Bloggers4Labour on Party Funding

in

Bloggers4Labour - Party Funding.

At risk of causing more upset, I'm not going to comment on the content of the post, except to say they missed a few things out...

There seems to be very

There seems to be very little comment about how these "loans" are to be payed back. I presume that Labour doesn't have the funds to pay them back and is not likely to in the future either (unless they are willing to repay the loans instead of having the next election campaign).

Listen, pal, why don't you

Listen, pal, why don't you pay us the courtesy of (a) posting a proper criticism, rather than saying, "there they are, boys, go get 'em", and (b) addressing the points I made, rather than the ones I didn't make.

Frankly I haven't got time for a load of your acolytes posting cynical, hostile, rhetorical comments, and reporting back to the mother ship about the nuance of some comment I made in reply. I should also add that your behaviour on the "comment deleting" issue was totally out of order.

You've really got to get over this idea that B4L is some kind of Blair-proxy, whatever the site's moniker might indicate to the uninitiated. If you can't reach TB personally, well I'm sorry, that's the limitation of blogging, but in the meantime, take B4L on its merits, not "NuLab's". Try to imagine, just for a second, that we - B4L and the 160+ syndicated bloggers - are able to think for ourselves, might just have the public interest at heart, and might not get satisfaction from typing up a printed sheet of orders with Number 10 stamped at the top.

I popped over to have a look

I popped over to have a look at the B4L post. It was such a nebulous miasma that it would be too much effort to comprehend, let alone criticise. A good argument should be have clarity and good structure - if it is good it will stand criticism. Neo Labour droids frequently use the technique of flatulence rather than putting forward a clear argument that risks being picked apart.

Secondly, what is the motivation in being a Neo Labour apologist? The project is corrupt, morally bankrupt and damaging this country. Is it some kind of compulsive disorder or do you hope to get some party position in return?

Reply to B4L

Reply to B4L [Bloggers4Labour]:

Listen, pal, why don't you pay us the courtesy of
(a) posting a proper criticism, rather than saying, "there they are, boys, go get 'em", and
(b) addressing the points I made, rather than the ones I didn't make.

First of all, I posted a link to your post without comment, because you took such great offense to my comment last time.
I linked our previous exchanges on my site rather than yours, as I thought this would be less confrontational. Obviously I was mistaken.

My intention was not "there they are boys go get em", and if it came across that way, I'm sorry. I should also point out that it even if my intention was to incite trolling on your comments, than it would be a pointless exercise as they would be deleted, and I would have tried a lot harder in the content of my post.
I'm afraid if you think Blairwatch has a troop of willing "acolytes" we can unleash at will, you overestimate our influence.

I am afraid that's as close to an apology as I am going to give, which brings me on to your part (b)
- that I addressed the points that you didn't make rather than the ones you did.

That was my point.

In your 630 word post there is no mention of the stories of the previous week - isn't this approach to the story typical of Labour's response generally? - To change the story from the subject of Labour's secret funding scam to one of Party Funding in general?

Frankly I haven't got time for a load of your acolytes posting cynical, hostile, rhetorical comments, and reporting back to the mother ship about the nuance of some comment I made in reply. I should also add that your behaviour on the "comment deleting" issue was totally out of order.

As for your disparaging dismissal of "Acolytes reporting back to the mothership" - if you don't want hostile cynical or rhetorical coments, I would suggest insulting people isn't going to calm them down, rather it will wind them up.
Also your dismissal of people as moronic trolls taking time out from their homework in previous comments is probably not going to help...

You say we were totally out of order to draw attention to the fact you were censoring the comments on your site. Maybe, maybe not. But given the party you blog in support of is not too keen on criticism or protest, as the 400 people stopped under the PTA at last years conference, Maya Evans, indeed Walter Wolfgang might testify, is it an unreasonable criticism or comparison?

But, this is a moot point, as I note from your party funding post, there are no commenters I recognise from here, just your own regulars, some of whom are making the same point I did. That your post is not remarkable for what it said [some of which I agree with, some of which I don't] but what it missed out.

I think you are over estimating our readership, the 1-2000 people who turn up here each day are not all going to click on the link to your post, of those who do, some may well agree with you and not me, and only a few of them will bother to comment, and surely only some of these will be 'unreasonable' in your view. That is hardly going to bring down your server, disrupt your site or swamp your comments.

With respect, I think you over reacted here.

You've really got to get over this idea that B4L is some kind of Blair-proxy, whatever the site's moniker might indicate to the uninitiated. If you can't reach TB personally, well I'm sorry, that's the limitation of blogging, but in the meantime, take B4L on its merits, not "NuLab's". Try to imagine, just for a second, that we - B4L and the 160+ syndicated bloggers - are able to think for ourselves, might just have the public interest at heart, and might not get satisfaction from typing up a printed sheet of orders with Number 10 stamped at the top.

You seem keen to make the distinction between Labour in general and the government/leadership in particular. That blogging in support of the former doesn't imply support for the latter.

Well, the labour government is made up of Labour MPs, who draw their support from the wider Labour Party and the CLPs.
There comes a point when for many people that distinction can no longer be drawn. As for taking B4L on it's merits, I sat down and read through your archives back to the beginning of January, and found little criticism and lots of justification for the actions of our government.

I've read some of your stuff in the past that has been overtly critical, but it is in the minority. If you are unhappy with the 'direction of travel' over the last 8 years, then come out and say so. It is more than your site's moniker that suggests ongoing support.

As for the 160 bloggers you syndicate, I didn't make any comment on them, I made comment on your post.

You have set yourself up as a 'front end' for Labour Bloggers, so surely it is not unreasonable to point to what you post. I understand you are not in any way official, or a substitute for TB - but you present your site as a gateway to those who support the Party, and therefore by definition the Labour government...

Surely you realise there are vast numbers of people who once considered themselves Labour through and through who can no longer stomach voting for the party responsible for Iraq, complicity in rendition, absolute support for the US under Bush, draconian anti terror legislation etc etc, that's before we get onto domestic policy...

I'm sorry you find our "juvenile, enraged, obsessive" criticism so offensive. Sorry because whilst you are right about the limits of blogging, you are in a position to have so much more effect on what happens in the Labour Party than us. I fully recognise that people like me banging on has little effect on the 'direction of travel' of this government.

But your operation does have the potential to influence the direction of travel. Perhaps it is how you choose to use that influence, or rather not use it that people find difficult.

You say that you are not a Blair Proxy, and I take from that you are not entirely happy with what has happened to the Party. If you guys were prepared to stand up and be counted, to voice your concerns rather than appearing to give the impression that you are more enthusiastic to support than critcise the government, then people might not be so quick to be as critical of you, as you are of us.

And finally, on the subject of secret loans, cash for peerages, the story that has emerged in part over the last week - you guys should be far more angry than us, it's your party after all...