23 responses

  1. David Hart
    March 31, 2012

    You might want to insert a hyphen (or, possibly, you might want to not insert a hyphen) in ‘deadminned’ in the first bullet point, which I read as (dead)(minned) before working it out:-)

    Reply

    • sarah
      March 31, 2012

      I have done so, purely for you and your semantic ways. Feel special. :)

      Reply

      • David Hart
        March 31, 2012

        You’ve made a terrible pedant smile.

        Reply

      • Josie
        April 18, 2012

        I’m sure I’ve had the same conversation with you before :-P

        Reply

  2. Sarah Martin
    March 31, 2012

    Thanks for the detailed update Sarah.

    Reply

  3. Rev Paul
    March 31, 2012

    Thanks for the detailed update Sarah. ;)

    Reply

  4. Alan Wyllie
    March 31, 2012

    Sarah, I just want to clarify one point.

    “And Politics UK (the folks who originally awarded Peter Reynolds “Politician of the Year”)”

    PoliticsUK ‘Politician of the Year’ was awarded in good faith to Peter Reynolds after a public vote on Facebook.

    At the time there was no indication of foul play and Peter Reynolds votes seemed to come from legitimate Facebook users.

    PoliticsUK neither endorse Peter Reynold’s opinion nor have any view on Peter Reynolds leadership(or non leadership) of CLEAR.

    PUK’s Terms of Use is clear on this subject:

    “12. Modifications to service
    ……Any awards can be withdrawn if the is sufficient believe that the award was not won either with the rules or outwith the spirit of the rules. Any award can be reclaimed if it is felt that it reflects badly on PoliticsUK or its owner.”
    https://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=246680175365029

    If anyone has evidence on any wrongdoing, I can be contacted via Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/alan.wyllie1
    or via email @ politicsintheuk@gmail.com

    All correspondents would be treated in strictest confidence.

    Alan

    Reply

    • sarah
      March 31, 2012

      Hi Alan,

      what I meant by that was that it was Politics UK that did the awarding, not necessarily that it was them what did the deciding. I accept what you said yesterday about you checking all the individual users to make sure they were real people, I don’t think Peter Reynolds was anywhere near as unpopular then…

      Sarah

      Reply

      • Alan Wyllie
        March 31, 2012

        I understood that Sarah. At the time Peter Reynolds was exceptionally popular. He had done a Q&A on PUK and impressed a lot of people.

        I never knew of comment warriors or his link on the CLEAR website…

        Thank you for you reply
        xox

        Reply

    • Mike
      April 12, 2012

      The word Facebook is appearing a little too often in this sorry saga for my liking. Didn’t I read somewhere that one of Peter’s supporters was a Facebook moderator?

      Reply

      • sarah
        April 15, 2012

        I think so, I’ve seen emails from Peter to a Facebook moderator email, and I have no idea how he would’ve gotten hold of that.

        Reply

  5. Edwin Stratton
    March 31, 2012

    “Any award can be reclaimed if it is felt that it reflects badly on PoliticsUK or its owner.”

    What does it take to revoke an award? It reflects very badly on PoliticsUK to have championed a racist, misogynist, homophobic, antisemitic bully – even by extension. His ‘award’ may have been the result of an election, but is an election free and fair with an ignorant electorate?

    Mill taught us that propaganda is effected by concealing half the truth, and Reynolds achieved PR control by way of hiding his past and censoring any and all dissent. Reynolds secured any popularity via manipulation, but once his actual stance became known, most abandoned him.

    I feel there’s a clear case for revocation.

    Reply

    • Alan Wyllie
      March 31, 2012

      We need an official compliant…Maybe by executives of CLEAR?

      Reply

      • Lem
        March 31, 2012

        Didn’t politics UK used to promote Peter’s blog, didn’t you say he was a man who knew how to pick his fights and was a breath of fresh air in the political arena (generally against minority groups and disabled people from what I’ve seen)? Top judgement there.

        Didn’t you notice all the racist, white-nationalist, homophobic, anti-islamic, anti-semitic things he said when you originally read it?

        Or, as it seems to me, are you just trying to get out of this with as little damage to yourselves as possible?

        I wrote an email to you many months ago, pointing out the obviously flawed voting process, I didn’t even have the courtesy of an email of acknowledgement.

        An internet nobody, who has achieved nothing but outraging and offending massive swathes of population gains the politician of the year award ahead of Caroline Lucas, the first Green party MP. Hmmmm, lemme think about that for just no seconds at all… absolute and obvious fraud.

        If you want to exit this affair with even the slightest shred of dignity and respect, I’d revoke the award as soon as I was back at my desk. Giving an award to a man like Reynolds’ whether genuinely earned (yeah right) or not sure as heck reflects badly (as per quoted section 12 of your Terms of Service) on Politics UK and you personally in my book.

        Regardless of what you do, you are tainted by the amount of grandstanding you have allowed Reynolds’ to carry out on your site, I would also have to question long and hard the journalistic capabilities of anybody who has taken this long to see the other side of the story, let alone think about publishing it.

        Reply

  6. Alan Wyllie
    March 31, 2012

    Sorry, complaint, not compliant..

    Reply

  7. Philip Walsh
    March 31, 2012

    Peter is a liability.

    Reply

  8. Educated Chappie
    April 6, 2012

    Hey ! Here’s a good idea . . .

    Why not go back to how things were before Peter was elected leader.

    I’m sure the whole reform movement will benefit from the LCA image that did so well over the years with its handful of members.

    Reply

    • Darryl
      April 7, 2012

      I don’t think it matters one jot how naff the LCA were, at least they had some personal integrity, didn’t grass people up, threaten legal action at a drop of a hat, sell out the ordinary members to try and milk profits from selective prohibition, create numerous fake personas to have conversations with themselves ad nauseum, make outrageous comments about immigrants, gays, jews, moslems etc etc

      Reply

    • sarah
      April 7, 2012

      It’s very interesting that CLEAR supporters cannot distinguish between “CLEAR” and “Peter Reynolds”. You know, good leaders create followers, and great leaders create leaders. What does it say about Peter Reynolds that even his supporters buy into the idea that only he is CLEAR?

      I think that CLEAR’s approach of a slick, professional campaign is a good one, and I personally wasn’t impressed with the LCA when I first checked out their site in 2006. But Peter Reynolds didn’t just make CLEAR, he was part of a large group of people who were tired of what the LCA were doing and wanted something different. And all of them have worked over the past year to make that happen, and as all of them have left, they’ve all said that it is because Peter Reynolds is impossible to work with. And they haven’t just stopped because involved in drug law reform, btw – from the people who have left CLEAR has come LEAP UK, the UKCSC, the Winston Matthews Campaign, the Cannabis Alliance, and there are more organisations setting up even now. All of these groups could have been either born under CLEAR’s wings or could have worked very closely with it, but they have all sworn not to have anything whatsoever to do with CLEAR as long as Peter Reynolds is leader – so what does that say about his image in the movement?

      Reply

    • Mike
      April 12, 2012

      Why not cut out the middle man and merge CLEAR with the EDL?

      It could make for some interesting rallies!

      Reply

  9. Rick
    April 16, 2012

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Back to top
mobile desktop