mhuttman
Full Member
People First
Posts: 124
|
Post by mhuttman on Jun 18, 2012 9:44:14 GMT -5
Maureen:
If you have access to the code base you will be able to see where the posts were stored. My guess is that *if the posts were not deleted* that there is a MySQL or some other SQL-type DB that is holding all of the content.
|
|
|
Post by christucker72 on Jun 21, 2012 18:21:34 GMT -5
Maureen, I didn't see Dawn's post indicating the Steering Committee opted to violate its own published/emailed rule that delegates could propose Grievances thru June 15th. If they do exclude my proposed Grievance from the pool to be voted upon, then I'll consider this another anti-democratic violation of my rights, according to the explicit rules, which the SC themselves created. They could've proclaimed no proposals would be accepted, so why would they again create a rule only to violate it, and further erode confidence in their honesty, integrity, and respect for core democratic, profesional norms.
|
|
|
Post by christucker72 on Jun 21, 2012 18:37:02 GMT -5
In response to Mike G. (Frank Lee Speaking pseudonym), I agree on wanting to restore the meaning of "patriotism" to its proper place in the public's mind, and back from the elite 1% who use it like a club, to enforce conformity with their plutocratic, militaristic agenda, by relying & selling a perverted frame of patriotism, which can depicts someone defending the Constitution as anti-American...however Orwellian, that may be. I definitely was NOT implying anyone would be un-patriotic if they didn't join our informal sub-group of CC2/99D delegates, and in fact, would be happy if everyone joined b/c this caucus idea was a response to the Orwellian blackout of communications/forum by the CC2's SC/leadership...so delegates opposed to Orwellian blackouts and the like could communicate & develop areas of consensus & institutionalize them in a recognizable entity, which people could join, leave, alter. My thinking was that if you're trying to get 99% support on key reform issues, then you are by definition patriotic.
Anyway, the informal email avalanche has grown & continued & not migrated here, so perhaps this idea/caucus will fade, or become useful at the CC2.
|
|
|
Post by Matt Forbes on Jun 21, 2012 20:44:17 GMT -5
I think we're managing to get the informal email topics over here, for the most part. I think part of the issue is that we've had so many conversations developing on there, that we're responding in email and then only half-responding with the same thoughts on this forum.
It's more a matter of maintaining the same flow of information when we post between the two.
I think the idea of the 99 Caucus will take better hold and come more to fruition during and after the CC2, when we have more delegates who are not currently active in either the email or the forum start taking part.
We'll have to remember... this is all just a beginning. We'll be doing much more work after the conference. This is all just the groundwork getting us focused on a project. I'm fairly certain many of us will continue to work together for quite a long while.
|
|
|
Post by christucker72 on Jun 22, 2012 0:26:32 GMT -5
I appreciate your optimism & the fact that we only have this forum b/c of your effort to replace the one lost during the Orwellian blackout of the former "official" 99D forum/communication platform.
Unfortunately, you're correct that the past 8 months seem to be an incomprehensibly persistent & unnecessary squandering of a brilliant idea, pool of motivated volunteers, previously inspired candidates/delegates, antagonization of virtually all natural allies, ensuring zero endorsements, so it's like we're just beginning now. If a billionaire hired some people to create a strategy to divert, defuse & demobilize all that latent frustration & pressure for democratic reforms, then they'd have done pretty much exactly what's happened w/ this organization, which I fear has disenchanted & turned off the most ardent supporters & ensured all that potential political pressure was diverted into a metaphorical balloon timed to pop way up where no one could hear or see it, w/ the only legacy being the internal, fabricated/exaggerated divides within this organization & between its natural allies...people who pretty much agree on the big problems, and solutions...conveniently scattered, while the top 1% remain unified in their opposition to democratic reforms.
I'm not sure if it was you that repeated my claim (in our private email network) that unless the "official" 99D/CC2 organization is reformed to represent its publicized values/rules (e.g. elected steering leadership & corporate board of directors, no censorship of dissent, erasure of deliberative forums, respect for professional, democratic norms, etc.), then we're doomed to fail, and need to re-organize in accord with an honest reflection of the 99% values most of us seem to support.
For example, I submitted a grievance (e.g. restoring due process, reverse NDAA provisions of "indefinite detention" of US citizens w/o trial/charges) in accord with previously published/emailed rules that I had this right until June 15th. Then I was told w/o explanation or justification that my proposal would not be included in final 100 that delegates could choose for their top 10 or so. Now, why would I be willing to invest the time/cash to fly to Philly, when I have no reason to trust that the leadership of the CC2 will honor any of the other rules they've published, and risk letting my presence falsely legitimate a process, which may turn out to be even more of an deliberately anti-democratic mirage?
Even if the ragtag CC2 delegates that show produce a magnificient 99D that makes the Declaration of Independence look like wall scribblings at a public toilet, the leadership has persistently & repeatedly proven that they are- if not paid sabateurs- hopelessly incompetent, cannot be trusted, resort to anti-democratic/dishonest methods, sow discord within & without, incapable of obtaining a single endorsement, and somehow respond to catastrophies by increasing their pathologically self-destructive methods.
I can deal w/ well-intentioned incompetence, but that's not the problem here, in my view, and neither are some fabricated irreconcilable differences, which no one yet has articulated. I can also accept legitimate hierarchical rule, but that's not what we're supposed to be, and the 'hierarchy' can't even say they've produced results worth for which sacrificing our democratic values was justified.
I think you're right that the majority of participants have much in common and genuinely want to invest time/resources in creatiing real democratic reform. Unless the core problems are reformed out of existence, then I suspect this energy can only be harnessed & motivated if a new spin-off organization is created.
I don't want the architects to have anyone to blame but themselves if this CC2 fails diasterously, so I'll hope for the best, hope that reason, solidarity win over petty quibbles & fabricated divisions. But it seems most in the (dozens?) of our private email group believe fundamental reform of the organization is necessary to effectively move forward in the future, esp. since the "founder" has repeatedly expressed explicitly intends to relinquish all responsibilities after 7/4.
If this CC2/99D is reformed in accord w/ its publicized values, then this caucus is probably unnecessary, but until then it could be one source of internal reform pressure, or seeds of something similar in the future.
p.s. since you've technical skill to administer this forum, do you honestly think it was possible to "accidentally" erase &/or disable the entire forum past/history on the former "official" forum? If so, wouldn't you feel the need to urgently & repeatedly explain & apologize for such a grave "mistake?" Curiously, that hasn't happened.
|
|