by rimu
We’re going to be trying to improve the tone of the comments sections on this blog.
Unfortunately we don’t really have the time to be nice, and delete or edit individual posts. Certain people have made it their (unpaid?) jobs to make a mess on this blog, and they are prolific enough that we don’t have time to edit or delete their posts individually. So all their posts will be thrown into a moderation queue, which we will let stuff out of if we have time.
Not everyone will agree with our moderation decisions, but please bear with us as we find something that works.
We are not against free speech, we think it is a wonderful thing. However, your right to free speech does not impose a responsibility on us to publish it.
Published in Environment & Resource Management by rimu on Fri, June 19th, 2009
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
What a lot of bull**it, you guys are totally against free speech.
Why is it that the left are so scared of letting those who disagree with them say their piece?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It’s not what you say, it’s how you say it
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
was it something I thought???
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
your right to free speech does not impose a responsibility on us to publish it.
That’s well put.
Fear not Big Bro, moderation is not such a bad place and you won’t be alone in there – your good friend D4J will keep you company. You can whine and winge about the ‘left’ til you’re both exhausted!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I take it that if these comentators improove their postings they will be removed from auto-moderation? I doubt a auto-mod on accounts will do much except for the most uninventive, a auto-mod on IP could work better but then that is also relativly easy to get around
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
My preference is to put up with the mess. If it bites I bite back.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Yes, sure, people could earn their way out.
It may or may not work. If it doesn’t we can try something else
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Can we have a game? The winner is the one who can shepherd, say, Big Bro, into moderation first?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
@bjchip Yes, some people thrive on the current environment. It’s a self-enforcing thing; hostile environments are only fun for certain people, so the environment becomes more hostile. And down the spiral goes.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
oh btw, due to technical limitations, even mentioning the name of people who are in the moderation queue will place that post in the moderation queue… so don’t go feeling like all your posts will be moderated if one of them is
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Excuse me thebiggerpicture the delay I’m experiencing with my comments appearing..is that moderation? I’n which case I both win and lose!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
oh good – what about quotes Biggie? Good move anyway – as a resident of the ‘H’ town I got blasted for months by what, turned out to be 22% of Ratepayers.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
As I’ve noticed… but I think I know who caused this and I’d already guessed the technical limitations.
I have not noticed that I need to descend to their level to make my points, and that contrary to expectations, most lift their game rather than dragging me down.
OTOH, I stayed completely out of the recent mess…. and the “who” I refer to has never shown any sign of moderation.
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
will the use of elipses cause us to be cast into the abyss?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Lovely grass. Fluffy clouds. Shinny happy people holding hands.
Bless.
This is politics we’re discussing, right?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
just guessing pete – but I’ve seen some pretty ordinary stuff roost around the place – referring to a sitting mp as ‘the devil’…then it’s supposed to be an anonymous blog – well that status has been endangered unwholesomely lately – people have feelings don’t they?
funny little things.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
You don’t give us ant examples
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
(any examples)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Atom?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
what about a 24 hour amnesty? There’s a couple of Sentences I’ve been saving up for a while – and the dogs have warned me already; if I try kickin em again, I’ll be properly bitten kitten
Just a vital message thru the Cairo Corridor….oh never mind
It ain’t important…I think, in their heart of hearts
they know…and it’s not a good tone, not a kindred spirit, or even
a point of view
i still say it’s jealousy from Mt Albert….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
So some people will be put int the moderation queue and some not, depending upon the quality of their posting.
As long as it’s not a political bias, but rather dependent on whether they troll or are abusive, then I think that’s a good idea.
Hopefully I’m OK
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Are you going to have a naughty list?
Seems kind of harsh guys, I think it would only be fair if you state explicit rules of engagement before you start chucking people in “time out”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
..just call me ellipses-man from now on..
..u-no-hu..
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
If I’m naughty, can I just have a smacked bottom instead?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
mark – let rip!
Hey ellipses-man! have you been in ‘that place’? What’s it like in there? Did you recognise your cell mates?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Jarbury,
.
On this blog I would say that the affected comment approach comes disproportionatly from right-wingers. Since they are disproportionatly represented in the problem population they are disproportionatly moderated. If this may be seen as political censorship is a matter somewhat debatable.
Maori are disproportionatly represented in poverty, poor health, crime, unemployment, etc and because of this decreasing benefits or health care, increasing the minumum wage, or increasing penalties for crimes results in a disproportionate damage to maori. I dont see this as discrimination in the sense that maori are activly targeted but that it is a side effect of a systematic change that may or may not be needed. It is the same with the modetration here. So rationally, to be consistant, the green party membership should see it as censorship since they see the maori situation as discrimination and the right-wingers whould see it as perfectly fine die to their inverse opinion. I guess it just shows the inconsistancy and irrationallity in ideology on both sides
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
@bjchip Yes, some people thrive on the current environment. It’s a self-enforcing thing; hostile environments are only fun for certain people, so the environment becomes more hostile. And down the spiral goes.
……………………………..
Meteria Turie (I think) said the Greens are at the “cutting edge of politics”
and you enjoy the use of the label “green” while pushing policies from the far left end of the spectrum so you can expect hostility.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I agree with shunda actually (shock horror), that the rules of engagement should be spelled out quite clearly before anyone gets chucked in “time out”.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
jh – how nimbly you reframe ‘cutting edge’ as ‘from the far-left of the spectrum’
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
thebiggerpicture – don’t tell us where the limits are! Let us discover them ourselves!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
jh – how nimbly you reframe ‘cutting edge’ as ‘from the far-left of the spectrum’
…………….
more the old blunted edge thinking it will rush in and pick up the pieces, drowning out the evolution of any third way that could develop.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Has “thebiggerpicture” ever posted before?
Who is he/she?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I thaught that things were getting a bit ugly on the “2 out of 2″ blog, how about a “suggested rules of engagement” either way a huge hints need to be droped before some people learn some manners.
I was simply trying to discuss the relevant topic .
I can understand why Frog has taken the stand he has taken.
Talking about free speech I visited the ACT site and I could not find any sort of associated site they host for bloggers.
Does the ACT or National party have accociated sites for bloggers???
Like Frogblog?
Others on the left are Socialist Aotearoa and Workers Party I put in a contribution regularly but I can’t rant on ACT!!!!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Kiwiblog & Whaleoil.
I would certainly quite like National to have a party blog. Anywhere I can berate Steven Joyce directly for his idiotic transport policies would be fantastic!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“..# jarbury Says:
June 19th, 2009 at 9:20 pm
Has “thebiggerpicture” ever posted before?
Who is he/she?..”
someone..obviously..from the moniker..
..dying to be drunk with power..
..’to rule over us’..
.. u-no-hu ..
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
i’m picking they are ‘short’..
.. u-no-hu ..
(censorship..eh..?..yagottalaff..!..)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
..was it something i said..?..
..u-no-hu ..
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
and jarbury..!..he/she’s got his/her eye on you..!
..your card’ll be marked soon enough..
..u-no-hu ..
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Oh-no, it’s u-no-hu! Hu? u-no, u-no-hu! O!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Voldemort!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Sounds good to me, discuss the issue, stay on topic.
Kiwiblog has got a bit out of control now – with 100+ people making ‘witty comments’ on nearly every blog post…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
- “We are not against free speech, we think it is a wonderful thing. However, your right to free speech does not impose a responsibility on us to publish it.”
Being called on your fascist authoritarianism must really grate for people who seek to perpetuate the self-deception that they are “libertarians socialists.”
When you limit dissent on your blog you can lie and lie and lie to yourselves.
Go ahead, jerk yourselves off.
But don’t you wonder why the left is being so soundly thrashed on the Internet, and is forced to retreat to its own little echo-chambers?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
As much as I’m normally against all that sort of moderation thing, it often gets to be that only the moderators view is ever seen and all that, thank you for making this choice for frogblog.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
LOL wat. A Libertarian of all people telling the owner of a blog not to run it as they want. If the Green Party wants to minimise the number of personal attacks on its blog, it has a right to do so. You have a right to take your wisdom elsewhere if you disagree. Try one of those great right-wing blogs. Oops, Kiwiblog polices ad hominem attacks too. Maybe Whaleoil is your nirvana. Enjoy.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I am horrified at the apparent inability of some people making posts to stick to sensible comment, or reply in such a way that they show the poor quality of their overall view of life and others.
This is my opinion though and I shudder a little at the thought of moderation.
I was wondering if we could give the job of moderation to some class of five year olds somewhere as I am sure they would easily appreciate what is the meaningful comment and what is the put down.
I have seen for years the behaviour of ACT members at meetings etc. and there has usually been an element of disrespect. Even Rodney Hide had to tidy his image up to stay where he is. All it does for me is to inspire me to make sure that this type of disrespect is not in control of things.
The Green Party is quite diverse in their views but the blinkered comments of some can’t see past their own prejudices.
I can tolerate it but it makes it very difficult to have constructive discussion on issues, and I wonder what people want or are so fearful of that they can’t let others have a constructive say without put downs etc.
I guess it shows a lack of any original thinking toward the new issues facing us, frightening but inspiring me to be more involved, more clear with my comments, more informitive and more inclusive.
I challenge other writers to show they are not as socially inept as they appear and then rules are not needed.
A Buddhist view which seems well backed by how the body deals with foreign matter is that to overcome something we need to absorb it first, become one with it. The more you fend it off the bigger it can get. That is how some in Martial Arts can block strikes when blindfolded.
I would think that the allowing of the disruptive process, even the publishing of the crap would help others take the opposite opinion, it just makes it difficult when the people doing it are so compulsive they seem off balance?.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Your right to free speech does not impose a responsibility on us to publish it”
That statement misses the point. Frog could have said “My commitment to free speech means that I will publish your comments even if I disagree with them”. Instead he has chosen to stand on his right not to publish. What this means is that the Green Party is going down the same road as APN, Fairfax, Murdoch et al, who put their rights to manage content before the public’s right to know.
I am disappointed that Frog has rejected suggestions that would have improved the tone of frogblog without compromising open discussion. But since he has decided to go down the censorship track, I would suggest that he set out rules for discussion, so that the censorship system will be transparent rather than arbitrary.
I have previously challenged frog to reveal his true identity. Now that he has become a censor as well as a moderator, I believe it is particularly pertinent that his identity be known. But I will not be holding my breath.
(If anyone is interested www republican co nz will be happy to publish contributions rejected by frogblog).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
But frog didn’t start this thread – “thebiggerpicture” did. I wonder if that is the name taken by a group rather than an individual?
Frog has already stated on this blog her gender. I don’t see it necessary for her to reveal her full identity, and I presume that there will be more than one moderator deciding who should go onto the moderated queue.
This site has had some degree of moderation with respect to language anyway, and there are already guidelines on acceptable practice, so the only real thing that has been changed by this decision is the timing of some posts and whether some posts appear briefly before they are deleted.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Its pretty clear who the big picture is, its the one “amphibian” that hasn’t posted on this thread so far.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Shunda
I am not so curious about them. Personalities eventually become evident in their posts and I am quite content to deal with nom-de-plumes HERE. I may know this one by reason of having worked with him on some policy a year or so ago… or I may be completely mistaken. If I really wanted I could work up some filters based on writing style and run the posts I have through them. Lots of work, no good reason to do it.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
If you are moderating because of personal attacks then thats fine, but if you are moderating because someone disagrees with your ideas then all you are demonstrating is why people shouldn’t vote for the greens.
A party that can’t openly debate any issue is not democratic but is actually authoritarian.
My experience with moderators is that they are human and as such their own personal beliefs will ALWAYS control how they moderate, so if they don’t like a persons personal beliefs they will be far more inclined to moderate them than someone who they agree with.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Methinks a professional distortionist has no place here – they take up too much attention and destroy constructive energies.
Once ulterior motives are clearly stated – I think it right that their vile and malicious intent is ignored – for ethical reasons and good taste.
So let ‘em rant on kiwibog or simlar – the Green Party does not owe anyone a Forum.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
1. Note this topic (by Frog):
“It seems I’m not the only one confused about the meaning of the question in the forthcoming referendum:”
This disingenuous response sets the tone, as if the Greens don’t understand that people feel that the law shouldn’t make it illegal for a parent to smack a child that an ocassional smack is ok.
2. while on the one hand your up there with science and common sense on climate change and sustainability your down there with tino rangitiratanga and a complete revision of the political system around that.
3.it’s true that blogs get stale as the same people become experts in their own point of views not learning anything new (myself included). Perhaps what’s needed is less opinion pieces and more analysis but I think that the problem is the raw ideology showing through (the balance to the position has either left , never joined or has one foot out the door), and ideology is too dominant to frame an objective position.
4?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Once ulterior motives are clearly stated – I think it right that their vile and malicious intent is ignored – for ethical reasons and good taste.
So let ‘em rant on kiwibog or simlar – the Green Party does not owe anyone a Forum.”
[remember Green Party support is 9%? but still a significant group in parliament yet on a show of hands you are the defenders of points of view a sizeable proportion find unacceptable]
or on (say) Climate change frame the discussion in a structured manner so as to think laterally> the behavioural aspects of the climate change debate and how can we ensure a structured debate or how can we pin down a point.. this is the holy grail of appropriate decision making(?)/ critical thinking.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Your right to free speech does not impose a responsibility on us to publish it”
That statement misses the point. Frog could have said “My commitment to free speech means that I will publish your comments even if I disagree with them”. Instead he has chosen to stand on his right not to publish. What this means is that the Green Party is going down the same road as APN, Fairfax, Murdoch et al, who put their rights to manage content before the public’s right to know.
You’re jumping to unwarranted conclusions again Geoff. Anyone who spends time here daily knows that by “tone” is meant inappropriate personal attacks and has nothing to do with political views. Frogs acceptability threshold for such is way higher than your own, as shown by your responses in the past when even mild personal comments have come your way. As a percentage, there is hardly ever intervention on this blog, much less than say Kiwiblog. I take it the intention is to deal with the people making such ad hominem attacks in an easier way. In the past, people have had to be banned from posting if they kept it up, like DPF does on Kiwiblog. Now at least they will just go into moderation so they can be checked at leisure but not lost. I agree the rules need to be set out more clearly.
(If anyone is interested www republican co nz will be happy to publish contributions rejected by frogblog).
LOL, I doubt you would! The most recent edit by frog was someone taunting a poster claiming to have been sexually abused, with sexual innuendo. We’re not talking about political views here, just a basic standard of adult behaviour.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
There are always going to be people who just like the sound of their own voices and I’m sure most people end up not reading what they write anyway. I think they should be left in as a reminder to everyone.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>was someone taunting a poster
Let’s not rewrite history. Said poster was taunting this poster with two separate personal attacks prior to this.
If bullies can’t take it, they shouldn’t give it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I really hoped you’d let it go, BP. I specifically didn’t mention your name as this isn’t about you specifically and you’ve apologised so that’s past now. It was some info Geoff was obviously missing on why intervention takes place on frog blog.
As you know, I defended your right to respond at the time. That does not mean anything goes. That’s all this is about.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
sounds fair pete?
What percent did the Greens get in the By Election Jh?;
I don’t have any interest in politics…..
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I think i’ll go and plant my garden with veges. Looking at the blog entries to date I think that those wanting to force their ideaology on Auckland city, and probably sell all the worthwhile assets to the futures market, are unable to accept the byelection result and see the Greens as an open threat to their plans. If people follow this trend next election the changes to Auckland governance will be ACT’s downfall, as by then the only part of the market economy to have improved will be the speculative process. The productive economy will still be floundering under the load that Rogernomics creates for the small consumers and producers.
I think both sides of the arguement on moderation are being a bit precious in various ways.
For those wanting to freely rant and rave, I think the internet is so full of forums and opportunities for someone wanting to have a say or post constructive ideas that one blog being a little less friendly is no problem, unless the objective is to disrupt the free flow of information and ideas by bully put downs etc.
For those wanting to moderate I can understand the frustration at not having the respectful Green tone followed. But it is only one vehicle for the job and a quiet talk over the fence to the neighbour, in the sun of course could be more effective? The recent tone would put a lot of people off going further in the interaction and thus stop the process of empowerment of opinion that the Greens try to achieve.
It would be a challenge to those who want to use this forum to keep their process in a way that empowers others, and if they have any worthwhile bits to add others may listen.
Otherwise a moderation makes sense to keep the original power of the open forum intact, and others can rant and rave in other liker forums?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I hope The Bigger Picture doesn’t put Frog into moderation
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The results for the Mt Albert vote on high turnout of 20000
%
Labour 63
National 17
Green 12
ACT 4.7
Bill and Bem .8
United Future .4
I think the most enlightening result is Bill and Ben did better than United Future
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Valis,
“LOL wat. A Libertarian of all people telling the owner of a blog not to run it as they want.”
Of course, that’s not what I said at all, is it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
thank you oldlux; – so those Greens up there got 12% hey?
Thought it was about that – not that far off the Nats either….well well.
Lessons on ‘how to think’ are obviously wasted on me.
Though I have nothing much invested in this Blog – if I were moderator well – a few people’d do their briefs.
Verbal Violence, abuse, threats, ridicule etc come under the criminal category of Assault.
Legally – one can’t expect a Politically engaged Blog to support abusive activity.
Wouldn’t be right.
12% though?
Interesting…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Of course, that’s not what I said at all, is it.
Well, there was also your usual authoritarian hyperbole crap, but I chose to let it go this time.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
As I recall the ALCP also beat Peter Overdone’s mob
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
All the percentages are artificially high. That is because neither New Zealand First nor The Maori Party featured.
Still a good result for the Greens.
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Is there ANY reason to believe that NZ First will come back to life?
I really have to regard it as history at this point.
But then I haven’t been watching NZ politics long enough to be sure that I am seeing what I THINK I am seeing.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Frog and I are different people.
We will provide more clarify as to where ‘the line’ is, asap. Probably on monday.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>Is there ANY reason to believe that NZ First will come back to life?
Heaven forbid, but it is certainly possible. Winston’s their boy.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
I think if you really look at the result in comparison with the last election where Helen increased her odds against a Natinal swing, Labour and the Greens have both done better and in general the more community focused parties increased. Act increased a few percent but National didn’t.
I would suggest this is an indicator that Auckland as our biggest population doesn’t like what is happening with Grandad state telling Auckland how to do things
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
In answer to Valis
The rules do have to be set out more clearly. At present they are not set out at all. I have had one post removed because it was ostensibly “too long”. But frog will not tell us how long “too long” is.
I cannot post a link to my own website on frogblog. But no one can tell me why that is so, or whether there is a rule against posting links which applies to everyone.
I agree that the tone of discussion on frogblog can be crude and abusive. Another good reason to make the rules clear. I don’t think that I have ever been abusive, but I will work within any set of rules that frog provides.
The alternative is to have a blog master who makes arbitrary decisions regarding content. Fine if the Green Party wants to go that way. But I expect that many Greens would find such an approach objectionable.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Geoff
I post pretty long myself but you’ve got me beat by some. Most denizens of the pond don’t get excited about the same things that drive you to post.
Not sure if there’s an automatic length limit that comes into play. There could be. Frog can tell us that much pretty easily.
Deep inside every long boring book there is a shorter and more stimulating book. It usually takes some editing to find it.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Have you ever clicked on your name Geoff, which is a link to your site?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Set me free why don’t you babe, let me be why don’t you babe, you don’t really love me, you just keep me hanging on….
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
As well as moderating the comments of contributors whose opinion (or method of expression) you don’t like, I wonder if you will also moderate the opinions of those who continue to support illegal activities such as marijuana use.
Their attitudes do more harm to the green party than some of the contributors here.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
greengeek – I support the legalisation of marijuana. Would you suggest that I was moderated for expressing such a view?
I don’t touch the stuff myself, but I would support anyone who wanted to use it for medicinal reasons. However my main reason for supporting its legalisation is that I would rather some of the profits from its sale went to the government rather than gangs. Would you have these views moderated?
Trevor.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Greengeek, would you also prohibit people advocate for the legalisation of less ‘sexy’ activities that are currently illegal, such as building with untreated macrocarpa, or exporting apples outside of the producer-board system?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
@greengeek anyone who silences others purely because they don’t like the other’s opinion will probably end up with a boring and unproductive echo-chamber.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Is this all about offensive remarks?
I live by the rule that offense cannot be given, it can only be taken.
Moderating posts or posters is an attempt to stop offense being given. I disagree with that approach.
Let them blog, I say. I enjoy all of you.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
you would not believe how ‘offensive’ i find the casual attitude of many greens to their funding of/partaking in..
..the barbarities of animal slavery..
..cd they be banned ..?..plse..
..(censorship..eh..?..
..a failure/slippery-slope favoured by those with very very small brains/imaginations..
..and authoritarian tendencies..)
..what’s ‘broken’..?..frog..?..big-picture..?
..and no doubt many of those carnivorous greens are ‘offended’/embarrassed by my denunciations of their barbarities/cruelties/meat-fat-blood-addictions..
..eh..?
..’everyones’ offended…sometime’..
..eh..?
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
(apologies/acknowledgments to r.e.m..)
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Greengeek
Advocating that an illegal activity be made legal is not the same as advocating that the law be broken.
It is an observation that the law IS broken and that a law so bad as to damage NZ society is used against NZ citizens like a club. NZ deserves better.
I am one of those who advocates legalization. Minimizing harm.
Damaging to the party? Not if the arguments are made calmly and rationally.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
greengeek would appear to be one of those greens ‘scared’ of their/green convictions..
..(and ‘what people might say’..)
such greens have had dominion in the green party for far too long…
phil(whoar.co.nz)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Thanks Jarbury I will take a visit to those sites.
OK so the Greens are around 9 to 12 percent I may stress that the majority are not always in the right and there has been many precedents in human history where humans correct these mistakes at the 11/59th hour.
I may take Oldlux’s advice and tend to my garden, a man after my own heart as that is the conclusion the philosopher Voltaire came to at the end of his life.
I have an idea for frogie:- Rate all the bloggers on a point system those who produce literary masterpieces be given a frog award, maybe a plaster paris statue of ‘Frog’ Then the sh!tstirrers award a wooden spoon dipped in a plastic sh!!! (it can be obtained at the magic shop)
Better still get us bloggers to vote the best posts
Just a thought
Yours respectfully
Drakula
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Drakula said: Rate all the bloggers on a point system those who produce literary masterpieces be given a frog award…
That wouldn’t work. Greenfly would win every time.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Short and pithy. The two-word Greenfly comment “Rank indeed!” on the thread about Christine Rankin being appointed to the Families Commission has to be the best ever imo.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Yes, many of Greenfly’s comments seem to have a certain ‘je ne sais quoi’ flavour about them
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
are you allowed to just boot the Dave Gallagher Trophy into touch like that ?
have a go at a Try kiwi….o qoutes:
“My chance to wish you cheers
we’ve many,
Good miles to go…
here’s Rainbows,
-whisky tears
A Promise of snow.”
S Hunt
Cold enuff here anyway…in a city, but still no movement…
Funny little kiwis
arawha S.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Excellent point. I definitely think it is important to be able to advocate ones particular point of view and I would probably agree with your own point of view about those two issues.
I was trying to make the point that stifling debate in a public forum skews the “tone” of the forum. Personally I am mortally offended by the views of those who waste so much time supporting cannabis reform when it alienates the wider public.
I’m generally happy to view the comments of the detractors on this blog because it is important that their views be heard, and also that the tenor of their mood be sensed, even when they are angry, disgusted or dismissive.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Really, thats the nub of my argument. If posts are made “calmly and rationally” there is no need to moderate.
However, from an outsiders point of view (I’m not a member of the green party) the offensive posts come as much (if not more so) from greens than others.
Isn’t Gblog somewhere for the “insiders” to pat each other on the backs in a familial and non-objective way?
Can’t Fblog be left alone as a vehicle for the real world to have some effect on progressing environmentalism and green technology without having to pussyfoot around any concept that is social anathema to some green party hangers on?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
would booze reform we more popular? I would think the rights and freedoms quoted here, are most like covered by the treaty, yet I maintain that w(H)aitangi2 might still be desirable – we have become much more of one race since that Treaty was paraded round the country….Te Rauparaha signed twice….Rangiheata giggled a lot.
Marijuana reform is merely consistant in a purely legal sense.
The allegory would be to execute jaywalkers whilst rewarding murder.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
True. And Tuhoe never signed at all, so Hwaitangi 2 would be a great idea.
(Notice that the “H” rightly belongs BEFORE the “W”. The words “when” and “where” have always been misspelt. They should have been spelt Hwen and Hwere.
All around the Pacific rim the sibilant sound was misspelt. It was never an “F” at all. I think the Chinese got it closest by putting the H first (eg Hwang Chow).
Mexicans and Peruvians (the original source of much of the Maori language) use Ju to represent the same sound (eg: Juanita).
So yes, bring on Hwaitangi 2. The original treaty was never a good document to use as the foundation of a nation.
Hope I don’t get moderated.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“Really, thats the nub of my argument. If posts are made “calmly and “rationally” there is no need to moderate”
Good morning GG;-fancy the Nation sleeps..think you’ll find (and I’m guessing) that such comment will meet with no bother.
I visit to see how the Party I might Vote for is doing. That’s all.
Why limit the Greens? When the changes of which you speak, lead into, finance, industry, may well change the entire quantity of our fuel bills….change the Country’s fiscal face?
ye country needs a concesnsus of expertise – I like what Key says about ‘inclusion’ – don’t think he is a dullard of the old school…but many more Voters will come of age by 2011 – any Punter’ll tell you, the Green vote/versatility is going to rise.
Obama’s election was due largely to net co-ordinators.
Good one’s
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Right On!
The Chinese alphabet has 400? characters, so given genealogical links to Maori – might not we find words fine enough in ancient Mandarin?
Key’s idea of Concensus, if he truly has integrity, could accomplish this – especially with the Greens – act is lookin like an arranged marriage – it becomes about quality – I think that’s the direction the moderator would like to head here – people here (many of them) are highly qualified and widely experienced – it would be a shame to reduce everyone to the lowest common denominator (imaginable).
John Key well, I’ve never voted National, and never let partisianship keep me from observing the right ways. He could lead it i reckon.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Greengeek
They aren’t talking about moderating based on opinion, but on offensiveness, so I really don’t think there will be any problem. Frog and company have shown a lot of good sense, and people who discuss social and climate issues here find their opinions are heard and answered… not ignored.
Some people diss other people instead… others rant on about things that are not really related to “Green” issues and principles. I think the idea of this is to remove the more bitter personality posts, not the policy and opinion no matter how contrary to our own it might be.
We have to see what they do with this though. At the moment we have only half the news. It may develop a set of interesting side discussions.
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Greengeek,
I’m not sure what you are on about with your wh and f post. A letter can represent different sounds in different languages. If you are worried letters not matching sounds, I would suggest you start with English; its a real mess compared to languages in the Pacific.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Samiuela, I was picking up on Marks post highlighting the addition of an H after the W in Waitangi (ala Whanganui)
There has been intense debate about adding the H but nobody really seemed to care about the phonetics of it all.
If you ignore spelling, and look at the phonetics, there is no way the “wh” should ever be used as it has been.
“When” was never pronounced Fen, and Whangarei, Whanganui and Whaitangi were never spoken as “F”
If Whangarei was rewritten Hwangarei it would be phonetically correct and we would not have to put up with all this nonsense about Fangarei.
Its crazy that Maori radicals were trying to impose an English mispelling to a Maori placename, and I think thats what Mark was hinting at.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
yes indeed GG – have just finished a very rare history book – Rangiheata was Waikanae this and Waikanae that – the longest resistor’s history in a way – and the people always called whanganui for the river and wanganui for the settlement ( originally ‘settled’ by 13 englishpeople )
In fact grew up with the children of an ancient kingdom – on the shore at Lake Taupo – am inseperanle from that
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
An update on this.
We are thinking about a more formal moderation policy, but due to an internal mis-communication, we didn’t mean for it to be released when it was.
We would like to assure everyone that that there is no intent to censor political comments and that clearer guidelines will be posted in coming days.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
>>We would like to assure everyone that that there is no intent to censor political comments
I’ve checked, and my comments are within the rules, yet most don’t see the light of day. And they’re all delayed, meaning debates become impossible. Those who aren’t subjected to the delay are at an advantage, because there’s a restricted right of reply.
I can only conclude that there is a political basis for the censorship.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
BP
You post twice as much as I actually see here? Surely an exaggeration
Or are you saying that half your posts get “stuck” for some period of time.
Frog might do well to allow some notice of those who are generally well behaved here as well as those who abuse the forum.
Merit points instead of demerit points. ???
respectfully
BJ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
much as i loath most of what bp says/advocates..
..the tenets of free speech/open debate over-ride that..
what are you ‘scared of’..?
..idiots speaking idiocy shoot themselves in the feet..
..nobody is bleeding..eh..?
..and hey..!..don’t get me started..eh..?
..you..as part of the ‘official’ green party..
..have a list of things ‘to do’/attend to..that is so long..(cf..lousy result in mt albert..)
..that it actually p*sses me off that you are wasting your ‘paid’ time/energies..
..on this exercise in futilty/’suppression’..
..and that in itself..
..is entirely symptomatic of what ails you/the green party..
..ffs..!
phil(whoar
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Apologies, BP. While I dispute that your comments don’t see the light of day, you did go into moderation by mistake. That shouldn’t have happened and has been sorted, with no posts currently being held. Go have fun.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Peter – this must be frustrating for you!
thebiggerpicture said: We would like to assure everyone that that there is no intent to censor political comments
Peter said: I can only conclude that there is a political basis for the censorship.
It’s as though there are two realities…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
“thebiggerpicture” sounds a bit like “thegreatergood”
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
in cricket we have spinners…as an old sailor, the Nom de Plume does raise a few pictures Pete!
It’s the flag they hang when a ship’s about to sail – every sailor has that empty feeling in the stomach, we’ll keep all the imagery above the waistline, and ‘igh tory and all what?
Immoderate? Dunno – go crazy behind the wheel d’ya?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Frog asks if I have ever clicked on my name, which is apparently a link to my site. The answer is no, but thanks for the information.
And information is all that I am asking. Specfically, what is the maximum length for posts? frog knows the answer to that one, because he makes the decisions to remove overlong posts. And how does the automatic post censoring system work? frog may not know the answer to that, so a “don’t know” would suffice.
It all comes down to whether your blog site, and by implication your party and your society, will be governed by rules or by the arbitrary decisions of faceless individuals. I am still hoping to find that it will be the former.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)