Liberal Propaganda at ProgBlog - not progressive

Yes, we're back at the very same issue - Liberal bias at ProgBlog. But don't worry I'll take a new angle too.

The PB moderators.
I've recently learned that there's a lot more liberalism at PB than the eye meets. Scott would like to make you believe that, out of seven moderators, only two are Liberals. Well, not so. Saskboy is SK Liberal (check Liblogs - he's still there) and Catnip, she's a very special Liberal, spelled liberal. Then there's Scott himself. Doesn't that make three already?

But there's something else.

During the Polly Jones crisis, one comment lost in all the bickering, intrigued me. Polly asked for a serious discussion on a current topic:

Would it be possible for people to state their positions on the WB? Are people aware of neo-liberalism? Or, do none of you look beyond your own postal code?

No answers, and I have to admit my own silence too. But it did lead me to visit some of my most vocal opponents' websites, trying to figure out what it is they are blogging about. These opponents included Scott Tribe, Steve V. and Jason Cherniak.

Liberal Propaganda
Do the test and decide for yourself (now do it!). Aren't these Libloggers merely Liberal propaganda sites with a "progressive bloggers" logo? By far the majority of their posts is nothing more than partisan BS; not very progressive if you ask me. One wonders, when Liberal party politics is all they seem to care about (along with their obvious party biases), what good it does for the Progressive Bloggers community; couldn't we simply subscribe to Liblogs if we were interested in Liberal junk?

I'm more progressive than you...
I realize all too well that it's hard to describe what progressive means. But it's less difficult to define what it is not;

Blogs continuously spouting petty party propaganda is not progressive.

So can it be done, can we actually blog without overly obvious biases? Yes, we can. And many have. Here's a list of progressive blogs, dealing beyond petty party politics. Yes, some of them are affiliated with political parties, and some aren't. But all have a far wider spectrum than, say, Far and Wide does.
- Buckdog: http://buckdogpolitics.blogspot.com/
- Bill Longstaff: http://blongstaff.blogspot.com/
- James Laxer: http://www.jameslaxer.com
- Political Psychols: http://cycles2k.blogspot.com/
- Marginal notes: http://marginalnotes.typepad.com/

Libs are as progressive as the Cons are green
Some say that the latest spat (or crisis) hasn't much to do with Scott's actions as moderator, but more with his politics. Either way, I take offence in having clearly partisan hacks as our moderators. I hear from many that Scott has done wonderful work for PB, I've no issue with that. He should be praised for his achievements. But when Liberals' only reason for joining PB is infecting us with their obvious biases (also given the scope of their blogs), one has to wonder if the progressive label is nothing more than dress-up. Conservatives have taken on the Green Label, and Scott, your right, their actions are not conform their message. But neither is the "Progressive Bloggers" label very suitable for Liberal partisan hacks. Progressive-Lites would be more appropriate.

Progressive-Lite Logo
I'm sure Joanne can supply you with a new Progressive-Lite button, Scott. Just ask her in a friendly manner, she's quite approachable. I've chosen the other logo below, to let you know where I stand:



Cheers!

Purging is not cool; when will Scott resign?

Scott is out purging, again, well sort off. Polly Jones, one of the (former?) moderators of PB, said:

After I refused to edit or remove my response, as directed by Scott through email, he took the mind-blowing action of deleting all threads in the moderator forum.

But that's not all. Polly:

When Scott re-opened the purged forums to a 'clean slate', I commented that I found his actions odd and promised to "take action" after the weekend. I can assure you that by action, I meant that I wouldn't be silenced on the issue. Scott has, however, used my comment to defend his latest abuse of administrative powers: locking me out of administrative access.

Always nice to know your fellow-moderators support you.
This didn't surprise me either. Polly:

Certainly, when Scott performed his purge of the forums, he notified no one.

Yeah, that's our Scott purging; no-one needs to know.

But (IMHO) Polly Jones was right about this:

Scott [Tribe] defends right-wing ideology. He is uninformed as to his own politial views. [...] I am really bored of people who prop themselves up against the Tories without recognizing they hold the same fundamental ideology.

Isn't it time for progressive change at PB and demand a more progressive Chief -Moderator?

This is how Polly Jones put it (in her comments):

[Scott Tribe] should quit. In fact, I will make the promise that I will quit, if he quits too.

And, if I may suggest, can it be someone that is not affiliated directly to one of the main political parties and/or to Jason Cherniak?

Thanks!

Update: Scott has sent me a personal email to explain his side of the story. Anyone interested in a copy can send me an email

- Marginal Notes: A Dissident Moderator
- Marginal Notes: The Very Dangerous 'Progressive' Mentality
- A Canadian Lefty in Occupied Land: ProgBlogs and Process
- Leonard Jordaan: Scott Tribe at all
- Scott Tribe: Admin Announcement
- Politics’n'Poetry: Dissidence
- Purging is Hot!

Liberal bias at ProgBlog; it just keeps coming

This time it was the "tricky partisan wording" of the latest poll.

Should the opposition parties unite and vote no-confidence on the Conservative government over the Green Plan?

Yes. Take it to the people and let them decide what Green Plan they want
No - do the strategy of the NDP and have the opposition force Bill C-30 to be voted on and passed.

After being criticized by many, this is how the God-moderator responded:

Anyhow, I will not be making polls anymore. If other moderators wish to do so, they can.. but I'll disavow right now that any poll questions come from me.. and I will be formally asking Saskboy to disable poll questions in the new site (unless of course the Moderator Board overrules me, which is entirely possible). I dont need the hassle or the grief.

It looks like the moderator needs to grab some humour. It would help him live longer. :)

ProgBlog Moderator DID get the numbers wrong - will he admit it?

Yes Scott, you did get it wrong. I did have another "Einstein moment" (the second one this week!) and came up with the following numbers:

Libs: 82
Dippers: 50
Green bloggers: 27
Unaffiliated with any political blogging group: 200

Total:359

According to this post at least a few bloggers were unaccounted for. According to Scott Tribe this would only amount to 0.1 percent "others":

And stop trying to paint my motives for not listing the BLogging Tories who are amongst our group. I deemed them such a small percentage I didn’t bother listing them. I didnt bother listing the 1 or 2 sites that put themselves under the banner of the Progressive Canadian Party either, and as in the BT member’s case, it wasn’t out of spite. They were all part of the 0.1% “Other” category.

As I outlined here this could not (and never) be right since a single blogger already accounts for 0.3 percent (My first "Einstein" moment of the week: 1/395 * 100 = 0.3%)

What Scott did was add up the "Others" (read Tories and a bunch of bloggers affiliated to other political parties) with the "Unaffiliated with ANY political blogging group"; not so smart. This, intentionally or not, inflates thes number of "Unaffiliates".

When I called him on it, he had this to say:

You're REALLY splitting hairs Erik if you're trying to attack me over whether my addition is right or not. If you think I made a counting mistake.. its very simple for you to double-check my numbers.

So that's what I just did.
Will Scott admit he made a mistake?


UPDATE: Scott did admit he made a mistake (see comments), but is still unwilling (for reasons unclear to me) to give the exact numbers. Be assured, that the current breakdown is flawed; the "unaffiliates" group is not as large as Scott likes you to believe it is.

Scott Tribe's breakdown doesn't make sense - did he fudge the numbers?

First off; I never was great at math. And I don't have a great sense for stats either. But have a look at this "Membership breakdown at Prog Blog". It doesn't make sense.

He claims the following:

And stop trying to paint my motives for not listing the BLogging Tories (note plural, EA) who are amongst our group. I deemed them such a small percentage I didn’t bother listing them. I didnt bother listing the 1 or 2 sites that put themselves under the banner of the Progressive Canadian Party either, and as in the BT member’s case, it wasn’t out of spite. They were all part of the 0.1% “Other” category.. which I didnt originally mention.

Since there are 359 bloggers (Scott's numbers), some quick math would show that a single blogger = 0.3% of the whole ProgBlog community (1/359 *100). So how does the 0.3% per blogger account for the 0.1% "Other" category?

It doesn't make sense.

Scott writes:

Am I doing something wrong here or is Scott Tribe fudging the numbers? Who's the Lord of Statistics out there? I bet I'm just being too serious.