Originally Posted by Guinness (Post 1059288)

As an ordinary Joe who posts occasionally, nobody would really mind if I called you an idiot, even though its abusive and kinda against forum rules, its pretty much accepted that you'd turn a blind eye as long as I don't sustain it on every post. However, if, as a moderator, you called me an idiot, that could be seen by your average professional moaner as an abuse of your position.

See where I'm going here? If you accept responsibility, you have to behave responsibly, and you also have to accept accountability.

It's easy for me to call Ken Moss, Graham Jones or Peter Britcliffe halfwits on this forum, they are unable to respond in kind. Ain't fair, but thats politics for you. I can post jibes, veiled insults and generally take the mickey out of them on a personal level, as politicians they know that they cannot do the same to me. Gordon Brown nailed his coffin shut at the last election for letting his guard down (bloody woman).

I've probably insulted the intelligence of Graham Jones more than most, does that mean it would be acceptable for him to write 'there are some right (expletives) on Accyweb', tarring everyone else for something I've posted?

The council monitoring officer has got this one horribly wrong, Cllr Pritchard should apologise, and she should also go through her facebook friendlist and block the muppet who put this nonsense in the public domain.

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 1059291)

you'll be having politicians apologising every day:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by DaveinGermany (Post 1059298)

Already happening, there's usually one article daily somewhere about some lame politico apologising for some perceived sleight, whether that be personal or on behalf of the great British public!

Problem is thought it's normally insincere, a sound byte to appease & takes the heat off so they can quietly carry on their conniving & troughing.

Originally Posted by Less (Post 1059310)

You're still upset over London's boss and his apology to scouseland aren't you?

Originally Posted by Judith Addison (Post 1060495)

I don't know how the resident who felt himself slighted by Councillor Pritchard actually saw the Facebook post. He wrote to the Monitoring Officer (the Council's Executive Director - Legal & Democratic Services - No. 4 in the Council Officers' hierarchy) but she dismissed the complaint, saying that Councillor Pritchard had acted in a personal capacity. The matter was raised at the Council's A.G.M. on 16th May, which I was chairing as the just-appointed Mayor. In summing up I said that I thought Facebook was an excellent method of communication and that as Councillors we should be willing to engage with citizens who wished to communicate with us in this way, rather than using traditional channels such as attending an Area Council meeting. I did say, however, that the dividing line between a Councillor's personal and public life is very fine, and that it's a very woolly area. I said I thought the public had a right to expect certain standards of behaviour from Councillors. In the past the test in such matters was often, "How would it appear to the man/woman in the street? Would they think it acceptable?" I think as Councillors we need to be extremely careful!

Originally Posted by Judith Addison (Post 1060495)

I don't know how the resident who felt himself slighted by Councillor Pritchard actually saw the Facebook post. He wrote to the Monitoring Officer (the Council's Executive Director - Legal & Democratic Services - No. 4 in the Council Officers' hierarchy) but she dismissed the complaint, saying that Councillor Pritchard had acted in a personal capacity. The matter was raised at the Council's A.G.M. on 16th May, which I was chairing as the just-appointed Mayor. In summing up I said that I thought Facebook was an excellent method of communication and that as Councillors we should be willing to engage with citizens who wished to communicate with us in this way, rather than using traditional channels such as attending an Area Council meeting. I did say, however, that the dividing line between a Councillor's personal and public life is very fine, and that it's a very woolly area. I said I thought the public had a right to expect certain standards of behaviour from Councillors. In the past the test in such matters was often, "How would it appear to the man/woman in the street? Would they think it acceptable?" I think as Councillors we need to be extremely careful!

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 1060513)

Very wise words Judith, a councilor has never been in the public eye like they are today, and as you say its a fine line between private and public life, but councilors have the right to a private life, its just that the general public don't think so, wonder what the most stupid time you have been contacted by a member of the GP about council work:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Judith Addison (Post 1060608)

People do sometimes contact us at unexpected times, such as Sunday afternoon. However, personally I don't compartmentalise my life. I'm a Licensed Lay Reader at St. Paul's Church, Ossy and am often spoken to about resident/Council matters when I'm at Church. I never object to this and feel it's only right I should be accessible to people. I might be old-fashioned but at my Civic Service last weekend I chose the hymn, "Brother, Sister, let me serve you" to express how I felt about my public duties. People sometimes say that religion and politics don't mix but I prefer to substitute the words "faith" and "community" and find that these are complementary to one another, not in conflict.

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 1060611)

I think the most stupid times I heard of councilors being contacted, were 6-30am on a Saturday Morning, and 10-30pm on a Saturday night, to me that is just a tad OTT:rolleyes:

Originally Posted by accyman (Post 1060617)

great things are answer machines

they help filter out the idiots :D

although if i was a councilor and someone rang me at 6.30 am any day of the week my response would probbably be at the local papers by 6.35am

probbably why im not a councilor :D

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 1060618)

When somebody rings you at these times you don't expect it to be council business especially if, as was the case, a serious illness was affecting the family, you only imagine the worst:(

Originally Posted by accyman (Post 1060619)

i agree jay its out of order and why anyone ringing me at that time would get an earfull esecially if it was a trivial matter

Originally Posted by jaysay (Post 1060621)

Oh you don't know just how trivial some of these things really are:eek: didn't realise a local councilor would be expected to move mountains before breakfast, then part the Red Sea before lunch:D