The payment to Porter

[facthunter]

I think I trust people in that part of Sydney to see through Craig. Some one may be running some ODDS on this. I've been known to be wrong on occasions but I've followed politics all my life. Nev

[Dax]

10 hours ago, Old Koreelah said:

A well-informed electorate. We hoped that new technology like social media would empower the ordinary citizen. Instead, it’s been used to misinform and inflame the gullible.

Misinformation has been with us for thousands of years and will always be with us, that's the nature of human psychology caused by terrible teaching methods and curriculum's. Proper education would solve that and a formula to achieve that has yet to be devised and under the current regime won't happen. Political correctness, woke and cancel cultures are making sure misinformation will only grow, until our education system is redesigned so it teaches the young about how to live, rather than to become economic slaves to the corporate elites.

 

It's moderation online which is at fault and with online government, there would have to be strict rules in regard to what can be posted in policy discussion and what can't. With the right controls agreed by the people it wouldn't be hard to restrict the crap we see on social media. Governance is not social media and having very strict rules would soon quieten down the rabid stirrers, or trolls when they realised their posts would be removed instantly and they would be subject to bring locked out of the discussion until they toed the line. They would still have their vote, but locked out of discussion.

11 hours ago, Old Koreelah said:

Citizens prepared to make the effort to get well-informed and involved in your self-government system. Just look at the TV crap that gets the highest ratings.

I have faith in the leverage person to be able to differentiate between media crap and governance and become informed on policy which effects them, after all everyone votes and currently is subject to the lies, deceit and never ending misinformation and denial from the political parties and their candidates. The difference being no political parties to throw their lies at peoples faces constantly,  no  press misinformation because there would already be truth in advertising and new reporting. Unlike now where the press and advertisers can say just about anything they like and not have any repercussions.

 

For any political system to work properly for everyone, you need policies which fit together like a jigsaw puzzle, every policy works to enhance and drive every other policy. That way it all fits together so the economy and society can function together and not as now, getting further and further apart. You'd have to wipe out monopolies and drive small business, small business is what really drives society  and creates real competition. Large monopoly driven corporations fracture society, drive up prices, lower service delivery and employment.

[old man emu]

54 minutes ago, Dax said:

It's moderation online which is at fault and with online government

“Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” Who will guard the guards? 

 

56 minutes ago, Dax said:

having very strict rules would soon quieten down the rabid stirrers, or trolls when they realised their posts would be removed instantly and they would be subject to bring locked out of the discussion until they toed the line.

The problem with that comes from the fact that we have a system where voting is anonymous. It's true that we have to have our names crossed off in order to show we attended a polling centre, but what we put on that ballot paper is known only to ourselves. If you have an online system, you could not require people to identify themselves and still have that concept of voter anonymity maintained. 

 

Also if someone using a particular screen identity who was constantly breaking the rules was locked out, all that person needs to do is create another account with a different screen name - from a different IP address - and carry on.

 

It is unfortunate that DAX has proposed many ideas that a lot of us can agree with. However, our combined experience tells us that, sadly, these things shall not come to pass.

[Dax]

1 hour ago, old man emu said:

If you have an online system, you could not require people to identify themselves and still have that concept of voter anonymity maintained. 

People could use whatever online name they want, which is the case now and there would be no reason to change that as anonymity is essential in my view, peoples privacy is paramount.

 

1 hour ago, old man emu said:

Also if someone using a particular screen identity who was constantly breaking the rules was locked out, all that person needs to do is create another account with a different screen name - from a different IP address - and carry on.

Not possible when you run proper registration regimes, in specifically designed secure systems that are very well protected and that can only be done by building a very secure system from scratch and not using any proprietary software. This would have to be done to bring all government online and open to all registered voters, not hard to do when you use proper identifying log in security. One way to do that would be to have a fully closed system, that can only be accessed by logging out of your standard online operating system and logging into the government system.

 

Even though you can use whatever online name you want, you would still have to register with your proper identity and be on the electoral roll. Being banned from discussion, wouldn't ban you from voting, you just don't get any say in formulating the policy.

1 hour ago, old man emu said:

It is unfortunate that DAX has proposed many ideas that a lot of us can agree with. However, our combined experience tells us that, sadly, these things shall not come to pass.

Any form of proposal to change our governance system and create a viable future instead of a death sentence for society, won't come to pass because just about everyone is locked into denial and deep seated fear of change. They prefer the devil that's killing them, rather than a chance to create and develop a viable sustainable future and be an actrive part of that regime if they want to be.

 

I've found in life, any viable approaches and new ideas can be adapted and changed to suit the requirements, old ideas and approaches can never be changed. There's an old saying which I run my life on, you can't take anything of the old into the new, or the old you drag in, will contaminate the new and you end up with another version the old.

 

That especially goes for government which can be seen every day, every time they make an alteration to their approach in policy, legislation or laws, it ends up being a basket case and just gets worse as they try adding more to the old to make it new and work for them.

 

We are at the end of a human era, it has less than 10 years before it won't exist in any viable way. It;s happened many times before in human evolution, yet ideological humanity refuses to see the signs and accept the reality of the evolutionary process, which is change to create an evolving future, or be relegated to the past.

 

It's an undeniable fact of evolutionary reality, but ideologues refuse to accept reality and are desperate to cling to the dying past.

 

I agree, it will never happen, because ideological humans won't change their approaches and neither will their ideological masters. The end result is completely in view, clear as day, not one case or hope of of changing without the people doing it and all everyone does, is reject change, deny reality and cling even harder to the empty hope destroying the future for our kids and grandkids.

 

Doesn't say much for human credibility, they will start and support ideological wars, but won't start or support peaceful wars of change against the destructive forces of ideology. What sort of logical sense does that make.

[old man emu]

2 hours ago, Dax said:

Doesn't say much for human credibility, they will start and support ideological wars, but won't start or support peaceful wars of change against the destructive forces of ideology. What sort of logical sense does that make.

Too true.

[willedoo]

17 hours ago, Old Koreelah said:

We hoped that new technology like social media would empower the ordinary citizen. Instead, it’s been used to misinform and inflame the gullible.

Scotty from marketing gave a speech at a happy clapper's conference. When he came to social media, he said there was some good there, but that it is also being used as a weapon by the 'Evil One'. You would think if Twitter etc. can give Trump the boot, that they would be able to cancel the Devil's accounts.

 

It's quite worrying that the political leader of our country believes that the Evil One is up to no good on social media. Personally, I think that proves he's mentally unfit to hold the position of Prime Minister. I respect people's beliefs, but I worry that our PM might be a fruit loop.

 

 

Edited September 21, 2021 by willedoo

[Old Koreelah]

8 hours ago, willedoo said:

Scotty from marketing gave a speech at a happy clapper's conference. When he came to social media, he said there was some good there, but that it is also being used as a weapon by the 'Evil One'. You would think if Twitter etc. can give Trump the boot, that they would be able to cancel the Devil's accounts.

 

It's quite worrying that the political leader of our country believes that the Evil One is up to no good on social media. Personally, I think that proves he's mentally unfit to hold the position of Prime Minister. I respect people's beliefs, but I worry that our PM might be a fruit loop.

 

 

 Not a fruit-loop; quite clever actor who has adopted the US politician’s art of conning the believer.

[Dax]

10 hours ago, Old Koreelah said:

Not a fruit-loop; quite clever actor who has adopted the US politician’s art of conning the believer.

Isn't that called pathological lying, or psychopathic deception, or maybe the other way round

[facthunter]

"Blessed are the PEACEMAKERS for they will  enter the Kingdom of God. Today peacemakers get assassinated for getting in the way of profits from wars. Nev

[Marty_d]

On 21/09/2021 at 12:59 PM, willedoo said:

...but I worry that our PM might be a fruit loop.

 

 

No.  Really??

[willedoo]

On 22/09/2021 at 7:46 AM, Dax said:

Isn't that called pathological lying, or psychopathic deception, or maybe the other way round

I guess he knows that a lot of clappers are gullible + paranoid, so panders to that audience. Playing up to them to get votes maybe.

[willedoo]

On 22/09/2021 at 11:37 AM, facthunter said:

"Blessed are the PEACEMAKERS for they will  enter the Kingdom of God. Today peacemakers get assassinated for getting in the way of profits from wars. Nev

Different days, but I always found 'Peacemaker' to be an odd name for Colt's famous six gun. It would have made a lot more widows than peace.

[Marty_d]

28 minutes ago, willedoo said:

Different days, but I always found 'Peacemaker' to be an odd name for Colt's famous six gun. It would have made a lot more widows than peace.

Goes to the attitude, doesn't it.  Peace through superior firepower.  It's still around today.

[nomadpete]

Colt was a peacemaker.

A "Rest In Peace"  maker.

[facthunter]

Liberator Bombers and Crusader rockets All part of the propaganda  plot to control minds and glorify WAR. Nev

[Dax]

14 hours ago, Marty_d said:

Goes to the attitude, doesn't it.  Peace through superior firepower.  It's still around today.

That's the USA approach, more guns keeps them safer. However as the USA is a fervent delusional society, locked into bizarre ideologies, it's completely understandable they like all ideologues can never see the reality that surrounds them, just their deranged ideology and they get violent if you point out their insanity.

[Yenn]

Definitely not a fruit loop. Listen to what the man says. If you do listen you will soon come to the conclusion that he says nothing. Just a load of platitudes and the media never picks him up on it.

Definitely not a fruit loop, far more dangerous, because the electorate never analyse what is said. they can only pick up on someone saying something they do or do not agree with. Talking and avoiding those subjects is a way of appearing good.

[Jerry_Atrick]

9 minutes ago, Yenn said:

Just a load of platitudes and the media never picks him up on it.

An acquaintance of mine started as a journo with The Age in about 1987. Back then, the press seemed to relish in holding pollies to account during press conferences and the like than they do now (although he has always been a sports writer). When I came over here in 1996, the first thing I noticed was the press didn't seem to hold their pollies to account quite as much... and when speaking to my acquaintance about it, he had said it was becoming like that in Australia, too.

 

Basically, for journalists, it came down to three things:

• You can make a lot of money securely and without having to branch out on your own as a journo. So you learn not to upset the apple cart too much - prod it enough to sell, but don't burst it.
• Your employer in the commercial sector is paid for by companies advertisements. They pay your employer who can pay you and make a profit. Editorial independence is out the window and truly independent editors don't last long, as the employer does exert influence to keep their clients happy. Yes, different advertisers will have different agendas (e.g. a renewable energy company will want the press they place media with to talk up climate change, while fossil fuel providers will want the press to deny it), but generally speaking, they all want similar things for most issues.
• The government will simply block access to the jouorno and the journo's employer. Jeff Kennett famously was open about it, and somehow your employer will be last to know of  breaking news and largely ignored in press conferences, etc.

So do enough to look like your holding the government to account, but don't really...

[willedoo]

I find the press conferences amusing. There are a certain amount of journos trying to hold the grilled pollie to account, but a lot just keep repeating dumb questions hoping for a 'gotcha' moment. Hoping to big note their very pedestrian career (fancy term for brown nosing the boss).

[facthunter]

You're right about the gotcha . That gives their lacklustre existence a high moment. and maybe the boss will know your name. Ha Ha..

  I asked a group  of Journo's years ago,  who were covering a Court case I had the continue or abort authority over and had to attend every session to do that job. "Why do you Print STUFF that's nothing like what is actually happening here?"

  The response was " There are only 2 kinds of journo's in Australia...Those who work for Murdoch and those who are going to". . Nev

[Bruce Tuncks]

All the stuff in this debate is good in that it illustrates well how true democracy is impossible or at least very difficult to achieve. BUT there is a big gulf between what we have here and what they have in Russia. ( In Russia, many contributors to this debate would be jailed ).

Personally, I like how the Swiss have lots more referenda than we do. I want to see the public decide on things like the sugar tax, and I reckon the fact that we are not given the chance to have a say weakens our claim to democracy, but again I say that most of the world is far worse.

To what extent should the oligarchs among us be able to shout out their messages and influence fools?  I can think of ways to slow this down, as I am sure most contributors to this forum could do too.

 

[spacesailor]

Sugar  ,

It is a natural plant product .

Lets start taxing those ' artificial ' food products. 

How is the chemical meat produce going . ( None animal meat ).

It used to be in one aisle only , but it's moved ( to were ! I don't know ) .

spacesailor

 

[willedoo]

3 hours ago, Bruce Tuncks said:

BUT there is a big gulf between what we have here and what they have in Russia. ( In Russia, many contributors to this debate would be jailed ).

This grandmother wasn't even the original poster online; all she did is repost a couple of posts from other people.

https://www.kyivpost.com/post/27323

Edited January 31 by willedoo

[facthunter]

Putler is justifiably insecure..Netahyahu would be in court IF this fiasco stops. Trump will be a big problem if he wins OR loses. He will only accept a WIN. Look where Boris took the UK. HE likes Trump. Fascists  on the rise in Germany. WE are on the edge of a world war which will be like NO other. No ONE will be the winner.    Nev

[Bruce Tuncks]

Spacy, cyanide is natural too. So is salt.