Community Spark

[Joe K]

This is a blog I discovered via the private blog of Honey Lucas, of GAVCA (who's recent remit, to be frank, has been to discourage people like me from 'asking questions', to the point of scrapping their two/three year old, hardly used 'til now message board). There used to be a third sector related newspaper called 'The Spark', so I took a look, and it's very interesting. Hopefully, if this 'big-up' brings them more attention (though they already get a respectable number of replies to each posting), they won't reject it...

www.communityspark.com/

[Joe K]

OK, given that it's been nearly four days now, and my comment is still, as it says below, 'awaiting moderation', and the topic itself is, despite being the most recent, over a month old, I'm starting to think this blog may not have much of a future. But let it slide for another month...

Joe K June 22, 2012 at 2:35 am
Your comment is awaiting moderation.

I tend to agree with Tommy T on this one. There are cliques and cliques, and the worst, I find, are the ones who set themselves up as ‘forum police’, not seeming to realise that if their assistance was required, the owner/manager would give them mod powers. Reporting a post is fine, reading the riot act to some newbie is not. I aquired my online name from just such a person, who described himself a ‘trollhunter extraordinaire’ in his sig, when I joined a presidential runner’s (Kucinich) board to expose his *own* trolling. The ‘trollhunter’s, not Kucinich’s.

And the argument that communities *should* be ‘hard’ to join kind of makes me think of ‘hazing’. Messageboards are a difficult medium to make a connection on, with misunderstandings being rife, creating hassle between people who would probably get on like a house on fire in RL, and certainly never consider saying the kind of hurtful things that they will say to a ‘stranger’.

That’s why I argue strongly – though I don’t rule out there being exceptions – that people aren’t trolls, but they do troll occasionally, and don’t consider it a bad thing when they do (though it’s like that line, ‘treason never prospers, for when it does, none dare call it treason’ ). If you have a ‘good’ justification for doing something, you can’t be a ‘bad’ person (troll). Especially if it’s ‘for the board’.

[Joe K]

And yay, I just checked, and my post was 'buzzed' through moderation. No responses, to me or Tommy T, but that's still something.

But what brought me here now (other than a desire to check for new email, since the computer had frozen when I came downstairs to turn it off) was that I posted a comment to another, similar kind of blog, and I think it might be a while before that gets through moderation too, since it concerns the Charity Commission (and anyone who has had dealings with the Commission will know what I mean):

Why every charity should want the Charity Commission to be a household name – and what they can do about it

Count me as one of the 30%, definitely. A charity I used to be a trustee for, after the present committee ran its finances into the ground and is now trying to sell off its only asset to avoid being culpable for £80,000 of debt, has now gone a hundred days without turning in its accounts to the commission. I am told this is the point where the commission is supposed to step in and investigate, but in practise, they have bent over backwards to take no investigatory action, even when presented with proof of the chairman lying.

They're not alone. The Police Complaints Commission and Press Commission are the same. Thorough investigations cost money, far more so if a charity, police force or newspaper appeal against a judgement against them than if you or I challenge a verdict. So the commission would rather not see any complaint get to the point of a judgement having to be made, and therefore fudges for all it's worth.

Barton & Tredworth, Gloucester.

So fingers crossed on that one going on view...