This forum and the Sydenham Society

[Robin Orton]

Two recent quotes from Tim Lund:

many of Sydenham's great and good feel very antagonistic towards this Forum, and were looking for somewhere they could put across the messages they would prefer.

[...] no one reads this Forum - it's what I used to hear from the absent friends of the Sydenham Society

(I assume 'Sydenham's great and good' is code for the Sydenham Society.)

And from G-Man:

I think if [...]the Sydenham Society collaborated and listened to what people are saying we would have a better High Street. On their website they say "Our aim is to be a voice for Sydenham and to make SE26 a better place to live and work. We strive to protect and improve services and amenities which impact on the local area. Our main areas of interest are Conservation & Planning, Transport and the Environment".Are they actually doing this at the moment? Can't someone from the society show their support for Dorian, Mosy and Lee's what if? ideas? If they have clout they can help really change Sydenham for the better, as I think now, more than any other time is when that clout is needed.

I have myself noticed that SydSoc do not seem to use this forum very much, which seems to me a pity. I'd have thought the community generally would benefit from a bit of synergy between two important Sydenham organisations. Can anyone tell us what the problem is (if there is indeed one) and perhaps suggest ways in which it might be overcome?

[admin]

I am a member of SydSoc.

I'm not the only one here, and we don't all think the same. I started and maintain this forum because I think it is good for Sydenham. That doesn't mean every post is good or even every poster is good for Sydenham but whenever possible Robin I leave it to your Pearly Gate Boss to infallibly distinguish between the two at a later date - as you can see my limited attempts do not always get 100% support.

I guess that's the issue: between what is basically a fairly uncontrolled discussion forum and one that puts across a specific positive view. The trouble is many of us (and that starts with me) think we are right most of the time. It takes a challenge to question whether one is mistaken. And if we are sometimes slow to acknowledge we may be wrong it can help others to decide between competing views.

I think it a shame some SydSoc members have shied away from justifying and defending their views either directly on the SydSoc website or here. That is their choice and I think it is something i would not wish bully them into. I just think they may lose a little legitimacy and the necessary check and balances needed if you believe you are speaking for other people.

Perhaps thats a bit easy to say for me - I speak for no one, not even myself really

Admin

[leenewham]

This forum is widely read by people in Sydenham, many people follow it even if they don't comment.

In google searches this forum tops anything related to Sydenham. I know there is resistance to using the forum by some in the Sydenham Society.

But the fact remains that this is a widely read site and any news related to Sydenham should have as much coverage as possible. It's a shame that the news on the Sydenham Society site isn't covered in here to maximise coverage.

After asking eventually the Sydenham Society eventually put the link to the What If project on their site, s they have with the blogs I manage for Home Park and Sydenham Library. All of these get far far far more referals from the forum than the Syd Soc site.

I'd hope that the Sydenham Society change their minds and use this forum to bring a lot of the good news on their own blog to as wide an audience as possible.

[Tim Lund]

After asking eventually the Sydenham Society eventually put the link to the What If project on their site, s they have with the blogs I manage for Home Park and Sydenham Library. All of these get far far far more referals from the forum than the Syd Soc site.

Thanks for this, Lee - it was the sort of objective evidence I was looking for when I started this thread back in July

Two recent quotes from Tim Lund:
many of Sydenham's great and good feel very antagonistic towards this Forum, and were looking for somewhere they could put across the messages they would prefer.

[...] no one reads this Forum - it's what I used to hear from the absent friends of the Sydenham Society

(I assume 'Sydenham's great and good' is code for the Sydenham Society.)

Nearly, Robin. "Absent friends" means former regular posters, such as Nasaroc, BigBen, Pat Trembath and Muddy Waters, all of whom are leading members of the Sydenham Society. "Sydenham's great and good" is code for a wider group who include local councillors and others with positions in various community groups, who I feel are missing out on the opportunities Forums such as this offer.

One of the reason why I stepped down as SydSoc chair was a behind the scenes campaign of other leading members to discourage use of this Forum, which struck me futile, as well as counter to my belief in an open society. I think it's perfectly fair to use the Forum to get across your views, but you have to adjust to a different style of communication, which is where absent friends failed. I do understand some of the problems - you have to know how to handle others attacking you, and generally taking the piss. You also have to think that anything you write may be used in evidence against you ... you can of course edit or delete what you write, but you can't be doing that all the time. So although the best tone is to be familiar, you do need to be careful as well.

I could go on ... but I need to do some paid-for work today. I'm not saying I know that much about how to use these Forums, but I have offered - and continue to offer - to meet up with anyone who wants to use this Forum to talk about how to use it.

[Rachael]

I know a lot of people dislike the EDF forum, but bear with me...

The local councillors there post quite often on EDF. As does the manager of East Dulwich rail station and people responsible for doings in Peckham Rye park and others involved in running things locally. They seem to have managed to get the balance right - they respond to specific concerns, given specific information where relevant, but don't get dragged into arguments, or post in any of the informal parts of the forum. It is clear from the tone they take that they are posting 'officially' rather than personally.

It is perfectly possible to do. It has been good to see Chris Best posting here recently, and I hope it signals a change in attitude from those in officialdom (by which I also mean organisations such as Syd Soc, although I'm sure Tim would want to qualify my use of 'official' there). It can be done, it should be done.

[Savvy]

Syd Society Members probably don't post coz this is all a bit too 'lowbrow' for them... too many mealy mouthed anti-immigration, tabloid reading ranters going on about 'benefit scum' and calls for a fat-tax. I would guess its all a bit tedious for for people who are above the mire -maybe they have better things to do with their time.

[JulietP]

Syd Society Members probably don't post coz this is all a bit too 'lowbrow' for them... too many mealy mouthed anti-immigration, tabloid reading ranters going on about 'benefit scum' and calls for a fat-tax. I would guess its all a bit tedious for for people who are above the mire -maybe they have better things to do with their time.

On any forum it's easy to avoid the bits one is not interested in. But since I've moved to Sydenham this forum has been the most reliable and interesting source of local information I've found.

I don't know anything about the Sydenham Society, but given the state of our High Street, I wonder what planet they're from if they think that solving Sydenham's problems has anything to do with being "highbrow". That just sounds snooty and pretentious to me.

[Tim Lund]

It has been good to see Chris Best posting here recently, and I hope it signals a change in attitude from those in officialdom (by which I also mean organisations such as Syd Soc, although I'm sure Tim would want to qualify my use of 'official' there). It can be done, it should be done.

I'm not sure that there has been any great change in the frequency of Chris Best's postings, but it's possible they have picked up - which is welcome if true. However, I think Chris takes too much on herself. What would signal a change in attitude from those in officialdom - which is a good enough term for people who Chris can influence - is to see other councillors and senior officers use this Forum to explain what they are doing, and respond to any comments. As said various other times, it would also be good to see more junior council officers use it just to publicise initiatives and events; it seems to me like a no-brainer for letting people know what good work the council does.

[Savvy]

Tim, really... its not going to happen. Not with the tone of some of the conversations and attitudes of some people this forum. This of this forum as if it were a physical 'space' and you're looking through the window and overhearing some of the conversations. Would you really want to come in, or would you instead open your own space and welcome people to come there for information?

[Rachael]

But, Savvy, the EDF forum is just the same, and 'officials' have no problem posting there.

[Tim Lund]

Syd Society Members probably don't post coz this is all a bit too 'lowbrow' for them... too many mealy mouthed anti-immigration, tabloid reading ranters going on about 'benefit scum' and calls for a fat-tax. I would guess its all a bit tedious for for people who are above the mire -maybe they have better things to do with their time.

On any forum it's easy to avoid the bits one is not interested in. But since I've moved to Sydenham this forum has been the most reliable and interesting source of local information I've found.

I don't know anything about the Sydenham Society, but given the state of our High Street, I wonder what planet they're from if they think that solving Sydenham's problems has anything to do with being "highbrow". That just sounds snooty and pretentious to me.

I think that's a little bit unfair. The active members of SydSoc aren't particularly high-brow or snooty - in fact, that's probably more what they think about me. But I think Savvy is right in identifying "anti-immigration, tabloid reading ranters going on about 'benefit scum'" as causing them problems. It's sensitive, and obviously does matter to many people, so you need to be careful what you write, but if you ignore it completely, you may seem out of touch. However, this shouldn't really bother people too much - it's easy enough to walk away from that sort of argument, and it does little harm to do so.

As suggested before, I think the reluctance of active SydSoc members to use this Forum is a combination of not being sure how best to use it, and opting instead to identify with what rshdunlop calls our local officialdom, who discourage channels of communication other than ones they can control.

[Tim Lund]

Tim, really... its not going to happen. Not with the tone of some of the conversations and attitudes of some people this forum. Thi[nk] of this forum as if it were a physical 'space' and you're looking through the window and overhearing some of the conversations. Would you really want to come in, or would you instead open your own space and welcome people to come there for information?

People expressing views I disagree with, in language I don't like, are just as much citizens as I am. I'd prefer to go into the space where views I disagree with are expressed, and see if there was anything I could do to influence them. As it happens, we have here in the Sydenham Town Forum a space where liberal views such as mine are perfectly acceptable and mainstream - which is why I use it. If I just wanted to live in a liberal ghetto, then maybe I would open my own space and welcome people to come there for information - but would they? Think about what JulietP wrote - she comes to this Forum for information, not the SydSoc web site.

[Tim Lund]

I just had an email from Cllr Mike Harris, the communications professional I mentioned here. He writes

If Labour were (and we're not) to get into the game of creating closed political discussions amongst sycophants - local people would ignore our back-patting and continue the conversation elsewhere.

Has he not noticed that that is exactly what people do?

[admin]

The discussion on "Right Wing Rantings" has been moved here:
http://forum.sydenham.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=6889

Admin

[sfhyouthforum]

high brow, low brow, mono brow: it is useful to hear all kinds of views so we know how people within the community think and feel on topics. It also helps when planning projects and thinking of improvements. Doesn't mean I like hearing some of the views, and it also puts people off posting on topics, but as long as we are a diverse free press, it is important to hear them.

[Robin Orton]

I guess there are two separate issues. The first is that some prominent local individuals (who may or may not be big in SydSoc), who would be in a position to make a really helpful contribution to some of our discussions here, choose not (or no longer) to post here, possibly because of the uninhibited and deeply felt (other words could be used) tone of some of the postings.I think this is a pity, but perhaps it's just how things are.

The other question is whether SydSoc collectively have taken a positive decision not to use this forum to publicize their activities and to involve a rather wider constituency than their paid-up members (of which I too am one, by the way) in their work; and, if so, whether this is something they might consider revisiting. I guess the only way of getting an answer to this would be for someone (preferably one of their own members?) officially to ask it of them. Perhaps at some stage there will be someone (braver than me) who may feel moved to do so.

[marymck]

I don't know what some of the people posting on this thread think "The Sydenham Society" is.

It's a local civic society made up of members from all sorts of backgrounds, with all sorts of politics and all sorts of priorities. Just about the only common thread is that the members live in Sydenham.

I'm a member. I don't claim to represent "The Sydenham Society" any more than I claim to represent the "Orders and Medals Research Society" or the "Society of Genealogists" or other members of "Women in Film & TV" ... or all Sagittarians who share a birthday with Stephen Spielberg and like chocolate and good wine.

Lots of people give up a generous amount of their time to try to make life better in Sydenham - be it through the Sydenham Society, or the community radio, or organizations like Friends of Home Park, or in Church groups or just by trying to be a good neighbour. This isn't the first thread where people have said hurtful things about "The Sydenham Society" or the "great and the good" or whatever, and I'm sure it won't be the last.

Perhaps the people who criticise would like to get more involved. If they don't want to do so by joining any of the Syd Soc's sub-committees (who give up even more of their time in a frankly thankless task) then there's nothing to stop them standing for the Council as an Independent, or just in writing letters to the Mayor about things they care about. Only just don't be surprised if someone calls you highbrow for showing an interest.

[marymck]

Robin wrote: [quote]The other question is whether SydSoc collectively have taken a positive decision not to use this forum to publicize their activities and to involve a rather wider constituency than their paid-up members (of which I too am one, by the way) in their work; and, if so, whether this is something they might consider revisiting. I guess the only way of getting an answer to this would be for someone (preferably one of their own members?) officially to ask it of them. Perhaps at some stage there will be someone (braver than me) who may feel moved to do so.[/quote

Oh how silly.

Of course there's not been a decision not to use this forum. Members of the Society (including the Chair) post information and publicity on this site all the time.

[Tim Lund]

Oh how silly.

Of course there's not been a decision not to use this forum. Members of the Society (including the Chair) post information and publicity on this site all the time.

There may or may not have been a decision as such, but it would be easy to identify a time when the number of posts from the SydSoc regulars I identified fell off significantly. This was presumably a set of individual decisions, rather than just accidents. We can be fairly sure these individual decisions were co-ordinated, since it happened at a time when I was the Chair of SydSoc, and it was suggested to me strongly that this was not a good place to post. I don't have SydSoc Exec minutes to hand, but I don't believe any such decision was ever minuted, but I think we have nonetheless good enough grounds for saying a decision was made.

As to whether 'members of the Society (including the Chair) post information and publicity on this site all the time', well, that's not really in dispute. Like you, I am also a SydSoc member, as are Admin, and Lee, so yes, and if anyone can be said to post all the time, then we do. The point is rather that SydSoc officers such as its Chair fail to use this Forum as well as they could - and did.

When it comes to information and publicity, the loss is perhaps not that great, although I think still appreciable. This Forum probably does not reach as many people living within Sydenham as say the SydSoc printed newsletter and enewsletter, and if something is publicised here it can always be picked up in these - in fact, from time to time I email Annabel (SydSoc chair) to alert her to items I've posted here which I think she would want to publicise - as indeed she generally does. Hopefully she - and you - also scan this forum items which deserve wider publicity. It works, even if not as effectively as it might.

The greater loss comes from not setting out SydSoc policy positions, and then engaging in debate and argument, which creates the impression that these positions are not as well founded and thought through as they might be.

[Dorian]

marymck

Maybe the S.S. hierarchy dont like being questioned or dissagreed with and posting on this forum may leave them vunerable to both ? Only a thought, not necessarily a critiscm.

I for one do not know much about the S. Society and did not know there were" Sub - committees". If you are suggesting that people shoud get involved with these committes maybe it would be helpfull to know what issues and subjects they cover are and then if subscribers to this Forum felt strongly about a commitees responsibilty they would be motivated to get involved.

Could some one say what they are ?