Kevin is not a “self appointed moderator”. He is the chair of the Open Government Network, which is responsible for this mailing list.
One man has power to delete opinion he does not like. That is not trust. that is not debate. That is not a forum where we talk about what we should do together because one man has already decided. Scientific debate and open challenges and different opinion are important.
Please can someone explain how people not mentioned on these lists can post to this forum? (I’m in the Scotland list.)
Perhaps the clue is in the word ‘open’.
Many thanks
Bruce Ryan
I suspect this is not an open forum but is an echo chamber where a certain moderator will delete opposing views.
I’m another ‘lurker’ (as defined in another thread). I’m not sure what I’m doing here but would prefer to hear views that I disagree with. Does the word open have different meanings when paired with democracy or minded?
2 Likes
In my view, any posts which are ranty, disrespectful towards other network members and shouting views rather than trying to engage in conversation and debate, are strong candidates for being hidden.
You dont think describing someone as ranty is disrespectful? If you had suggested foul language or personal attacks, I might agree. But ‘ranty’ is a judgemental single view. Citizens are rightly passionate about many subjects and that is a good thing. Please stop shutting down voices that oppose your views. Just looks like mysogeny.
Guys,
Could we have a discussion about what and who this forum is for, how it’s designed, who is responsible for growing the community, and how it is supposed to complement/collaborate with the other domains/projects run by steering group members.
Kevin, you know Ive attempted to address this already by my email to you (and below) on the 7th Nov, which focussed on Involve’s attempts at Open government, Democracy, and Participation and Engagement, Networks.
carly@involve.org.uk,
paul.braithwaite@opengovpartnership.org,
DemocracyNetwork@involve.org.uk,
james@involve.org.uk,
chloe@involve.org.uk,
tim.hughes@opengovpartnership.org,
blair@accountabilitylab.org
I have no idea what Mum said. 20 years ago it wouldn’t have mattered. People were far more tolerant. We always had “naughty rooms” where the untameable were directed and often stayed because they and their “weird” mates related differently than risk-adverse bureaucrats or schoolmarms. we wont agree with what many people say but they have a right, and a place, to say it.
That said, Let me be civil and honest. By any measurements of useful media;
- this forum is a failure. 387 members in 7 years?
- the democracy network is a failure. Connecting the 900+ organisations working on issues of power, democracy and voice in the UK. With 101 Followers?
We all consider OUR culture normal. We all make mistakes.
That’s OK, as long as we admit them, tolerate and learn from them.
So can we move on and redesign UK democratic networks to be inclusive?
With a bit more tolerance? PLEASE.
Bruce,
To answer your question.
Just the way the programmers set it up in the first place.
It is open source.
The graphic design, as you can see, appears as the UK, NI. Scot and Welsh as equal forums. which really doesn’t work. The UK should be the umbrella with the others sub forums. So it seems the comms is designed so that anyone can post on any forum.
I guess the JOIN on each forum is there so, if there were any community managers, they’d get to know their audience. Unfortunately, apart from the Scots OGP secretariat (Neisha), who direct their forum’s readers to the official minutes of meetings between government and civil society members - using this domain as their civil society outreach - there are no other UK community managers who bridge between other UK governments and their civil societies.
A post was recently removed as it violated our community guidelines regarding respectful and inclusive discussion. The statement targeted individuals based on their dual nationality and suggested they should not participate in UK-related matters, which conflicts with our commitment to fostering a respectful and open community for all members.
We remind everyone to express opinions constructively and in line with our rules, which prohibit discriminatory or exclusionary language. If you have questions about this decision or our guidelines, please feel free to contact the moderation team.
Oh Kevin.
I hope you don’t mind. I’ll be using this thread to educate a few community moderators around UK opengovernment traps/domains, so if you would point at the moderation team that you’re referring to it would be really useful. Just edit a link into your last words to link to “the moderation team” page.
Of course, Ive got mum123abc complaining to me directly, about your deletion of his/her comments. I hadn’t realised her point was "my point about people with dual nationality having allegiance with other countries and positioned to disrupt our society- they should be excluded from civil service and govt." … Which includes me of course.
You should be aware; I’m ( like most people who don’t project their own sensitivities onto others) quite capable of defending/explaining ourselves. Moreso, it gives me/us an opportunity to explain how attitudes created by living outside the UK echo (closed institution) chambers, would never create the kind of naive protectionism that your previous post. and mum123abc’s original one, illustrates. That’s just an indication of “the British way”.
Hey Bruce! Aren’t you glad your old man was an an Aussie?
This is a toxic platform full of misogyny and arrogant men who are passive aggressive. So here we have another dual national interfering in British governance. I hope UKColumn pick up on this. This platform is FOR MEN and not inclusive. This platform is infiltrated with men who bully others .
Simon you are a case example. You could have responded directly to me. Instead your behaviour confirms my point - you are all on here with an agenda to harm UK governance. This platform is not fit for purpose.
Oh look. We are promised that posts will never be deleted for the historical record.
At the same time it is impossible to leave this ridiculous platform. Cannot delete my profile. Can not discuss key issues about transparency. No GDPR.
This is a terrible platform. AGAIN. My posts were deleted by the moderator. Posts from men using the words bastard and dicks were allowed.
Go ahead moderator delete my profile. This platform is not fit for purpose.
Nobody with dual nationality should be allowed in government.
OK. That’s better (Thanks Kevin.)
HI Mum,
I was surprised too; about not being able to simply delete my account/profile, although this forum isn’t quite the Hotel California it seems. (“you can check out any time you like but …” 
) Here’s the reasoning behind it.
So our moderators can anonymise your account without deleting your posts, which is the reasoning for the “non-profile-deletion” policy. Before you go though, could we have this discussion - about
Cause your concerns about National allegiance are a legitimate concern. We"re just coming at it from different perspectives. Although, when you talk about “dual nationals should not be allowed in government”, I’m not sure whether you mean that means as bureaucrats or elected officials.
N.B. 16% of people in the UK were born OS whereas its 30% in Australia.
1.26 million usual residents in the UK had multiple passports in 2021.
You’ve hit one social problem on the head. If one is an “immigrant” or has “foreign” parents, particularly if you’re young, one never has a country where you feel at home. This has blown out since the world wide web was invented, simply because we’re all global citizens these days. e.g. I’ve got twenty tabs open in front of me, four languages (using google translate) all talking about the same things.
So, if your concerns are not just Xenophobia, which no one apart from a good psychologist can help with, what are they? I’d be interested in your opinion after you read this Dutch article.