I've sat in on (other) situations because no-one else would before now. It's horrible but what are we supposed to do when a case is raised, ignore it? Auto-declare every accused person a social danger and bar them from all social events? Most of the time no-one involved is doing very well, no-one wants to talk to the cops (least of all the survivors, otherwise they would have already been and sometimes have), and no matter what happens someone is feeling aggrieved at the end. It's really easy to sound off about what should and shouldn't happen, but this shit is hard. It's done by people who aren't expert, who have it fall in their laps while they're half-burnt out from everything else etc. And it's absolutely never, ever helped by people speculating/gossiping from the sidelines.
Yeah, and I have to be perfectly honest, my first instinct was “oh, the hubris, the irony, the schadenfreude”. Which, given my knowledge was zero, I’m ashamed of.
I didn't put it very well in my post, particularly saying such investigations are 'problematic'. I meant that not in the sense of shouldn't be done, but as in difficult and messy. I also agree that organisations do have to respond, especially if the accusation is that someone is abusive, but the nature of that response as a process will vary between local and national organisations. Hard, difficult yes, absolutely, but there has to be a response. Where I was going with it was the bit you quoted. The nature of sexual offences make it difficult to come to definitive conclusions that someone didn't do it. It's not one of 'ours', but the Delta thing is the ultimate example of that.
Don't forget comrade Delta it's why many of us left the SWP.
If only you'd never joined in the first place
I blame a ex girlfriend
Horizontal recruiting?
Not to sure left many many year's ago.
isn't that more an awl thing?Horizontal recruiting?
Any examples of their notoriously inaccurate behaviour?
Well what do they believe in? They believe in solidarity and they believe in liberty. There could a name in those two words. One that means something.
Liberals?
Solid Berty?
You threw the accusation out there.
It’s sly of you to make an accusation but then refuse to back it up.
it's strange to throw something like that out and then not address the point when supplementary information's sought. it's like there's no substance to the claim.
If you wanted to keep this under your hat why did you post the accusation of notoriously inaccurate up then?
this section of the udc hasn't started looking yet. i'm not asking for personal details, but evidence of a group being 'notoriously inaccurate'. if the only way you can support the claim is with personal details of individuals then that undermines your claim about an organisation's activities imo. e2a: if this notoriously inaccurate information is the personal details then it's easy enough to say x group lied about a person i won't name to prevent the lies spreading.
bookfair.org.uk
Nothing appears to be about workplace or community organising? But maybe I just don't understand the current terminology among anarchists?Manchester bookfair have published their list of talks:
I can't say it looks like the most inspiring line-up, nice to see ontological death chant lad is back though. This time he's deterritorialising.Talks – Manchester & Salford Anarchist Bookfair 2024
