|
Post by An Fear Dubh on Mar 26, 2008 16:07:55 GMT
I have confidence in your abilities Setanta and I am confident that you have made efforts. But we the members need to recognise the flaws and failings that exist here. And these failings are obstacles to this groups development. We need direction that will move this group forward if we are incapable of reaching the conclusion ourselves. So a broader input from more members will be positive.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Mar 26, 2008 17:01:50 GMT
Slugger has some yaps though.
|
|
|
Post by Bilk on Mar 26, 2008 17:38:46 GMT
do either of you know where to find these people? Setanta I wasn't trying to be clever mate, I know how hard it is to attract people, especially when we are hidden away. By that I mean we can't be found via google or some other search engine.
|
|
|
Post by Bilk on Mar 26, 2008 19:15:55 GMT
I have been in touch with LL, you remember her surely, "Louisianalady". She is thinking of paying us a visit to try it out again, please welcome her if she does come. I hope she won't have the same problems I did about signing in. Setanta whatever it was you did to get me on, please do it for her.
The subject of LL, has made me think of the times on LU and on the old TWF when we had a room set aside for chat and drivel. We, as in all of us, at sometime in there showed our human side, and it made me for one realise that the people I was arguing with earlier in the day were after all human beings . We dicussed births,deaths and marriage and the humdrum problems in our lives. I can remember some really emotional moments on those threads. The support we gave each other on those occasions was very touching indeed, and at times came from the strangest of sources. Perhaps that is what we now need, it is a way of talking about ourselves which was suggested earlier.
|
|
|
Post by Blue Angel on Mar 26, 2008 21:05:18 GMT
I think so - And I think AFD touched on a very important point there that is a blindspot for many of us and that we need to face. Insomuch as focusing on 'unionist' or 'republican' instead of anything else is setting up divisive lines. I know from past experience talking with Bilk that my politics and his would match on some areas where some republicans I have met would not match with mine. Also, that was my suggestion about us talking about humdrum things -there is a danger in that it could be construed as timewasting. But we have a 'chillout' area here. It would be nice if it were used more. I have talked to Bilk on all sorts of subject in the past, including once long ago where I chatted with him for hours about various types of planes. No-one can talk politics all day long and nor should they do- it would not be a healthy human being who did so and who never thought about taking the kids for some ice-cream or taking the missus out to dinner for a romantic evening or human things like that which we all do. I doubt even AFD started talking about republican history on the first dates with the significant other in his life (yes I am been cheeky!). Er don't worry guys we won't be debating the merits of communism versus capitalism using dialectical materialism or similar methods any time soon. My futue brother-in-law is a kid and he doesn't remember growing up under the Soviet Union while his mum and older sister do and while they would say it was far from the evil empire it was painted as in the west it was also far from perfect and it's only a small percentage of people who wish to turn the clock back. Okay that was a bit off topic there - other suggestions - howsabout some looks at literature from the unionist side of the camp, some discussion on music. There were several unionists on the earlier incarnations of this site who played musical instruments (as do I ) and I found that a handy meeting point of interest. And I do think we need to all take a look at ourselves and times and step back a bit and accord respect when we know we haven't. AND AVOID at all times personal insults and digs - these and ad hominem jibes go nowhere and are unworthy of us all here. And we have ALL done it at some point if we are honest with ourselves...
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Mar 26, 2008 22:04:08 GMT
I remember those times well, infact one member who is also here in particular had me reaching for the tissues. And let's not forget for all the arguing and fighting that we often had when twf was being shut down we all piled intogether to save it and we were all sad to see it go.
When the peoples assembly was hacked most if not all of the members here piled in to save it. This proves to me that we have alot of time for eachother despite all the arguements.
IMO we have to face things head on, take the rough with the smooth and we all know the usual subjects will arise again and again. I suppose there are times when debates seem to be merely point scoring and I guess we are all guilty of it to some degree. But on the main I am being perfectly honest when I say my posts are not to point score, they are to show how I feel, show my anger, confusion, bewilderment etc and also to show signs of relief and even joy when some posts take me by surprize.
I have learned more about republican viewpoints including my own feelings and views, and I have learned more about members here both good and bad.
I will go along with the rules of the forum if they decide to stop some discussions such as republican v loyalist, but be rest assured if their is a lull on headon debates then I will be straight back into them as soon as we get the go ahead. I don't see the point in being birdmouthed when we have major issues dividing us.
But then again this is only my viewpoint.
|
|
|
Post by Bilk on Mar 27, 2008 13:30:31 GMT
Another possibily, send out a global email to all our present members who don't come on a lot, or not at all in some cases. Perhaps just asking them to come and say Hi and letting them know their input was valued and that they are missed by us. I wouldn't want to turn this into a totally mushy friendly get together. Deep debate about each others feelings and beliefs is the most important part of what we do. But there are times when all we want is a chat. What I think I am trying to say is we need to find a happy medium. I think in particular if we want to attract women, this kind of interaction is fundamental to their sex. On the other hand in the debates themselves, you can rest assured if I myself, have something to say, believe me I will say it.
|
|
|
Post by earl on Apr 3, 2008 12:04:46 GMT
It is good to see that Bilk has returned to active participation because his input was positive. I am not one of the administrators, or one of the people that forum members take leadership from. Nor does that role suit me or interest myself. But as a member I am not interested in regular participation in a group that constantly drowns itself into petty uninformed and false debate. The sole purpose of which is to point score. I think we need to move away from this and develop the potential of the forum. We seem to be bogged down with the obsession of Nationalist v Unionist. And our criteria is into which camp do members fit. The example of Bilk's return and the messages here highlights this so the emphasis is that Bilk is 'another Unionist' to even up the numbers. The fact that Bilk labels himself as having 'left wing' politics seems slightly irrelevant or by the way. For myself having 'left wing' leanings is more important than being 'nationalist or unionist'. Unless we recognize this group flaw and the 'leadership' adopt a plan of action that sets us on a course that moves away from this the group is doomed to stagnation and its membership will shrink and shrivel until a blind hardcore is left and I think we are nearly at this point. The fact that Carol's group could not bring itself to move over here is a lesson we should have learnt from. And we must wonder and analyze why this happened. Obviously this group did not appeal, why was this? I would like the female membership to be increased and that is not to create a dating club. We need to look at more popular subject matter to debate, where the divide of the debate is not 'nationalist v unionist'. In fact we might need to put a temporary embargo on ourselves where 'nationalist v unionist' topics are held off for an agreed time period. So rather than keep bemoaning the situation I think it is time that leadership and a plan of action was begun. I'd agree with what you've said here, and will hold my hand up as being a part of the problem when it comes to points scoring. I need to debate more with the head and less with high strung emotion.
|
|
|
Post by An Fear Dubh on Apr 6, 2008 19:17:07 GMT
Earl I think we have all done this.
It is good if we just think about it and try to move away from it. No doubt we will fall into the trap again, so there is no need for anyone to confess or apologize. We are trying to learn through this process of change so we will make mistakes.
|
|
|
Post by An Fear Dubh on May 16, 2008 9:24:02 GMT
Over a month ago I made the following point.
"We seem to be bogged down with the obsession of Nationalist v Unionist. And our criteria is into which camp do members fit....... Unless we recognize this group flaw (most debate is along Unionist v's Nationalist divide) and the 'leadership' adopt a plan of action that sets us on a course that moves away from this the group is doomed to stagnation and its membership will shrink and shrivel until a blind hardcore is left and I think we are nearly at this point."
As this view went largely unchallenged, a few did vocally support the view. I assume it was accepted as true. The ethos of this forum is supposed to about looking to find common ground and finding a way forward together. I wonder how we intend to achieve this object if we are constantly engaged in fruitless debate where the object is to belittle and point score against the 'other tradition'? Surely it is time that the admin seriously addressed this issue, if we are serious in our objectives. Or maybe people are fooling themselves and these objectives were never serious ones.
May I also ask for a progress update on recruitment and the elusive 'clickonme.com' address??
|
|
|
Post by Harry on May 16, 2008 16:05:12 GMT
We don't have any Road To Damascus AFD. We can't dictate to people on what they debate about. What we do here is ensure both sides are welcome. We ensure nobody is discriminated against. We aren't here to provide some sort of solution.
This site allows people like you and me, who most likely would have no dealings with each other to debate, free from the usual sectarian nonsense.
All this site ever intended to do is exactly what it is doing now. Its not perfect but in general it works. I agree fully it can be vastly improved.
We can't change the mindset of old. Most things always boil down to them and us. However, we are talking, not fighting. We accommodate both sides fully. Do you honestly believe that any of the admin can change mindsets?? I respect quite a few Republicans now, yourself included. That is progress, that is moving forward. We do get bogged down but i feel you are asking alot of a simple forum
|
|
|
Post by An Fear Dubh on May 16, 2008 17:21:42 GMT
Like that response Harry, but there is no harm in trying to challenge ourselves by raising the bar ever higher.
|
|
|
Post by Harry on May 17, 2008 11:34:34 GMT
Like that response Harry, but there is no harm in trying to challenge ourselves by raising the bar ever higher. Your bang on. We shouldn't get comfortable and think we can't achieve even more. Any ideas you have would be gladly appreciated. PM me if you like or do it here.
|
|
|
Post by Blue Angel on May 17, 2008 19:40:12 GMT
I'd like to contribute if I may. I'm saddened recently by the way personalities have got in the way of debate at time. I'm not going to point fingers as I have been guilty of it myself but I feel it's creating sourness. I think one of the advantages of this medium is that we can avoid the kind of response some of our points of views would provoke from each other as the medium lacks the immediacy of real debate (although that has it's own disadvantages too...) but I have been sadenned by the way we have occassionally slipped into growling at points. We all know each other here mostly and many of us for a long time, despite our massively different outlooks I would like to think we generally respect each other as at least honourable opponents.
I for example have managed to acquire insights into unionist points of view that have at times forced me to re-analyse points of views or outlooks I have previously held. It would indeed be easy to let us lapse into going around the same old debates pointlessly and do think at points we ARE coming close to that. I feel we should be giving ourselves a kick up our own backsides. I no longer sadly have as much time as I once did to debate here but when I can I do but right now my priorities have become marriage and work (to save for the former) and after work study where possible. I suggest as a general rule can we if we feel like having an outburst in response to a topic or post that angers us step back until we are cool enough to approach it more sensibly. We've generally avoided some of the foulness I've seen on the internet where unionist and republican meet but we can improve yet more on that.
|
|
|
Post by An Fear Dubh on May 18, 2008 14:14:28 GMT
When people don't point fingers I always assume that the criticism is aimed directly at myself. I prefer the finger directly pointed, even if I am singularly selected from a group of 'offenders', then I know clearly where I stand. If you do not want to publicly do that then privately PM myself and say 'you are the one - you are one of the group'
I am passionate about politics, but I do divorce myself from taking personal offense in honest debate, in fact my skin is that thick you could not cut me with a stanley knife. But I am able to see when someone is trying to be offensive and I do error and return fire. I do try to adopt a 'no strike first policy'. Some people can not understand someone like me easily and assume I am being affected by hostility directed at me or towards my political aspirations, I am not.
In this topic, I hoped I had previously identified a weakness of the forum. One which I had contributed to and one that I feel you 'Blue Angel' are referring to by 'sourness'. And I am making a conscious effort to reform myself. Earl also identified himself with some of the points I made, and in Evangelic style affirmed his conversion. While such affirmation was good it is not necessary for everyone to make such public affirmations. It is enough for them to consider the points made and to inwardly reflect on their own contributions to the forum. They may decide that they want to continue as they have always done, there is no onus on them and no sanction is threatened.
|
|