Home › Forums › General Discussion › Due process for revoking Harry Hempy’s right to participate on party website
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 3, 2016 at 10:06 am #248
Harry Hempy
MemberOn October 30, 2016 I was unable to access the ColoradoGreenParty.org website. On November 1 I phoned the registered tech support number for ColoradoGreenParty.org and was told the Green Party of Colorado had revoked my right to participate on ColoradoGreenParty.org because I habitually troll the website.I contest this characterization as a troller (whatever that means) on ColoradoGreenParty.org or any party-owned social media.Paragraph 3.3 of the party bylaws guarantees due process to every individual in the party before being kicked out, including at least 3 weeks notice of the potential punitive action. I received no notification before my access was cut off.After the election is over I will solicit from GPCO Council a written notification of the revocation of my rights of participation on party's website and the party's justification for taking this action. I want an opportunity to speak in my defense at the earliest feasible date.
November 3, 2016 at 7:55 pm #1438Michael Haughey
MemberThis is outrageous. Sounds like an attempt to silence unwanted opinions by the individual who made that decision, or worse we have a plant.Michael HaugheyJC Greens
November 24, 2016 at 3:13 pm #1439rlworthey
MemberWho specifically revoked your access?
November 24, 2016 at 4:58 pm #1440Harry Hempy
MemberMy access was revoked by the Administrator of the GPCO Website ColoradoGreenParty.org. According to the GPCO Forum member list and Whois.com the administrator of record is Andrea Merida. If it was not Andrea, that site has been hacked.
December 3, 2016 at 5:16 am #1441Harry Hempy
MemberI received no complaints about my behavior as a Green from GPCO Council, so on Nov. 30, I submitted a proposal to Council for drafting and discussion (hidden from general party members) to prevent Andrea Merida from abusing her position as website administrator in the future.The text:
WHEREAS,The Green Party of Colorado has revoked Harry Hempy's access to ColoradoGreenParty.org, the official public website of the Green Party of Colorado,THEREFORE, GPCO Council takes the following actions:
- GPCO Co-chair, Secretary, and Treasurer positions are declared vacated, effective immediately and will remain vacant until party elections are held at the 2017 Annual Meeting.
- GPCO Council will form a select committee, charged with planning and conducting the 2017 GPCO Annual Meeting, within 15 days of adoption of this proposal. The annual meeting will occur between February 1 and March 26, 2017.
- Accusations that Harry Hempy has misused GPCO social media, described in
4. Background of this proposal, are dismissed. Harry's access to ColoradoGreenParty.org and all GPCO social media shall be restored, effective immediately.
Andrea UNblocked me from the state party website immediately after I posted this proposal. That is the good news.Unfortunately, Council did not address the due process issues and bylaws violations issues raised in the proposal. I remain concerned that Council was silent regarding Andrea's dominant position over the Green Party of Colorado, which enables her to secretly block anybody's access to party assets with no justification and no accountability to Council.
February 12, 2017 at 8:50 pm #1444Véronique Bellamy
MemberHarry,I don't mean to invalidate your argument but I must query you on one point. I can't imagine the Colorado Green Party has a number posted to a GPCO member who acts as tech support for the organization's website. In order for someone to be "tech support" and yet, be able to tell you that, they must be privy to the machinations of the Green Party of Colorado and have the authority to answer your questions. If you called their hosting company, you'd probably get the same answer that you'd get if you called mine asking about access to my websites, a nicer form of "piss off, you're not the account holder". This is because it's not the job of a web host to invigilate the content on their hosted accounts and this is also legally problematic. If a webhost had the ability to invigilate the access, as you state, they would be in violation of the Safe Harbour provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act which shield the webhost from liability.
February 13, 2017 at 1:23 am #1443Harry Hempy
MemberVeronique, I did not say the webhost invigilated my access.It was coloradogreenparty.org owner/administrator/tech support person Andrea Merida.If you look up coloradogreenparty.org on Whois.com you can see the phone number and email address for the site owner, administrator and tech support, all of whom are Andrea Merida.
February 13, 2017 at 2:03 am #1442Harry Hempy
MemberDetails, for Council members, are at http://gpco.fullydefiant.com/forum/index.php?topic=306.0
February 16, 2017 at 9:46 pm #1445Véronique Bellamy
MemberHarry,When you buy a domain name, often these fields are populated with the same person's data even if it's not relevant. When I buy a domain name (unless it's through domains.google, which does provide me free WHOIS protection), even if it's for a client, my name is in all three fields regardless of whether it's my website or a website I'm working on for someone else. Even my country-level domain names have different trustees because, while I am a French citizen (and thus, a citizen of the EU), because I am resident in the United States, I am required to purchase "trustee service" from my registrar in order to have a .fr domain name.
February 17, 2017 at 11:22 pm #1446Harry Hempy
MemberVeronique, Thanks for explaining that.The fact remains that Andrea forbade my access to ColoradoGreenParty.org solely on her own authority, in gross violation of GPCO Bylaws. She tried to cover it up by secretly restoring my access.
February 18, 2017 at 9:02 am #1447Véronique Bellamy
MemberDon't get me wrong, I would like to see something a little better, like a Jekyll-powered site hosted on Github Pages so that the source code (including any changes) are tracked via git. That way, it's easier for something like this to be proven and it's easier to prove who changed what. The problem with that, though, is that it's not very user-friendly and is more for developers who want to spin up a quick site.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
