Transparency In The Internet Party
transparency
tranˈspar(ə)nsi,trɑːnˈspar(ə)nsi,tranˈspɛːr(ə)nsi,trɑːnˈspɛːr(ə)nsi/
noun
noun: transparency; plural noun: transparencies
1.
the condition of being transparent.
"the transparency of their predatory motives"
frankness, openness, candidness, honesty, directness, forthrightness, unreservedness, plain-spokenness, straightness, straightforwardness, ingenuousness, innocence, guilelessness, simplicity
"the report said that the country's economic management lacked transparency"
antonyms: opacity, cloudiness, obscurity, ambiguity, cunning, secrecy
2.
a positive transparent photograph printed on transparent plastic or glass, able to be viewed using a slide projector.
"colour transparencies of the Grand Canyon"
synonyms: slide, diapositive;
Above is the definition of Transparency from Google. This thread is about how we can implement Transparency within the Internet Party, both in our internal and external processes.
One of the ways I think we can implement Transparency is to publish all of our documentation as PDFs with regards to the internal workings of the Internet Party on our website. Here I'm talking about things like our Health & Safety procedures, Sexual Harrassment policy, our Induction booklet and other such documents.
Suzie Dawson Thu 7 Dec 2017 4:03AM
let me know if that format doesn't display correctly
@taneharre and i'll send you a pdf
Daymond Goulder-Horobin Thu 7 Dec 2017 6:32AM
You'll need to make it a word doc, can't open it on windows
Suzie Dawson Thu 7 Dec 2017 7:23AM
Miriam Mallinder Thu 7 Dec 2017 4:19AM
Freedom of speech?
Suzie Dawson Thu 7 Dec 2017 7:24AM
Freedom of speech does not include libel
Miriam Mallinder Thu 7 Dec 2017 7:48AM
I totally agree Suzie
Tane Harre Thu 7 Dec 2017 9:57AM
Can we stop with the comments and discuss this reasonably. Suzie has posted a document. Does anybody not agree with it? Miriam, can we have a copy of the thread you keep talking about?
Miriam Mallinder Thu 7 Dec 2017 5:19PM
Sorry Tane, I thought I had posted the copy of the thread last night ... my computer is glitching at the moment will do again below.
Miriam Mallinder Thu 7 Dec 2017 5:39PM
The document Suzie has posted needs some discussion ... yes those things in the right hand column were all done. I have some issue with the left hand column though.
I also completely object to her using that document as a method to completely denigrate the work that went on before her arrival, the reason she is here in the first place, to conveniently gloss over her mis-understanding of the mandate she was given which undermined the campaign plans that were in place and that she had agreed to execute, and how her mis-understandings and cavalier railroading approach put many people at considerable personal financial risk, how she used funds from the EC to mitigate that risk instead of to put it to good advertising use, her complete mis-representation of the state of the Internet Party Companies (again by not listening), and her total disrespect to the work and experience of the entire exec who had gone before her (which was not useless, as she likes to make out).
As I alluded to in the previous thread. All that Suzie does is spin to make herself look good at the expense of some very good people.
Furthermore, a leader who is unable to listen, and who is unable to see the good points in any people s/he is working with and incorporate them into a team (unless those people completely agree with her) has a lot to learn about leadership. If that leader thinks s/he has nothing to learn and continues to believe and state that they have the high ground ... what does that say about where that person's state of mind and leadership style currently is?
Tane, I am happy to work in a more evidence based manner, as you suggest. It is a good idea and will hopefully move us forwards (in a transparent manner) It is Christmas and no doubt Fred, as do I, have some family priorities at this time, so it may not be as immediate as would be preferred.
Suzie Dawson · Thu 7 Dec 2017 3:51AM
@taneharre - attached is the position the Party was in when I accepted the leadership (February) versus the position the party was in when I announced my leadership in June. The page is from the business plan endorsed by the exec and presented to Kim at the time. While people bleat about transparency it was in fact me that insisted that we make our strategic plans public and let everyone see every business/strategy doc at every step of the way. In that same spirit, here you go. This shows precisely why I was unable to go public in February, and why I was comfortable to in June.