Stakeholders are the "key"

[Nibor]

Hello Mathew,

Have you left your details with the Commissioner ?

[John Archer]

Mathew,

From what you've written, I don't think you know what democracy is and I bet you don't attempt any kind of serious response to ELF's point above about an EU-wide democracy being an impossibility. I'd add that the EU should not even exist?to come into being its proponents had to subvert national democracies. Well, our democracy at least. So any talk of 'democracy' coming from the mouths of europhiliacs or those who would give them the time of day is pretty phcking rich.

For what it's worth to you, you come across as someone whose mind is so ....erm.... open that he thinks there is virtue in listening to, say, the arguments of?and presumably learning something useful from?the supporters of a burglar who put a case for him retaining some or all of the property he has stolen. For all I know you might even believe they could have a case. Speaking for myself, I don't have any time for the moral views of others, unless they happen to coincide with my own, but I find your morality interesting?in its pathology.

And from a purely rational stance, you're asking us to debate with the likes of someone who claims he can square the circle with a straight edge and a pair of compasses. Again, for all I know you might even believe he could have a case.

BTW, have you seen Margot's blog? You'll agree it's an appalling joke, won't you? Boy, is it DUMB.


P.S. While you're at it, do us a favour. Edemocracy? Oh please. Don't. Not more e-this-that-and-the-bloody-other-shit.

[Bagua]

[...]

Matthew,

Your Sections List illustrates the EU promoting framing that establishes Blogactiv as a partisan player.

The full list of currently active sections is:
? Communications (English): why are communications between the EU and Europeans so bad, and how can they be improved?

This assumes the blogger advocates improved ?communications between the EU and Europeans.? The communication is so bad because the EU is dysfunctional and should be eliminated, not improved. Further, ?European? is your chosen identity, not those who oppose the EU.

? Energy & Climate (English): how can Europe square the triangle of energy consumption, climate change and energy security?

This assumes that there is something positive for ?Europe? to do in this field. My view is that Anthropogenic Global Warming is a hoax, ?squaring the triangle? will destroy the economies of the EU victim nations.

? EU Priorities (English): what should the EU?s overall priorities be? And what about the next Presidency?

Again, this assumes that the EU should have priorities, my view is it should be opposed and eliminated.

? Social Europe (English): How can Europe remain competitive while not abandoning its cherished social model? Does such a model even exist?

Again, this assumes the ?cherished social model? should be maintained, and the 27 nations are somehow all competing as one team; they are not, they compete with each other and this free enterprise should be preserved by eliminating the EU.

In short, if you truly aspire to serve as an unbiased ?premier platform for opinions, discussions and views on EU policies? you need to eliminate the inherent EU positive bias that is typified by your framing these ?core issues? in a way that favors furthering the EU project.

[RAENORTH]

Bagua - nice one!

You might add that in simply promoting dicussion about "Europe" is furthering a key EU policy. Promoting discussion about how to get rid of it (the EU), however, is probably not!

[John Archer]

Bagua,

Bagua - nice one!

You might add that in simply promoting dicussion about "Europe" is furthering a key EU policy. Promoting discussion about how to get rid of it (the EU), however, is probably not!

I second Richard on that.


OT:
I haven't visited the Blogactiv site so your happy spotting of the following was a pleasant surprise for me and a bit of a coincidence, given my earlier post. Thanks for that.

? Energy & Climate (English): how can Europe square the triangle of energy consumption, climate change and energy security?

You'd get the impression that squaring the triangle was difficult or had never been done before, or somethin'. Well, it has ? about 2300 years ago at least, by Euclid for one. See his Elements, Book II Proposition 14, where he gives a slightly more general case which, it just so happens, conveniently includes all triangles.

Squaring the triangle is NOT a problem.

So here we have another dumbarse metaphor, on a par with the solecistic, but common, usage of "lowest common denominator" to mean precisely the opposite of what it is.

I'll stick it in my eurobollocks collection.

[Bagua]

Squaring the triangle is NOT a problem.

So here we have another dumbarse metaphor, on a par with the solecistic, but common, usage of "lowest common denominator" to mean precisely the opposite of what it is.

I'll stick it in my eurobollocks collection.

Yep, that is a good description of the entire Blogactive site, the opposite of active, Blogsluggish is the real truth.

Just a handful of ?blogs? with one or two posts and no comments. Also note there is no Sitemeter, would no doubt be embarrassing.

I can see why they are so keen to recruit a real Blog like EUReferendum, any hits are better than none!

[SandyRham]

Hmm, I wonder if they'd tolerate something like
"Troll city, dedicated to detailing democracy's demise"
Actually could be fun to illustrate from history and current practice that Europe is a stew with lumps in, not a liquidized soup.

[Bagua]

I thought I had a site-wide overview, and I see no trace of it.

It?s certainly easy to get lost in the detail, what with 4 blogs total averaging 12 words each.

They are quite strict in the ?offensive material? department as well, I made a rather innocent and germane comment on the one post on the ?human rights and immigration blog,? referencing Sweden, my comment was summarily rejected for using the word ?rape?. Since when is that a swear word or offensive?

See no evil, hear no evil I suppose.

[John Archer]

They are quite strict in the ?offensive material?....referencing Sweden, my comment was summarily rejected for using the word ?rape?. Since when is that a swear word or offensive?

It isn't.

However, I suspect you were telling them a truth.

And they responded loudly with: "We (say we) want the truth, but we can't HANDLE the truth."

I think they employed Jack Nicholson for the voice-over on that one.

[SandyRham]

So the message seems to be talk simply and clearly to blogacity. They can't handle very much more. Still it's always a good exercise to talk to people from their own viewpoint.

Hmm, tried to find a forum at EurActiv but just got blurb about fora being set up. I suppose this is homeopathic democracy, debate with 350 or so people who represent a sample of one millionth of the 'demos'.
I wonder, if you put enough Commisioners in an hot air balloon, whether it would take off without the burner??

[ELF]

homeopathic democracy

[comet]

See no evil, hear no evil I suppose.

See no evil, hear no evil, speak no sense.

[Bagua]

So the message seems to be talk simply and clearly to blogacity. They can't handle very much more. Still it's always a good exercise to talk to people from their own viewpoint.

Not only simply, clearly, and bizarrely censored, but briefly! I tried to make a point on one comment and found I was quickly over the size limit. Perhaps I'm too verbose, but my comment was a just a few lines, yet too much for EurActiv, apparently their version of "communicating" requires the peasants to be brief and sanitized.

Perhaps Matthew should post a list of forbidden words, and short, cheerful messages one can just cut and paste? Strange way of "improving communication" -through elimination.

Hmm, tried to find a forum at EurActiv but just got blurb about fora being set up. I suppose this is homeopathic democracy, debate with 350 or so people who represent a sample of one millionth of the 'demos'.
I wonder, if you put enough Commisioners in an hot air balloon, whether it would take off without the burner??

That's a good one Sandy, "Homeopathic democracy" "Representation through dilution and careful selection" and note: According to Homeopathic
"science" the dilution is so extreme that no molecule of the original remains in the resulting sugar pill, their claim is that the "energy" of the original somehow is transfered and remains.

Not unlike the EU's idea of democracy. Select one out of a million "citizens," educate them as to the message, sanitize and select their words beyond meaning and offer it as "the people have spoken!"

[Watchet]

Mathew: re your post of Wednesday Nov 21, 2007 3:22 pm on the same Blogactiv site that you referred to on your earlier link on this EUReferendum "Stakeholderss are the key" thread:
http://support.blogactiv.eu/faq/#can_anyone

Your Blogactiv site reveals that your Blogactiv post follows immediately after Shang Hi!s post of Wednesday Nov 21, 2007 3:46 am on this EURef thread. Remember it was Shang Hi's post, though you ask me where the post was. Answer: it was on Blogactiv's site http://support.blogactiv.eu/faq/#can_anyone

Watchet: Where did you post this?

While comments are the responsibility of individual bloggers (so it's up to them to approve, if they have set up pre-comment approval), I thought I had a site-wide overview, and I see no trace of it.

If you commented to someone's blog, then it's up to that blogger, but in my opinion this comment would be absolutely no problem. Anything much harsher than the word IDIOTS might fall foul of the blogging guidelines (re: offensive material), but calling a general class of people idiots (as opposed to an individual) would be fine in my book. Do it all the time!

Why did would think that this would be a problem?

Yet here is Shang Hi!'s entry on the same Blogactiv comments site on the same day only 2 hours later! I shall precis Shang Hi!'s piece on Blogactiv

Shang Hi! Says:
November 21st, 2007 at 5:30 am
Britain?s very new & very immature Foreign Secretary, David Miliband, recently spoke about ?Europe?, when presumably he meant the ?EU?..... The EU & its member governments are quite ridiculous the way they want to turn their backs on their best friends. Not just ridiculous, but IDIOTS!

You/Blogactiv then add slightly less than 6 hours later:

mathew Says:
November 22nd, 2007 at 11:17 am
Everyone, I should have mentioned earlier that during this site?s pre-launch ?Alpha? phase we had a post dedicated to defining the site?s catchphrase....

Shang Hi!, while your first paragraph follows the conversation on
?EU/Europe?, the second is a bit off topic, so if you want to
criticise/comment on EU enlargement policy, you could start a blog here, or post to the guest blog. It?s a very good topic and noone?s starting it yet, so go for it.

Mathew, 2 points:
1. I can't see why you say you couldn't find Shang Hi's piece when you responded to it about 100 minutes later!

2. Blogactiv's site has had a very quiet time since its first entry of October 11th, 2007 at 9:55 pm until this last one on November 22nd, 2007 at 11:17 am, hasn't it? It's only the 7th one! That includes your 2 posts, & Shang Hi!'s one. I hope for your sake you are not working on commission!

Watchet

[mathew]

Hi everyone, it's me, back in the lion's den again. A few quick reactions ...

John Archer, for what it's worth to you, you're mind was clearly shut a long time ago (you didn't even visit the site...), so I won't bother. I like your comment about squaring the triangle, though. A cheap shot, but it hit.

Bagua: you make a very good point re: the sections and how they imply the framing of Blogactiv. It actually wasn't my intention - the purpose of the sections was always simply to aggregate posts on similar topics together, not to advocate post content.

[ Having said all that, some of you may be dimly aware that most people in Europe (note i'm not saying "Europeans" ;-)) accept the EU as a given, so they will be posting on "EU policy", rather than "EU existence". Deal with it.]

Nevertheless, I accept that my web1.0 background tripped me up when writing the section menu. Will try to recast this more neutrally if I get the time. Not that I think for one minute that any of you will ever post there, but what the hell ...

As for sluggish ... well, we're doing OK. 370 posts so far have been selected for the Home page, which means that more than that have been posted on the individual blogs. Most of these posts come from around a dozen bloggers. I'd like more, but it's a slow haul - people active in EU policy do have other things to do than sit in their pajamas, foaming at the mouth as they type.

The whole thing about censorship, above - sorry, but I can't actually summon the energy to go back through it all (who posted what to whom ...). I do remember not noticing a comment, and then dealing with it. No memory of censoring a comment about rape in Sweden, but I believe you and apologise if we were too prudish. And if there was a size limit we should bloody well say so! Again, apologies.

But more generally about censorship, Friends of the Earth just posted something criticising the European Business Summit.

They posted this on the EBS? own blog, hosted on Blogactiv.

EurActiv (Blogactiv's parent company) is a media partner for EBS.

But we pushed the post to the Blogactiv home page, which gives it extra visibility on EurActiv.

If Blogactiv or EurActiv ever intended censoring critical voices - as many here and elsewhere automatically assumed - we would never have given such publicity to the EBS? critics.

But we did.

Mathew

PS Doubt I'll be back, but I'm sure you'll have fun in my absence.