I think it goes further Individuals, pressure groups and charities have all sorts of means of advising politicians, political parties and governments without needing to go as far as endorsing them.
I'm not saying Tom shouldn't be a Conservative Party member or supporter. I'm pleased in fact that he is at least endorsing the role of political parties. It just leaves MySociety with implications to resolve as an organisation. Alex On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Dan Brickley <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Francis Davey <[email protected]> wrote: > > 2009/10/6 Matthew Cain <[email protected]>: > >> There's a significant distinction between advising the government of the > day (regardless of which party is in power) and advising a political party. > >> > > > > As I said, this must be some political nuance I'm missing because I > > don't see it. Sorry. Surely advising people on IT and having a sane > > policy is a good thing. I'd be happy to advise the Tories on anything > > I knew about because it would mean they were a better and more > > effective political party, that in turn can only be good for everyone. > > Better at achieving their aims and objectives, perhaps. Which is a > rather sporty leap from 'good for everyone', unless you also believe > the Tories to be a fundamentally public-spirited group. > > I'm personally disappointed to see Tom line up behind the Tories, > because I greatly admire his work but have less than zero trust in the > Convervative Party having 'good for everyone' goals. > > Maybe I should be looking at it backwards: 'well, if Tom is an example > of a modern Conservative, they can't be all bad'. And I'm sure they're > not all devils! But there's an egalitarianism and openness to much of > 'net culture, especially data sharing and transparency efforts, which > stands apart from all I've ever learned about the UK's Conservatives. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReIAna459sg pretty much captures how I > remember them from last time around... > > > > > I struggle to see how telling people what is a good thing to do can > > ever be bad. > > Because it implicitly lends them MySociety's credibility, and provides > that old gang a plausible cover story for why they're the > forward-thinking modernists, even if they're not. > > (Post-Iraq war, I am pretty dismayed by the Labour Party too, and have > been asking myself what I think about my friends advising and helping > them in open govt efforts.) > > I can only echo Mathew Cain again here: > > > There's a significant distinction between advising the government of the > day (regardless of which party is in power) and > > advising a political party. > > Once a party has found their way into power, getting them good advice > (or at least not willing them to screw things up) is the responsible > way to behave. The US right wing have lost the plot on this point, > w.r.t. Obama. But this isn't the same as lending support for a party's > election campaign, which is what's happening here. > > > Surely no-one cares *who* is in power provided they do the right thing? > > Which right thing? Governments do a lot of things, and I expect a lot > (not all) of what the Convervatives will do to not be very 'right > thing', regardless of their mysociety-related policies. We can only > hope they make nice JSON feeds documenting it all so that this can be > corrected in subsequent elections... > > cheers, > > Dan > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list [email protected] > Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: > https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public >
_______________________________________________ Mailing list [email protected] Archive, settings, or unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
