| Topic: | The answer to the question | |
| Posted by: | Dan Evans | |
| Date/Time: | 13/04/06 09:11:00 |
| Peter, thank you for finally giving me the answer I was looking for. Sorry for the delay in replying - having a job can be a bit of a constraint on participating on internet forums. I'm not sure what you mean when you say that these people lack the courage to reveal themselves after the election. It does bring to mind a very unpleasant picture but let's not go there. The reason I asked for the membership of the ICG committee pertained to the ongoing discussion about IsleworthTW7.com. James de Vivenot raised the question as to why there couldn't be a site for the Isleworth area like the one we have for Brentford. It emerged in that thread that the ICG had bought the IsleworthTW7.com domain and others in the borough because they feared at the time of its launch that BrentfordTW8.com would become a propaganda tool for the Labour party. In the event it didn't and it also emerged in the course of the discussion that we had been misled when people told us that this site was owned and controlled by the Labour party. In fact it belongs to a private company with no political affiliations. In response to further questions by local residents on the matter Phil Andrews said that the committee of his group 'might consider' transferring the domain on certain conditions. (As far as I am aware this is a purely hypothetical question as there is nothing to indicate he has actually been asked to do so.) This was a surprising response given that most people would agree that BrentfordTW8.com is a good thing and a similar site for Isleworth would be an asset to the area. Surely the approach of the ICG should have been to initiate a request that a site should be launched in their area and offer help and support rather than domain squatting. Like others I was perplexed by this stance but then I was reminded of the sustained attempt by an ICG member to close this forum down by posting literally hundreds of messages, many of which were abusive. He was angry at having been banned for what he claimed were political reasons but what most other participants recognised was an inability to debate with others in a civilised fashion. Quite rightly he was roundly condemned from all corners, including fellow members of the ICG. We were led to believe that as a result of this outrageous behaviour he had left the group but your post seems to suggest that not only has he rejoined but has been promoted! Presumably as he sits on the committee which would make the decision on whether or not to get the company that runs this site to launch one in Isleworth he would veto it as he would probably not be allowed to participate on it. |