OK thing to do. That is worlds apart from people creating deliberate arguments, leaving the party, then standing themselves or creating campaigns not to vote or whatever. Scotland desperately needs big names and people who can rise above the petty divisions and situation I described above that we now find ourselves in. It needs more disrupters and people pulling others down like a hole in the head. I'd also like to see Yvonne Ridley stand for Alba, but tbh I can see exactly the same thing will happen if she does - that scrum of unionists, SNP loyalists and "Alba supporters" will leap on her in a totally predictable way too. It really saddens me that that's were we are, but it is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Honestly, I don’t think social media pile-ons* affect anything in the real world. The problem we have is the SNP dominates the independence cause—they are 100% synonymous for most of the public—and the SNP’s become tame and cosy with the status quo, and wary to push at all for Indy.

      *I assume that’s what you’re on about. I don’t engage in any of that myself.

      Delete
    2. "In terms of Alba themselves, Craig clearly have the conversion with Alex and it was agreed mutually it was an OK thing to do"

      I think people are willfully missing the point here. The Alba constitution is clear on this point and doesn't go away simply because two people have had a private conversation. So my question is this: will a blind eye also be turned to bad rules for other, lesser-known people, and if not, why not?

      Delete
    3. Aye it was horrendous on here yesterday Mr Kelly, you have my sympathies as I unfortunately came up against someone “anon” who seemed to want to argue about a word and have the last word. I agree that a lot of people seemed to miss the point you were making about the constitution. For what it’s worth please try to ignore the mischief makers and keep blogging.

      Delete
    4. Anon at 11:25, of course the SNP dominate the independence cause. That’s how it’s always been, and isn’t going to change.
      A vote for any party other than the SNP, or indeed an abstention or spoilt ballot paper, is effectively a vote for the union.

      Delete
    5. Good well expressed point. We do not benefit from a shredding of the vote.

      Delete
    6. Sad to see Alba members on here defending a clear violation of the constitution - developed by members - because "Alex" and "Craig" had a wee talk. It smacks of the Fiona Robertson debacle, which was the reason I left the SNP in the first place.

      Delete
    7. @11:59

      So if I vote SNP, I’m voting for stale, woke, incompetent rule without independence on the horizon. Effectively for the Union.

      And if I vote for any other Yes party, then I’m voting for the Union.

      You see the problem, don’t you? I won’t vote at all when the choice is shit or shite.

      Delete
    8. Anon at 1:46, I understand what you’re saying, but if a lot of people don’t vote and the SNP lose say half their seats and the nationalist share of the vote is below 40% at the GE, the independence cause will be damaged.
      The unionist parties won’t be slow to seize on it, that’s for sure.

      Delete
    9. With due respect, anon, You don’t understand me at all. The SNP will keep on treating us With contempt if we keep clapping our hands like happy seals And certain Ginger dugs. Your vote is your Reward for their behaviour. Your vote is your complicity with their back peddling on independence. Your vote is your permission for them to abandon any attempts whatsoever towards independence in our lifetimes. The future of Scotland is in your hands. Don’t buy into their narrative of despair. Blackford and Wishart will be Retired from their long careers in the Lords before Scotland will be independent.

      No. I will have no part in that. Let the party suffer the consequences of his own inaction. I will return when they get back to business.

      Delete
    10. I’m having to use dictation today and it shows. Apologies.

      I’m talking about the SNP as a whole. It’s not just Humza or even Nicola I’m on about. It’s the willingness the party membership has to be sold down the river.

      Delete
    11. Anon4:04, I've spent the last couple of days here moaning about the number and the quality of anonymous posts, so thank you for proving me wrong with the best post of the week.👍👍👍

      Delete
    12. Sadly some don’t seem to be grasping the damage that’s going to be done to the independence movement by shunning the SNP at the GE.

      Delete
    13. Sadly some don't seem to be grasping that we no longer care as the SNP are leading us nowhere anyway.

      Delete
  4. Surely because of Craig Murray's status it's only right that he should be treated differently from an ordinary member?

    ReplyDelete
  5. The biggest things maist these anonymous eens will dae is in their breeks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A lot of the shorter posts, asking daft questions, are our British friend KC. He’s ever so helpful. 😈

      Delete
    2. Thig an Donas ri iomradh! Thalla gu Hìort, KC!

      Delete
  6. Anon-whose-four-comments-I've-just-deleted: would you please just go away. I told you on Thursday that you were no longer welcome to post here, and that means exactly what it says on the tin. You are now the beginning and the end of the problem, because you are wasting my time, you are wasting your own time, and you may occasionally by causing other people's anonymous comments to be deleted due to mistaken identity. Do us all a favour and find another blog to troll.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I had tried before to create a blogspot account which needs a google gmail, but tried again - and it wants a phone number to send a code to. Sorry, until I can afford a burner phone, google don't get my number. Having said that most people probably wouldn't mind, so you might need to go back to the sign-on. Shame it can't be an either or - sign-in or go into a moderation queue, but it doesn't look like you can. I got my wordpress years ago, but from what I see it can't work with blogger.

    As for the constitution and leader thing, well, you need a leader for day to day decisions, and if people don't like that they can elect another at the next conference which might be yearly. You can't ask the Tories to hold the election until the next conference. Some would say it's up to the NEC, well, mmmm, they'd just say no. You get community ventures that appoint a manager to get on with things. Good. You get those who even make day to day decisions by committee. Bankrupt.

    Craig is clearly a special case, but yes, Alba need to be more flexible. The SNP talked about disciplining members back in 2017. Eh? What do they think this is, a fecking school? Take your 18th century discipline and shove it. I'm an Independence supporter, is there something about the word "Independence" they don't understand? Don't answer that ...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Google needs your full genetic code, Your Tax statement, and pictures of all your First degree Biological relatives. Nothing nefarious. Just data Protection. Don’t ask…

      Google has fallen as far in my estimation over the years as the Scottish national party. 10 years ago they were both the good guys.

      Delete
    2. Really? In 2014 google was good?

      Delete
    3. Indyref2, if you don't have a Google account how do you manage to avoid posting anonymously? I've tried the URL thing on my phone but it never works for me.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous at 7:24 PM
      It says "Comment as:" and then Anonymous, but a down arrow to the right of that. Click on that arrow and you get Name / URL, enter your name, and then click Continue to the right and up a little bit from that. That's on a lifebook on Windows 11 though, with Firefox. I run Ghostery but so far it doesn't interfere.

      Delete
    5. Testing...

      Delete
    6. Thanks Y2IR2.
      I also will not give up my details to the Global Panopticon of internet surveillance knows as Alphabet / Google.

      From a technical perspective, distributed authorization / authentication has been a solved problem implemented using open standards and open code for years already. e.g. OAUTH 2.0. I suppose that since Google bought the Blogger.com platform there is no likelyhood of them NOT spying on their users.

      James, have you thought of moving to a platform that allows you to better manage user generated content, and also respects user privacy more?

      p.s. Wordpress also has its own issues, so I can't really say that simply jumping to the obvious competitor platform would be a slam-dunk either. :-(

      Delete
  8. I agree James, there are times that reading through the comments of a small (but vociferous) cadre of bloggers is a chore due to the incoherent & illogical thread of their thought processes and arguments.
    I'm more than happy that you've taken the action you have, now (hopefully) we can have thoughtful discussions which stimulate and encourage productive debate.
    On the blog at present there are several Unionist bloggers making valid and pertinent arguments which are answered and indeed, riposted by, Yes'ers .... but the Trolls have become a complete pain in the arse !!

    I further agree with your analysis regarding the Craig Murray situation, that there has to be consistency in how the Alba Party rules are applied & enforced because if not then the Party itself will be brought into disrepute.
    As to why Craig has perused the political path that he has with Galloway's Workers Party of Great Britain, I'm at a complete loss ..... but I'll give him this auld piece o' Scottish advice :-

    ... "if ye sup wi the de' il, sup wi' a lang spoon"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately I don't think he thinks Galloway is the deil.

      Delete
    2. The Scots fae of is o , you dinae need an apostrophe .

      Delete
  9. James, what on earth is your problem with communism, that you feel pbliged to make a negative reference to either Lenin's sect (in this case), or Stalin, or East Germany at least once a week? Do you have a box to tick every time that says "how can I make a parallel of whichever situation I have with how bad those commies are?"
    Sometimes I wonder if you're more right-wing than Stu Campbell, because with such hatred for communists you're definitely not on the left.
    Regards- a concerned Leninist cultist

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What juice are you on? I want some

      Delete
    2. Anon at 10.03: You're obviously correct that I mentioned both Leninism and East Germany today, but I'm fairly sure it's been a few months since I last mentioned either. Not sure when I last mentioned Stalin but it can't have been all that recent.

      In fairness to myself, I don't think either of today's references have much to do with left or right. I mentioned East Germany because it's the most obvious example of a surveillance society, and for Leninism I was thinking of an example of a small, tightly-controlled vanguard party.

      Delete
    3. By the way, I don't know about you, but I've actually voted for a communist party in the past (in a US election), so hopefully that sets your mind at rest.

      Delete
  10. James, I hope you won't let the nutters dishearten you. They are working to an agenda that we can see through. Your blog is still as necessary as ever because the unionist false flaggers are getting emboldened. Please don't get disheartened. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  11. James - why not prohibit anonymous comments ?

    ReplyDelete