I have been tidying up, both my mind and mailboxes. Last month I was looking at a database technology selection problem and was indirectly pointed at “A visual guide to NoSQL”, or at least the picture. I have updated my wiki page on NoSQL, to include the reference and the image. The massive number of post relational systems available today reminded me of Stonebreaker’s article, The End of an Architectural Era (It’s Time for a Complete Rewrite), in which he first suggested that the monolithic poly-functional database’s day was over. Alternatively you can access it and some of his subsequent work here, at



That’s odd, the post and comments about not holding a Leadership nomination meeting in Lewisham Deptford Labour Party have been removed from their Facebook page. A member asked about the absence of a meeting, and was replied to by Dale Campbell Sharpe who while not being present at the Executive Committee meeting which made the decision stated he supported the decision on primarily financial grounds. His thread, caused me to write the following, which I was going to post as a comment.

This is a provocation. While I have some sympathy with the practical side of organising such a large, (over 2000 would have been invited) all members’ nomination meeting at such short notice and that the constraints placed on the EC by the NEC made it even more difficult and potentially worthless, cost is at the bottom of the list. Personally I was waiting for the minutes to be published before we discussed this but to claim that our EC voted not to have a nomination meeting for practical reasons alone, when we now know that Labour First were attempting to suppress the Corbyn campaign and the membership’s voice, is treating us as idiots.

I first dealt with this originally here.

the same old things

the same old things

Over the weekend, Dan Hodges, a right wing commentator, who claims to be ex Labour, wrote a piece stating that Owen Smith had lost the Leadership election. Essentially he argues that relying exclusively on his alleged superiority in winning an election is bogus, because he can’t. His argument was that while many Jeremy Corbyn supporters are maybe prepared to compromise to win the next election, they are not prepared to compromise to lose. This is pretty insightful for Hodges. What he and many in the PLP underestimate is the massive anger felt by many of the 200,000 Labour Party members who fought the 2015 general election being asked to concede the political offer to an inadequate front bench, an eventually demonstrably inadequate manifesto and an inadequate campaign.

Labour’s Leadership Part Deux

Labour’s Leadership Part Deux

This is awful, worse than last time, probably because Corbyn’s opponents know this is their last chance.   It’s also completely unnecessary and a diversion from the task of opposing the Tories in Parliament made more acute by the Referendum result. I shall continue to support Jeremy Corbyn for four reasons and this blog looks them; about the policy platform, the electoral strategy, together with a vision about the desired role of Labour’s members and finally, sadly abuse and cheating. Possibly most importantly, it’s about the role of the membership in the Party, because as John McDonnel and Chunky Mark have said, “It’s not Jeremy Corbyn they fear, it’s you”, a Party of ½ million and still growing.


With respect to the GMB’s all members consultation on the Labour Leadership nomination, I have posted to Facebook asking under which rule was the all members consultation authorised, there is no mention of such a process in the rules and under which rule does the decision of the ballot become a mandate for the Union, its CEC and its full timers; the rules reserve such power for Congress and the CEC could have called a Special Congress for that purpose.


Jeremy Corbyn has proposed as one of his 10 pledges to establish a free “National Education Service” and while as a policy I think it needs to be given more shape, for instance it is insufficiently detailed about the FE sector, skills acquisition & maintenance and life long access, its key value is that it states that the goal of world class education system is a public goal and today’s problems can be solved collectively and that the market can’t. The Tories desire and actions to privatise Education is an abandonment of quality in state education.