General Discussion

A questionable butterfly

People

emailhelpuk
avgsupport
DiamondLife
Diane Mondeo
Braytq
Frankie757
Joan
Devon leisure
Igmaclogin
Julias Sachin

Gary Taylor

1012
41
roberta
roberta
08 May 2017 08:19

Should Gary Taylor take a leaf out of the book of our previous DTC posterMichael Clayson.? He posted on various matters relating to our community but never got involved in  party politics. I know he stood as an Independent but many knew where his political stance stood but never once on here did he push it. I miss his imput

2 Agrees
Gary Taylor
Gary Taylor
08 May 2017 08:49

For the avoidance of doubt, I post on here as an individual and not as a member of Dawlish Town Council, as you will know Michael would have done. Yes, I am a member of the Lib Dem party (it's not a hanging offence) and - just like anyone would do if they read (say) The Guardian or (say) The Daily Telegraph - with my comments driven by the principles and leanings that led me to join the party, a certain bias is bound to show through on political matters, which I would expect a reader to factor in (or respond to) to suit their own viewpoint.

 

 

1 Agree
Andrew
Andrew
08 May 2017 11:44

@Gary Taylor maybe you believe you can be on here as an individual and not a dawlish town councilllor. but in reality everything you write on here influences how you are perceived as a councillor by those who visit this website. it's naive to think otherwise until you cease to be a councillor.

 

And you 'feel' Michael  Clayson may be watching and posting as his persona? Is that just a 'feeling' or do you have anything factual? Why is it relevant? Other than deflecting the spotlight from the notion pushing a political agenda.

 

@roberta being an independent councillor doesn't necessarily mean we know where they stand regarding their political stance. 

Gary Taylor
Gary Taylor
08 May 2017 14:11

With the benefit of hindsight, Indy Scot, it was inappropriate to suggest any specific member of the public posts on this site under a pseudonym. I would therefore offer an apology to Michael if any offence was taken (certainly none was meant) and I have removed the line in question from my posting above.

 

And you are also right that what I write here will reflect on how I am perceived as a Town Councillor. For that very good reason, my account is now closed.

 

P.S. So long - and thanks for all the fish...

Andrew
Andrew
08 May 2017 14:16

@Gary Taylor I wouldn't worry about it, i know you didn't mean any offence, you were on the defensive because the thread title bears your name. This isn't the council chamber where threats of legal action were made with alarming ease not so long ago. but i think @roberta and I have made valid points.

 

Account closed? well that's quite a change of heart. Farewell @Gary Taylor.

roberta
roberta
08 May 2017 17:50

Gary I did not mean for you to close your account.My intention was to makeyou think about the way you were using this site to promote Lib Dem policies which was becoming repetitive and boring.As a Councillor for this town I thought you would concentrate on more local matters. You were becoming a party political broadcast for the Lib Dem Party and latterly promoting Macrons win with such relish I would expect to hear from dim tim. I see and hear party politics elsewhere I look on here for things of interest to my locality and may be national issues that affect us all. I had no objection to the polictical threads relating to our local elections, but you were very voracious in your postings regarding Lib Dems to the extent I switched off from the contest between Clatworthy and Wrigley.

2 Agrees
Carer
Carer
09 May 2017 06:24

So Gary posts on here as an individual and you have a go at him as he was 'boring' for promoting the Lib Dems.

 

What about Paul who was forever promoting Trump on the lead up to the US election and forever promoting May and the tories in our elections.

 

Wasn't/Isn't that boring also?

 

Whatever happened to freedom of speech?

2 Agrees
Andrew
Andrew
09 May 2017 12:08

@roberta has hardly had a go at him. she expressed an opinion as per freedom of speech.

 

It did become less about issues that affect us all and simply about which personality wins and Lib dem vs Tory tribalism in DTC and nationally.

 

 

1 Agree
TheObserver
TheObserver
09 May 2017 14:14

Can I just say, I have refrained from posting for such a long time, because what's the point, quite frankly. Here on dawlish.com, is just a small community compared to the town, it's populations and those that have thoughts and opinions day in day out.

 

Anyway more to the point, I don't blame or wish to point blame at anyone for having freedom of speech, beliefs, opinions, in any matter whatsoever. I don't blame Gary for being a Lib Dem, that of which is rightfully his choice.

 

However, I'm sick of reading the rubbish that comes from his mouth. He is a poor example of a councillor. Maybe Gary, like Mr Wrigley you could actually tell the town what you have done to aid it, what you would like to do, and how you mean to go about it. Instead of feeding people with your stupidity and quite frankly un-profressionalism. It's not acceptable in any means.

 

Also don't bother replying to me, just a flying visit. 

5 Agrees
Andrew
Andrew
09 May 2017 23:56

The Lib Dems don't exactly have a lot to tell the town. There's not much difference between Taylor and Wrigley, the latter has just enough sense not to embarrass himself daily on Dawlish.com. 

Taylor is either not bothered about being re-elected or completely naive, whereas Wrigley doesn't risk being rejected or jeopardizing his public persona. 

2 Agrees
webmaster
webmaster
10 May 2017 09:01

@TheObserver I'd be interested to know where you get your stats from as it is not possible for me to know how many Dawlish people view this site. However the stats for last month according to Google Analytics were:-

 

April 2017

4181 users/visitors

of which

2676 were returning users/visitors

Total page views 35,904.

 

I don't think the community on here is that small. Clearly there are more people that read than post. You don't need to be signed up to read this site.

5 Agrees
TheObserver
TheObserver
10 May 2017 14:49

@webmaster - and the two people thus so far have agreed.

 

I was merely talking about the small group of those who particpate in conversation, so your answer is, I get these stats from my eyes and looking.

 

It is great to see so many people come to dawlish.com, most for information and to find out about the town, not to read the rubbish and the politics that Mr Taylor happily displays for us.

 

In no way shape or form am I knocking the site itself, those who view it, read it and participate. I am however happily, knowingly and openly knocking Mr Taylor for being foolish, rude and quite frankly arrogrant. 

5 Agrees
webmaster
webmaster
10 May 2017 15:52

@TheObserver, yes you are right - only a few visitors contribute. I think a lot more would contribute but fear being shot down for having an opinion. Some post for a period and then give up due to being bullied off.

I see councillors contributing to the forum as a positive thing. I hope Gary will come back and others will post.

I think you are wrong to denigrate Gary for posting on here.

9 Agrees
Lynne
Lynne
10 May 2017 17:24

@webmaster -  well said!

(and on another matter - many thanks!)

4 Agrees
ShyTalk 47
ShyTalk 47
10 May 2017 17:51

Gary's loss, if permanent, is a shame.  Whatever your political affections, you can choose to listen to or ignore his postings.  Where now are we to hear knowledgeable insights over planning matters, etc?

The only prospect of avoiding an overwhelming Selfsh Party landslide is to look at any left-of-centre offerings.  It is only a pity the Liberal Dems blew it by siding with Dave for a little taste of power in the coalition.  But don't hold your breath.....

4 Agrees
Andrew
Andrew
10 May 2017 18:17

There's nothing to stop the Lib Dems posting on Dawlish.com. I don't think Gary Taylor's contribution particularly did anything to rebuild the Lib Dem's reputation post-coalition. Nor did his postings convince me that the Lib Dems aren't predominantly concerned with 'winning here' and gaining power.

 

@webmaster plenty of politicians have been denigrated on this forum. from trump and le pen to local councillors. why were @TheObserver's posts treated differently? he clearly has a strong opinion about cllr taylor's effectiveness in office and character (and he/she has received numerous agrees - or hadn't you noticed?) - if you think he's wrong to post what he did, are you going to moderate on posts relating to all politicians? i.e. putin or farage. and what do you mean 'wrong'? isn't that subjective? 

 

furthermore @TheObserver's comments were made after @Gary Taylor closed his account. so are contributors on dawlish.com allowed to criticize our political representatives or not? as your intervention isn't about how contributors on dawlish.com address one another - GT had already left.

 

You refer to Cllr Taylor by his first name. Do you know him personally?

 

And if people are being bullied of the site, then why? Is moderation effective? I felt shot down by Gary Taylor for having an opinion about the Lib Dems, neoliberalism, his colleague becoming Mayor, etc and I felt his postings about Clatworthy were wholly designed to belittle. It's just surprising that a councillor would do that sort of thing.

1 Agree
Lynne
Lynne
10 May 2017 18:25

Seems it's your turn now webmaster.............wink

(no doubt followed very shortly by its being mine?)

roberta
roberta
10 May 2017 18:29

Well heres one poster who had refrained from posting on this site for some time.I wont be missed I know, I cant for the life of me understand how GT has been bullied offsite Im sure as a Councillor he must have thick skin. I started this thread with my opinion of his postings I still  stand by what I said, opinions on politicians is commonplace on here but it was his persona of a councillor posting on here so voraciously withhis polictical affiliation.Anyway I degress Ive asked webmaster toclose my account,.

Andrew
Andrew
10 May 2017 18:34

@Lynne, go ahead take your turn.

webmaster
webmaster
10 May 2017 18:34

@Indy Scott & @roberta

I never said Gary was bullied off.

I’ve not moderated anyone’s posts except my own. I don’t know Gary personally. He may have emailed me in the past but I can’t see any PMs from him in my messages.

If Trump or Le Penn posted on this site I would want them to stay also due to the traffic it would bring to the site, not because of their politics.

Andrew
Andrew
10 May 2017 18:38

@webmaster i don't think @Gary Taylor was bullied off either. you wrote that some people had been though.

I mean if someone said 'Putin is a tyrant or Russian mafia' would that be permitted?

 

I was just surprised to see a moderator offering their personal view that's all.

 

@webmaster if trump or le pen were posting on this site i wouldn't be as enthused - they're the far-right after all.

webmaster
webmaster
10 May 2017 18:53

@Indy Scot, I think it is best to treat people in the same way you would want to be treated yourself.

@roberta, I'm not saying you bullied him off. I've always appreciated your contributions to the forum and would like you to stay also.

1 Agree
Andrew
Andrew
10 May 2017 18:56

@webmaster. I agree but if people do not treat you that way then they should be held to account. Cause and effect.

1 Agree
webmaster
webmaster
10 May 2017 19:11

@Indy Scot, yes.

1 Agree
Andrew
Andrew
10 May 2017 19:33

@webmaster i wasn't suggesting any high ranking politician is likely to post on this site. you've misunderstood me. but yes i agree in that unlikely scenario traffic would be huge.

 

I meant if you intervene to object to people having a strong view against someone like Cllr Gary Talyor, then why not intervene against strong views and denigration of other politicians and where does it end the town council? county council? Westmisnster? the EU? People have denigrated May, Corbyn, Merkel and Juncker haven't they?

webmaster
webmaster
10 May 2017 19:48

@Indy Scot, Gary Taylor is a dawlish.com member and the others aren’t.

That is the difference.

Andrew
Andrew
10 May 2017 20:13

@webmaster - Past tense you mean - Gary Taylor closed his account before the comments made by @TheObserver, therefore he was no longer a member. So @TheObserver's comments were about a former member, a politician like any other.

 

unless you're telling us that @Gary Taylor is still a member and he hasn't closed his account.

webmaster
webmaster
10 May 2017 20:56

@Indy Scot, you just agreed it is best to treat people in the same way you would want to be treated yourself on here. I don't see why someone closing their account should change this.

2 Agrees
Andrew
Andrew
10 May 2017 21:12

@webmaster, you can't object to people on dawlish.com having a low opinion of politicians, whether those politicians had an account on dawlish.com or not.

 

Theresa May obviously doesn't give a damn about people struggling to make ends meet. I'll treat her with the contempt she treats others.

Le Pen is a racist therefore if we are to treat her as she treats others then we'd  do so in a hate fulled compassionless manner. Better to speak out against racism.

 

Other posters have objected to Gary Taylor using Dawlish.com to further a political agenda and being a poor councillor for example. Maybe they have a valid reason and decide to treat him accordingly.

He's a politician and accountable to the electorate, being a member of Dawlish.com shouldn't provide immunity from criticism. 

If it does then Dawlish.com is biased.

 

So yes I agree with treating others in the same way I would want to be treated. Unless they need to be held to account.

If I gave someone my vote based on certain pledges or a manifesto and expectations of how a representative should behave and interact with the public I would expect them to deliver and act accordingly.

If they fail to do so and exhibit behaviour that is not befitting of their position I would be justified in taking a critical stance and treating them accordingly. I would speak out against it.

Andrew
Andrew
10 May 2017 21:30

@webmaster you told @TheObserver 'i think you are wrong to denigrate gary for posting on here' at 15:52.

Seemed like an objection to me.

 

Objection: a reason for disagreeing with or opposing something : a reason for objecting

Margaret Swift
Margaret Swift
10 May 2017 21:31

Well, like others, I am astonished by the personal remarks made by the Webmaster, that is NOT their role. But, I have always had my suspicions about said Webmaster and his/her supposedly impartiality!! 

2 Agrees
Andrew
Andrew
10 May 2017 21:45

@webmaster see my last post at 21:30 and your last post at 21:27.

Hypothetically how would a post by someone else appear at let's say 21:28 that hadn't been there before 21:30? how is that possible?

webmaster
webmaster
10 May 2017 22:16

@Margaret Swift - Good point. I was trying to moderate the thread - that was all.

@Indy Scot - Denigrating someone that is a member of this site is against the terms and conditions. It always has been. No idea about times.

2 Agrees
Andrew
Andrew
10 May 2017 22:16

@webmaster I'm also not convinced that someone can be identified by the writing style shown by a handful of posts the day they joined when their old account dates back a couple of years.

 

It's far too coincidental.

Andrew
Andrew
10 May 2017 22:21

@webmaster not changing or deleting posts or text within posts does not signify impartiality.

 

impartiality: noun neutrality, equity, fairness, equality, detachment, objectivity, disinterest, open-mindedness, even-handedness, disinterestedness, dispassion, nonpartisanship, lack of bias 
Andrew
Andrew
10 May 2017 22:35

@webmaster you offered a personal opinion regarding @TheObserver's post about a local councillor. that was hardly impartial.

Your version of impartiality tells me what I need to know, so thank you. I'd rather discuss this here, why not have transparency? I don't want to speak to you - a written response on the forum is acceptable.

 

Would you not at least answer this one before bedtime?

 

"@webmaster see my last post at 21:30 and your last post at 21:27.
Hypothetically how would a post by someone else appear at let's say 21:28 that hadn't been there before 21:30? how is that possible?"
 
I hope no posts on this thread are deleted or censored, can't imagine why they would be though.
 
 
2 Agrees
TheObserver
TheObserver
12 May 2017 12:35

Well to anyone who feels I've done something wrong please @me a post so we can discuss. I gave a view, an opinion and what I felt was right. I stand by that. If at anypoint, by anyone Mr Taylor, Cllr that is, feel bullied by anyone, then I can certainly find more cases agaisnt Mr Taylor to show how he bullied others. 

 

Well Mr Taylor now seems to be more observant than I, watching and not participating.

 

@webmaster - i do not see an issue with you, not sure if you have one with me? only thing that i can say in any response is that would it not be best for a webmaster to post his/her own thoughts under a different alias to that fo the "webmaster" title? it would allow the webmaster to then appear impartial while still having a view.

 

Don't we all love politics?

2 Agrees
webmaster
webmaster
12 May 2017 14:05

@TheObserver, no I don't have an issue with you. I'll just stick to moderating and you can all let me know if I overstep the mark.

2 Agrees
TheObserver
TheObserver
12 May 2017 14:42

@webmaster, i don't think by any means you over stepped a mark, more so that mixed messages were apparene tand clarity lost. we afterall only human and we can't all live our days rightfully all the time. 

Andrew
Andrew
12 May 2017 16:36

@webmaster, it's astonishing how more frequent your posts on dawlish.com have become since @Gary Taylor ceased to be a member.

DEEDOODLE
DEEDOODLE
12 May 2017 18:31

Sigh!

6 Agrees
Comment Please sign in or sign up to post