Ben Guerin: a dirty politics fuckwit

104 comments on “Ben Guerin: a dirty politics fuckwit ”

• Comments are now closed

1. lprent 1

   13 July 2015 at 5:00 pm

   7:00pm…

   Just a wee warning. Because of the amount of diversion trolling going on on my post (some people like to live dangerously), I’ve put a full moderation on this post.

   I’m letting through any half way reasonable comment and mostly answering them. But it’d inadvisable for the usual trolls to try diversion trolling. I’m really not in the mood for it, but I am finding it hilarious to do permanent bans for the fools who do it.

   I will pop this comment at the top of the list by putting a earlier time.
   • Thom Pietersen 1.1

     14 July 2015 at 7:28 pm

     This is the norm now – And an output of the American consultants.

     Just don’t click bait – Kiwi’s are actually better than this.
2. Roflcopter 2

   13 July 2015 at 5:26 pm

   Or maybe *gasp!* he didn’t give a rats arse if people knew who he was, and was enjoying putting together something that pokes fun at Twyford’s racism.

   Everyone knows he’s a Young Nat, please keep up.
   • lprent 2.1

     13 July 2015 at 5:37 pm

     Well you might know being around such a dork in Wellington and the people of this ilk at Whaleoil and Kiwiblog – the home of dirty politics in NZ.

     I have no idea who such simple idiots of the National party are.

     I juts find it incomprehensible that anyone would do such a dumb thing. I’m pretty sure that his employers will also find that to be the case as well.
   • Karen 2.2

     13 July 2015 at 5:51 pm

     Really? I’ve never heard of him. Maybe you mean everybody doing comms for the National Party has heard of him.
     • David H 2.2.1

       13 July 2015 at 7:19 pm

       He looks about 12. Goddam schoolboy script kiddies.
   • Frank Macskasy 2.3

     15 July 2015 at 10:58 am

     Roflcopter – “please keep up” = attempt to sound authoritative?
3. Goodshepherd 3

   13 July 2015 at 5:27 pm

   Oh dear.
   What a twat.
   And on the public dime…
   Master Guerin, grow up and grow some ethics.
   • Malconz 3.1

     14 July 2015 at 12:17 pm

     He’ll probably mature a bit after his voice breaks….
4. SHG 4

   13 July 2015 at 5:28 pm

   Amazing how even though the Young Nats’ Ben Guerin has been commenting online about what it was like to whip the site up on a Sunday afternoon, he was unable to hide the fact that identity behind the site is someone named “Ben Guerin”. Thanks for your Internet detective work there Captain Sysop.
   • lprent 4.1

     13 July 2015 at 5:32 pm

     So you approve of a parliamentary employee employed by a National MP doing this kind of trash?

     Surely that wasn’t what you have been saying for years about the imaginary Labour party staffers who don’t write here….

     You really are a hypocritical idiot.
     • SHG 4.1.1

       13 July 2015 at 5:36 pm

       So you approve of a parliamentary employee employed by a National MP doing this kind of trash?

       100%, because it’s nice to see that at least one side of NZ’s political spectrum knows how the Internet works.
       • lprent 4.1.1.1

         13 July 2015 at 5:43 pm

         And that says all we need to know about your sense of ethics.

         Rather than leaving it there, perhaps you should explain why you think this is a good idea for our local politics or anything else with some examples of what you think is permissible with people controlling data.

         Define the edges of what you think is permissible..

         Publishing other peoples posts under your own name – wait that’s been done – Cameron Slater..

         Coming to think of it – is there anything that Cameron Slater has done which you think would be over the edge?
         • SHG 4.1.1.1.1

           13 July 2015 at 5:47 pm

           It’s funny, and it makes Labour look stupid. Therefore it’s a good idea.

           [lprent: Ok now you are just trolling my post. You can justify anything with “but I found it funny”. Including rape, serial murders, medical misadventure, …

           Banned permanently. I’m not really interested in hosting psychopaths on this site. ]
       • tko 4.1.1.2

         13 July 2015 at 8:20 pm

         Knows how the internet works? not very well, or at least not more than the average year 10 IT student.
         • lprent 4.1.1.2.1

           13 July 2015 at 8:58 pm

           He does know, very well. That was why he picked up a permanent ban when he persisted in deliberate diversions.
5. dv 5

   13 July 2015 at 5:31 pm

   BUT BI+UT BUT there is a disclaimer at the bottom!!!!

   This website is not run by the NZ Labour Party.
   • lprent 5.1

     13 July 2015 at 5:34 pm

     And yet it has a logo that has to be in copyright eh?

     Interesting. Basically this twerp seems to be positively stupid. I bet that his mates follow him here…
6. James 6

   13 July 2015 at 5:38 pm

   deleted – asked and answered above
   • Weepus beard 6.1

     13 July 2015 at 5:40 pm

     Hard to read when the biggest thing in the whole page is the Labour banner.
7. Weepus beard 7

   13 July 2015 at 5:39 pm

   He shouldn’t be using the Labour banner for this. That is the property of the Labour party in their function as a current opposition party in New Zealand’s parliament.

   It’s a bit like Steven Joyce using an Eminem song for an election campaign.

   I suspect there will be a swift telling off from the speaker of the house…

   …oh wait, he’s a Nazional party apologist.
   • SHG 7.1

     13 July 2015 at 5:44 pm

     He shouldn’t be using the Labour banner for this. That is the property of the Labour party in their function as a current opposition party in New Zealand’s parliament.

     You don’t think parody should be an exception to the Copyright Act? How very Big Business of you.
     • lprent 7.1.1

       13 July 2015 at 5:48 pm

       How can you parody something that hasn’t happened?

       Show me a site where Labour has done anything like this……

       Fuckit – you are just trolling – bye – permanent.
     • Weepus beard 7.1.2

       13 July 2015 at 6:48 pm

       They are not too bright, are they. A red banner and “Labour” in a generic typeface would have done the trick but they were arrogant and lazy like their master Steven Joyce.

       I’d go further, SHG, but you are permabanned so I need not.
8. North 8

   13 July 2015 at 5:52 pm

   “Ben Gurion” you say ?……oh well, vast knowledge of racism there. Another wee Tory bites the dust !

   [lprent: Huh? I just searched the page – where did that show up? ]
9. fisiani 9

   13 July 2015 at 5:54 pm

   Dirty Politics is hidden. Comedy is not. Labour dug the hole. Young Nats are just helping them dig it deeper.
   • lprent 9.1

     13 July 2015 at 6:01 pm

     Ok, so explain why this is humorous to you. I can’t see anything about it that is.

     Unless of course you want to make up some weird tale that the National strategists has passed to you to say (when I see several known trollers passing the same PR spun line, I get deeply suspicious).

     I’d also suggest that you think carefully about what you say. I’m really not interested in diversion trolling on my post.
     • Atiawa 9.1.1

       13 July 2015 at 6:15 pm

       I just sent him a text letting him know what a shit head he is. Can’t see much harm in anyone else telling him the same.
       • Izzy 9.1.1.1

         14 July 2015 at 5:28 pm

         I can’t stand the Nats, but I really don’t think this is dirty politics.

         It’s a fairly obvious parody of Twyford’s foreign ownership work, clearly registered to Guerin, who makes his place of employment abundantly clear on LinkedIn and various other places online, and talked openly about making the site. One of the main things about ‘dirty politics’ was that those involved went to great lengths to hide their identities and their involvement, e.g. Jason Ede multiple email identities.

         As for use of the Labour logo – possibly a poor choice, but it didn’t take much looking at the site to realise it wasn’t actually a Labour Party site, and it’s not exactly the first time a political party logo has been used to parody that party, e.g. http://thestandard.org.nz/not-quite-beyond-parody/

         I think it was poor judgement by Guerin to do this when he is an employee of the Parliamentary Service – while he has every right to be involved in political activities in his spare time, the unfortunate reality for PS employees is that it’s pretty risky to do so in any public way, because of perception issues like this. He’ll presumably learn from this mistake, which is an easy one for young activists to make when they start working for MPs.

         I think it’s disappointing that you saw fit to publish his contact information, which apparently commentators here have now used to send him abusive messages.

         He said something about your team that you didn’t like, which pissed you off, and that’s chill. You don’t have to like it, you don’t have to like his politics, you’re allowed to question whether the site was made in a work capacity or done independently (which he has answered). But he doesn’t deserve the level of vitriol in this post, and he doesn’t deserve texts and emails telling him he’s a piece of shit. Being a Nat doesn’t make him immune to being hurt by this kind of thing. Be kind.

         Disclaimer: In the interests of transparency, I know Guerin through Wellington youth political circles – he’s friends with some of my friends so I’ve met him a few times and follow him on social media.
         • lprent 9.1.1.1.1

           14 July 2015 at 7:36 pm

           The information that was published was the public information that every registrant for a domain must make public. If you want to change that then I suggest that you talk to IANA.

           It is there specifically to allow people to find out who is responsible for uses of that domain. Perhaps you should bestir yourself to find out what the responsibilities are for a domain name holder.

           The “voitrol” was because he didn’t provide any information on the site to identify who was responsible for it. As far as I’m concerned he was concealing who was responsible from the public. All that would have been required for me to make a quite different type of post would have been a prominent notice or an about at the top of the site that said this was put up by the Young Nats.

           So I made my rapid searches public and expressed by thoughts of a politically aware fool who would do this complete lack of public transparency, along with a reasonable explanation of why he did it. Since he’d neglected to provide that information, I feel that he should wear the consequences like any responsible adult

           Bearing in mind the search engine optimization on this site and the interest in this post, that will probably be for some time.

           Suffice it to say that the next site that I spot of this non-transparent dirty politics ilk will at least redouble that level of vitriol if I can trace it back. So you should suggest to your wellington “team” that they’d better learn to be responsible before I make them.

           BTW: I don’t play for any “team”. Many around the blogs and anyone who knows me will happily attest to that. I’ve worked and cooperate with people and organisations from the army to this blog, but I’m not into silly juvenile pack games.
           • tinfoilhat 9.1.1.1.1.1

             14 July 2015 at 7:52 pm

             “So you should suggest to your wellington “team” that they’d better learn to be responsible before I make them.”

             🙄 really ? 🙄
             • lprent …

               14 July 2015 at 8:03 pm

               By giving them some involuntary transparency… 🙂
           • Peter Green 9.1.1.1.1.2

             14 July 2015 at 11:24 pm

             You’ve made a bit of a logic fail here.

             Choose one of:

             (a) The contact details were clearly linked to the website and easily available to anyone who’s interested. If this were the case, Ben’s involvement would have been perfectly transparent and there’s nothing to criticise.

             (b) People aren’t likely to know that the Young Nats were behind the website, because most people don’t know how to find whois details. In this case you get to criticise Ben for hiding the site’s provenance, but you don’t get to make his contact details easily available. I’m guessing the intersection between “people who can lookup domain registration information” and “people who send abusive messages” is small.

             I’m strongly in camp (b) on this, and I’m in favour of involuntary transparency for anyone engaging in two-track politics. But that shouldn’t include personal email addresses and phone numbers.
             • lprent …

               15 July 2015 at 7:25 pm

               In other words, you are into being a elitist and would like Ben to avoid the personal responsibility that he undertook by taking the domain.No particular surprises there

               The whole point about the transparency on the domain names is that the information is available to anyone. It is published because it is meant to be available. Specifically because people using domains are meant to be personally responsible for them. That has been the principle behind them since IANA started publishing them – probably before you were born.

               Since he was too irresponsible (or gutless) to publish it. I did it for him.

               But I am intrigued. Could you explain exactly where you draw the line. For instance addresses must be published in court documents. Many of those are also public documents. Do you disapprove of those as well? Property ownership and rates are public documents. That have contact details on them. Do you disapprove of those as well?

               Or is it just people you know that did something completely stupid that you want to protect?
               • Peter Green …

                 17 July 2015 at 1:23 pm

                 I don’t know Ben, I was born before IANA was formed, and if it’s elitist to believe that logical consistency is important, then fine.

                 [A] “The information that was published was the public information”

                 [B] “Since he was too irresponsible (or gutless) to publish it. I did it for him.”

                 A or B, pick one. You can’t have it both ways.
                 • lprent …

                   17 July 2015 at 4:33 pm

                   Why? Your logical position seems to be that of an elitist.

                   It essentially says that the only people who should be able to get public information are those with the skills to get it. Now I could understand that attitude for someone setting up a business based on information scarcity and wanting people to pay for free information.

                   But otherwise [A] + [B] id perfectly consistent.
           • Izzy 9.1.1.1.1.3

             15 July 2015 at 12:02 am

             I know the information is in the public domain (hence my comment about Ben not exactly hiding who owned the site). There’s also a difference between contact details being available, in the public domain, for the small number of people who bother to look for it, and those details being actively published in full as part of a scathing blog post on a popular blogsite.

             That’s encouraging harassment. It goes well beyond making someone responsible for not making affiliation clear on a website about the issue of the day. The site should have been clearly labelled as Young Nats, it wasn’t, that’s not great. The Young Nats and Ben did take credit for it all over social media, but it should have been clearly displayed on the site. Absolutely. It doesn’t make the way this post was written ok. I really hope that at some point you’ll read over this and go “wow, did I really call the kid that? yikes!”

             BTW: I like your work, always have (I’ve read TS on and off for 8 years). I shouldn’t have implied that this is just tribalism, as it’s clear from comments here you really do see this as dirty politics – a point on which I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.

             And the Young Nats are hardly in my Wellington “team” if that’s a thing I have.
     • Lanthanide 9.1.2

       13 July 2015 at 6:17 pm

       I don’t think it’s funny, or even really clever. Just stupid, really.
   • Tracey 9.2

     14 July 2015 at 12:43 pm

     and yet tony alexander agrees restrictions on foreign buyers are needed and that an influx when china loosens restrictions is going to be like a tsunami… is he racist too
10. mikesh 10

    13 July 2015 at 6:05 pm

    By his employer you presumably mean Brett Hudson, who, at the last election, bestrode the streets of Johnsonville telling everyone to vote for his opponent, Peter Dunne.
11. sabine 11

    13 July 2015 at 6:05 pm

    would the new cyber bullie law fit an action like this?
    • lprent 11.1

      13 July 2015 at 6:08 pm

      Hard to see how. From what I saw of the bill (I haven’t read the act yet), that was pretty specific about it being a person as a victim, so Labour couldn’t use it. Furthermore I think that the act doesn’t take effect until 2017.

      And I’m pretty sure that my comments were completely justified opinion, and all of the facts are correct. I even showed my workings for each point leading to those opinions based on those facts.
      • sabine 11.1.1

        13 July 2015 at 6:30 pm

        i am more thinking as a “clearly misleading’, ‘ impersonating a group’ etc etc case.

        Free speach is one thing, parody is another thing, but this is as close to impersonating a political group for personal gain and amusement it gets. I can see quite a few people not realising that this page is a fake.

        i guess it is a case of bullying a party?
    • Roflcopter 11.2

      13 July 2015 at 6:19 pm

      Why? LPrent was only making an observation…. oh wait, you meant Ben?
      • sabine 11.2.1

        13 July 2015 at 7:33 pm

        yes. Sorry if I was misunderstood.
12. UpandComer 12

    13 July 2015 at 6:08 pm

    Hold on,

    What’s more dirty, some young talented guy throwing up an obviously humorous satirical website on an issue of the day that I ‘presume’ amounts to an exercise of free-speech that he’s publicised to be the same.

    Or publishing on the internet his photo, his address, apparently his phone number, his post code… ? There are a number of adjectives one could use in relation to that. And for what purpose? What do you want to achieve by marking a big ‘X’ on where this young guy can be found?

    What’s more dirty? This is actually hilarious. Carry on.
    • lprent 12.1

      13 July 2015 at 6:18 pm

      You really are a bit stupid aren’t you…

      1. What is talented about throwing up a micro website? On average I seem to do one every other week, and I do it for free without charging taxpayers for it.

      Writing code requires talent. Elegant designs require talent. But I can’t see any real signs of that in the site. It looks like pretty standard, and there are less than 50 lines of substantive code and a few pirated graphics. It looks like he was using a primitive design tool rather badly.

      2. The information that I used here is ALL public.

      3. The domain registry requires that people getting domains put their contact name sand details in public specifically so others can find out who is responsible for whatever they use the domain for – which is what I did. This includes valid addresses and phone numbers. Here look at mine for this site. http://dnc.org.nz/whois/thestandard.org.nz

      4. The Linkedin site requires that you explicitly turn on information so that it is public. Ben G obviously did.

      The next parrot using this argument (because I envisage that it will be the next National party line) will also get dumped.
      • TheContrarian 12.1.1

        13 July 2015 at 6:37 pm

        He charged the taxpayers? Didn’t the site go up on Sunday?
        • lprent 12.1.1.1

          13 July 2015 at 6:48 pm

          That is actually a reasonable argument.. I’ll let it through despite the ban.

          1. As far as I can see, there is nothing on this site that says he did it on a weekend or on his own time. Since his job is doing communications for his employer, and this is quite clearly a communication that benefits his employer, I have to consider that he probably did it in work time OR did it on a weekend for plausible deniability.

          2. Besides, most of the parliamentary services employees working directly for MPs that I have ever met (and I have met a lot) work weekends as well as weekdays. That is because constituents and political activities don’t stick to a weekday schedule.

          This is why we don’t allow party political parliamentary staff to write here except under their own name. Like MP posts, Mike Smith or Rob Salmond when he does contact work. This is to ensure that there is absolutely no question about who they are working for at the time.

          This fuckwit didn’t put his own name on his work, and I suspect that he did it for his work. I can’t see any way that he could “prove” that it wasn’t done for the benefit of his MP employer.
          • McFlock 12.1.1.1.1

            13 July 2015 at 7:01 pm

            As for being done on the weekend:

            domain_dateregistered: 2015-07-12T14:42:42+12:00
            domain_datebilleduntil: 2016-07-12T14:42:42+12:00
            domain_datelastmodified: 2015-07-13T13:07:46+12:00

            i.e. domain last modified at a quarter to eight on monday morning.

            Personally, rather than going for “plausible deniability”, I give him a 40% chance that he’s just done the standard tory thing of mixing business with pleasure and the resulting conflict of interest.
            • lprent 12.1.1.1.1.1

              13 July 2015 at 7:05 pm

              I did notice that. However that in itself doesn’t prove much either. It could be that he did it at lunch (see the timezone is NZ).

              But it was somewhat indicative. I wonder if the Domain Name Commission is OIA’able. Because they may collect IP addresses from the registers.
              • McFlock …

                13 July 2015 at 7:15 pm

                heh

                I also like TRPs point about the costs.
        • te reo putake 12.1.1.2

          13 July 2015 at 6:59 pm

          Be interesting to see who paid the set up costs.
13. Ron 13

    13 July 2015 at 6:11 pm

    Mmm I wonder if that site would be an offense under the new Digital Bill?
    Anyone familiar with the new bill that could comment?
    • lprent 13.1

      13 July 2015 at 6:13 pm

      see http://#comment-1042999
14. TheContrarian 14

    13 July 2015 at 6:22 pm

    I thought political satire was a good thing.

    Take a deep breath Prentice. It is a joke site, kind of like ImperetorFish and his Martyn Bradbury Real Estate. Kinda of like The Civilian. Pretty sure you are taking this Waaaaaaaay to seriously.

    [lprent: So I don’t think Dirty politics is funny. And so far no-one has managed to explain why they think it or this was funny. Like Nicky Hager, I view this particular kind of political crap by taxpayer funded political party staffers to be quite unfunny. Doesn’t matter if it is Jason Ede or this idiot. I don’t tolerate it here because I really don’t want my taxes funding National being spent on this kind of stupdity.

    But hey, lets give a concrete example. I warned in comments that I wasn’t that interested in this particular line. So I think this is funny.

    Banned until the next amnesty for diversion trolling.

    Laughing laughing…. Oh yeah that is FUNNY! I can see you rolling in it from here. Funny looks different to different people eh? ]
    • Lanthanide 14.1

      13 July 2015 at 9:33 pm

      This website is pretending to be Labour, by using the Labour party logo.

      So it’s not satire or parody like The Civilian obviously is.
15. whateva next? 15

    13 July 2015 at 6:35 pm

    and if some person pulled similar stunt using National’s logo? would there be uproar? Paddy and his gang would have a field day! or just a visit from lots of policeman for several hours while you are out?
16. upnorth 16

    13 July 2015 at 6:49 pm

    I found it funny and entered in my name – i have a very english name with two sirs in my family tree and came out at 6.6%.

    Now just a few questions – can i person who works parliament and do there own politictiking outside work hours?

    why didn’t they ask the real estate company permission to use or participate in the analysis – I mean this does smack of stolen data syndrome
    • lprent 16.1

      13 July 2015 at 6:55 pm

      …can i person who works parliament and do there own politictiking outside work hours?

      Turn that around. Can you or he or anyone else prove that he didn’t do it in work time or that he didn’t do it for his MP/party employer. There is a reason why parliamentary services makes people in his type of role sign the types of contracts that they do.

      That is why at the very least, he should have had his name prominently on the work and had some kind of disclaimer on the site. He didn’t. H just had a figleaf proclaiming what it wasn’t display right at the bottom of the site.

      He was being a stupid fuckwit
17. Heartbleeding Liberal 17

    13 July 2015 at 6:52 pm

    I’m a leftie who thinks Phil is on to something. I find this a light hearted and jab at the butchered communication.
    • lprent 17.1

      13 July 2015 at 7:11 pm

      I may do as well if it wasn’t being done by a employee of a MP. As soon as I see that, it flips it from being satire to dirty politics. There is a reason that parliamentary services writes those contracts with some pretty severe restrictions about activities.
18. TheContrarian 18

    13 July 2015 at 7:08 pm

    My ban was completely out of order. It wasn’t diversionary in the slightest nor is it a case of Dirty Politics given he made the site publicly with himself as the domain registrant on the DNC.

    You also seem to have forgotten this….

    http://www.3news.co.nz/nznews/colin-craig-mocked-by-fake-website-2014072914#axzz3fkjHM1OO

    Don’t be such a precious little flower.

    [lprent: Don’t be such a dickhead. But we will let that stand as your reply to the ban.

    Was parody that done by a the parliamentary political staffer? That was the point of my post. The dirty politics book had a point because of the way that it was being directed by parliamentary political staffers running clowns like Jason Ede.

    I find it unfunny because that particular meme is so destructive of the political process (look at the US congress for the extreme examples of the partisan logjams it produces). Having people paid to poison the political process. So you are still trying to divert it as a funny rather than an issue.

    So I will count that as a fail when it comes to an explanation.

    Besides – I told you would find my ban funny. Laugh damn you !!!! I’m sure everyone else finds it funny. I found it funny. ]
19. James 19

    13 July 2015 at 7:11 pm

    There is the strong possibility that this was just done as an individual and not part of his National appointment. After all he is also linkedin as a current director of codesmashers.

    The domain was registered to Codesmashers before it was put to his name yesterday.

    And he did say that it was shipped up on a Sunday afternoon.

    So – perhaps not in his role of a taxpayer funded staffer when he did this.
    • lprent 19.1

      13 July 2015 at 7:15 pm

      So why was he still playing around with the domain registration at midday today?
      Wasn’t at work?
      Or was doing the final touches?
      • Roflcopter 19.1.1

        13 July 2015 at 7:25 pm

        Or maybe someone at Codesmashers was doing it on his behalf?
20. Lucy 20

    13 July 2015 at 7:18 pm

    seems to have been taken down. The boy is an idiot who thinks he is smart!
21. rhinocrates 21

    13 July 2015 at 7:18 pm

    So the little snot gets to have his cake and eat it too – indulge in racist jibes and blame Labour for it – the perennial “But Labour….” excuse.

    And you didn’t see this coming Twyford, you goddamned idiot? What were you doing, loading walnuts into your blunderbuss to shoot down the enemy’s homing pigeons?
22. tinfoilhat 22

    13 July 2015 at 7:21 pm

    🙄
23. Printnet 23

    13 July 2015 at 7:28 pm

    Looks like it went up recently. He had Google index the site on 12th, 9.30 GMT.
    http://bit.ly/howkiwinat
    It’s such an amateurish attempt, there’s been real no effort to hide anything. As you did, it’s there for anyone that knows how the internet works. However the offending site is offline now so suspect his boss or other had second thoughts.
    • lprent 23.1

      13 July 2015 at 7:35 pm

      It’s such an amateurish attempt, there’s been real no effort to hide anything.

      Agreed. But you’d be surprised at the number of people, particularly recent codebunnies working on other peoples sites who have no idea how the web actually works. The domain and site is set up for them by whoever is paying for it because they have to carry on paying for it long after the bunny is gone.

      However the offending site is offline now so suspect his boss or other had second thoughts.

      I would hope so. I generally find that once they get highlighted prominently enough that the serious politicians become aware of consequences that stupidity gets removed.
      • rhinocrates 23.1.1

        13 July 2015 at 7:50 pm

        the serious politicians become aware of consequences that stupidity gets removed.

        You mean they invoke “plausible deniability”?
24. millsy 24

    13 July 2015 at 7:58 pm

    Probably has a big pic of Deng Xiaopeng on his mantelpiece.
25. Kevin 25

    13 July 2015 at 8:01 pm

    Dirty Politics? More like Dumb Politics.
26. Michael who failed Civics 26

    13 July 2015 at 8:02 pm

    I hope someone complains to Parlaimentary Services (Guerin’s employer) about him conducting Dirty Politics on the taxpayer’s $$$. I reckon that’s serious misconduct.
    • ian 26.1

      13 July 2015 at 8:34 pm

      [deleted]

      [lprent: Try another post this was way off-topic. This one is about a taxpaid parliamentary political staffer employed by a National MP putting up a ‘parody’ site. without any acknowledgement of who he is. A classic dirty politics technique, just like the poison of Jason Ede pulling the strings from John Key’s office and running remote smear campaigns using various right wing bloggers as brainless puppets.]
      • mickysavage 26.1.1

        13 July 2015 at 8:40 pm

        Labour actually really likes Chinese people and has a long positive relationship with them. Labour is concerned at the prospect that the wealthy’s bank deposits in China will swamp our small real estate market and prevent the young and the poor from ever owning a house again. So Labour wants there to be some limits. Chinese people can continue to buy and own houses. Rich Chinese corporations should however not have the expectation that they can increase their holdings over here.

        Besides you are off point. You should make this comment in one of the other posts.

        [lprent: Indeed. He only just missed a permanent ban because you warned him 😈 ]
    • lprent 26.2

      13 July 2015 at 8:58 pm

      I am sure that it will be raised.
27. keyman 27

    13 July 2015 at 8:27 pm

    couldnt standard throw up the john key lie o meter
28. millsy 28

    13 July 2015 at 9:08 pm

    [deleted]

    [lprent: Divert this off-topic topic to Open Mike ]
29. millsy 29

    13 July 2015 at 9:09 pm

    [deleted]

    [lprent: Divert this off-topic topic to Open Mike ]
30. JohnKeyMustGo 30

    13 July 2015 at 10:16 pm

    You can see my post about this at. https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=853372488051625&id=531591143563096

    There is more to this. Like the person they were bragging to this morning was Gwynn Compton, John Key’s Senior Social Media Advisor. The person who you may remember threatened me a few months ago and then was found to be the owner and designer of the site http://www.changetheflag.nz. All shows a very similar MO.

    Since this morning, National MP Brett Hudson, who Ben Guerin works for has openly supported his actions. Or at least the actions of young Nat’s with reference to this situation.
31. Sable 31

    13 July 2015 at 10:36 pm

    Not much of a coder if you ask me. Made it all too easy to find out who created the site. Smug little twit….
32. Kipcha 32

    13 July 2015 at 11:02 pm

    [deleted]

    I sincerely hope this message gets through, though i doubt it will.

    [deleted]

    [lprent: you are right. If you don’t say anything related to the post, then why do you expect to be heard? Try OpenMike. There you can talk about your own topics, and provided you don’t trip over the bounds of the policies, then you can talk mindless dribble. If you want to speak on one of my posts, then stick to the topic and forget about diverting down to whatever interests your teeny prepubescent brain. ]
33. adam 33

    13 July 2015 at 11:50 pm

    Silly question, but who the hell is Brett Hudson? I mean apart from maiden speech the guy is a nothing. 17 posts on his web page – and he’s creaming it from the public purse. Now a staff member has done more work than him.

    This the real face of a third term national government – staff members doing the work, (albeit in this case juvenile – but maybe that’s part of it too) whilst Tory MPs do nothing.
    • Rosie 33.1

      14 July 2015 at 9:54 am

      “………….who the hell is Brett Hudson?”

      A twat. See my comment at 35.
34. NZJester 34

    14 July 2015 at 2:37 am

    I was just wondering if the said plonker has broken copyright law by the use of the Labour Party logo in his attempt at a non parody political hatchet job?
35. Dirty Politics Fuckwit 35

    14 July 2015 at 8:31 am

    Good morning! As the subject of this post, I felt it was only appropriate that I provide a response.

    Last night I tweeted the following: https://twitter.com/bjhguerin/status/620538187501277185

    Monday 13th July 2015
    Ben Guerin

    Comment on How Kiwi Are You website

    On Sunday the 12th of July I was a member of the Young Nats team that produced the Kiwi-O-Meter on the url http://howkiwiareyou.nz. I would like to publicly state that this website is not at all affiliated with the New Zealand National Party, New Zealand Parliament, or any National Party MPs; and is not endorsed by, or representative of, the views of my employer.

    The Kiwi-O-Meter was developed solely by the Young Nats, with no financial compensation, for distribution on the Young Nats Facebook and Twitter pages.

    Within 6 hours of launching, more than 25,000 people visited the site. Feedback from users was overwhelmingly positive, with people from all over the political spectrum indicating their support for a light-hearted, satirical website that lampooned the racist and ill-conceived statements made by Phil Twyford and Andrew Little regarding the Auckland housing market over the weekend.

    As the registrar of the domain my details were publicly available. Perhaps this was a mistake, but I am a supporter of transparency, and made no secret of my involvement. The fact that the site was made by Young Nats was publicly acknowledged by myself personally and on the Young Nats social media pages.

    Unfortunately, after my personal details including phone number, postal address and email address were published on an article on The Standard, I receive a significant amount of hatred-filled vitriol directly at me personally via txt message, phone calls, emails and messages sent to my personal Facebook and Twitter accounts.

    As a result of these communications, the Young Nats have pulled the site from the http://howkiwiareyou.nz domain, and we have no plans to re-launch it.

    ENDS
    • Anne 35.1

      14 July 2015 at 12:44 pm

      Oh boo hoo, hoo, hoo. My heart bleeds for you.

      As a result of these communications, the Young Nats have pulled the site from the http://howkiwiareyou.nz domain, and we have no plans to re-launch it.

      Serves you right. Shows what a bunch of mentally challenged, inconsequential, puerile minded itsy bitsy twats you all are. May your days be awesomely fruitful and enlightening. 😀
    • lprent 35.2

      14 July 2015 at 1:32 pm

      I have been busy this morning and lunch is a bit short for a full reply.

      However….

      As the registrar of the domain my details were publicly available.

      As is required for all Domain names. If you check the http://dnc.org.nz you will find my up to date details for this site. Just as they have been for 7 years. Here is me, registrant

      

      Here is Pete George, registrant of yournz.org.nz (just because I am thinking about complaining to him about his stupid and ignorant post this morning pushing this PR line)

      

      This is explicitly public information to allow people to be able to check who is responsible for a domain, and for them to be able to contact them if there is an issue. This is a concept known as personal responsibility. Get used to it.

      …but I am a supporter of transparency…

      The fact that the site was made by Young Nats was publicly acknowledged by myself personally and on the Young Nats social media pages.

      Great idea. Unfortunately for you I didn’t see that. What I saw was a link to it sent to me by a concerned green supporter. So there were no notices or warnings

      The relevant and most appropriate place to ensure transparency would have been ON the site. Why wasn’t it? Could you please explain this oversight in the use of transparency – a principle that you claim to support, but clearly do not practice.

      Why do you think I called you a fuckwit? You ignored the most basic rule of transparency, that the disclaimers and attributions should be ON the object. They should not be somewhere else that people cannot see.

      However I assisted you by rectifying your lapse of principle. I published the data that you didn’t make clear on the site.
      1. That it had been developed by you.
      2. That the young nats were involved.
      3. That you were employed by parliamentary services and therefore may have done it while being employed by them. Somehow in your comment here you appear to have overlooked commenting on that.
      4. You should probably have had a close look at your contract with PS and throught about the impacts on your direct and indirect employers before developing the site.

      Unfortunately, after my personal details including phone number, postal address and email address were published on an article on The Standard, I receive a significant amount of hatred-filled vitriol directly at me personally via txt message, phone calls, emails and messages sent to my personal Facebook and Twitter accounts.

      Welcome to my world. In the last 7 years I have amassed a very large collection myself.

      That information is available for ALL domain names and their registrants, admins, and technical contacts. That is because domain names are a privilege requiring personal responsibility. If you put up a website or mail server or anything else under a domain, then you are responsible for the content published under it. The contact details are there for people to contact you. Sometimes that contact may be unpleasant.

      From your whinging, personal responsibility appears to be something you are uncomfortable with. Perhaps you should not put up websites until you are better able to bear the burden.

      BTW: If the site hadn’t had valid contact details, then I’d have asked the DNC to drop the domain and/or the registrant.

      As a result of these communications, the Young Nats have pulled the site from the http://howkiwiareyou.nz domain, and we have no plans to re-launch it.

      Good. I’d suggest that if you decide to put up future sites like it that you should ON the site
      1. Put in a disclosure statement that says who the site was set up by.
      2. Think carefully about using copyright material that you do not have permission for.
      3. Do not attempt to deceive the public.
      4. In your case make sure that you do not cause issues for your employers or employment.
      5. Think through the consequences for the body politic before acting like a political fuckwit. I’d suggest reading Dirty Politics, or having a look at the partisan high inertia morass that the US congress has steadily falling into over the last 30 years, and consider that short-term stupid acts at various equivalent to you did are what triggers that.

      In short – you acted like a fool. Take some personal responsibility for it and learn from it.

      Updated: with some images.
      • Lanthanide 35.2.1

        14 July 2015 at 1:37 pm

        It’s notable in his statement that he says the site was not affiliated with Young Nats, National Party etc.

        But he fails to mention it wasn’t affiliated with Labour either, despite using their logo.
        • lprent 35.2.1.1

          14 July 2015 at 1:38 pm

          Thanks. I did mean to point that out as well.
    • Rosie 35.3

      14 July 2015 at 1:40 pm

      “I would like to publicly state that this website is not at all affiliated with the New Zealand National Party, New Zealand Parliament, or any National Party MPs; and is not endorsed by, or representative of, the views of my employer.”

      OK Ben, can’t you see your actions, are by their nature, political and your actions DO taint your party? You can’t magic it away with a disclaimer.
      And you can’t distance yourself from your employer either, especially as he DOES endorse ‘howkiwiareyou.nz on his facebook page.

      I’ve had a couple of emails with the local paper regarding their continuing receiving weekly advertising dollars from Brett Hudson, in light of this murky activity of yours and his endorsement of it. I’ve been informed they are looking into it.

      Probably nothing will happen. But who knows? Either way, it’s probably not the kind of attention your boss needs though is it? Maybe you can both learn from this.
    • Rosie 35.4

      14 July 2015 at 2:24 pm

      Hi Lynn. I’ve been trying to reply to Ben Guerin at 35 but I keep getting a message saying I’m making a duplicate comment, but the comment hasn’t actually showed up…………….

      [lprent: I have left my post on full moderation after getting tired of the sad old trolls from past eras reappearing in 2008 diversion trolling mode. I have been putting about a quarter of the comments into spam because they don’t address the post and/or the comment they are replying to. Silly buggers have a selection of other posts to put comments about Chinese into, but I guess that they ignore warnings. ]
36. Rosie 36

    14 July 2015 at 8:57 am

    Oh wow. That is gold.

    I feel a letter coming on. Brett Hudson, ex software salesperson, for Oracle if I recall correctly, came over all political all of a sudden in recent times and decided to go into politics because Labour.

    When asked by Wallace Chapman in Back Benches a couple of weeks ago why he entered politics he simply replied “I didn’t like what Labour were doing when they were in government last so instead of complaining I did something about it” (words to that effect).

    Well good for you Mr Hudson, very deep thinking there.

    Then he read from prepared notes in the “I’ve been thinking” section…….much to everyone’s amusement.

    Honestly, the guy is an egg, he even looks like an egg.

    During the election campaign he made a fool of himself during the first candidates meeting for the Ohariu electorate by not being able to answer questions from the audience beyond the scope of the party line, demonstrated general naivety and slagged Labour off in his opening statement. It was very clear he was out of depth.

    He has an office in the Ohariu electorate and has an ad in the local paper every week. He’s getting his feet under the table, ready to step in to Dunnes shoes once he’s gone.

    I may write an open letter to Mr Hudson in our local paper asking him whether his staffer Ben Guerin act’s of Dirty Politics comes under the heading of “developing a data driven constituent engagement strategy” and how Mr Hudson feels about being associated with such a creep and whether he thinks this is legitimate use of tax payer money.
    • Sirenia 36.1

      16 July 2015 at 10:41 am

      Yes do that please.
37. odot 37

    14 July 2015 at 9:33 am

    Step 1) Take data
    Step 2) Give data to specialist in data/statistical analysis
    Step 3) Make data public

    On the flip side:
    Step 1) Accuse data leaker of targeted racism
    Step 2) Mount massive campaign to make the public think data is inherently racist
    Step 3) Get cronies to make random number generator website
    Step 4) Put ads on website
    Step 5) Profit

    The original story is about foreign investment in NZ, specifically how it is driving up the property market and making homes and renting unaffordable in Auckland…but hell we cant have a reasonable public debate about that, it will ruin me and my friends chances of making millions in yet another property boom! You’re trying to take money out of my pocket!

    If anything, this saga should be about the need for accurate data, or even better a registrar on foreign buyers of homes in NZ. Wait for this government to do absolutely nothing about it, and use the line “Oh well actually this is the market at work here….it has nothing to do with easy access to low interest loans or offshore buyers needing an easy and relatively tax exempt method of acquiring high return investments.”
38. Rosie 38

    14 July 2015 at 10:57 am

    Brett Hudson was promoting the fake site on his fb page yesterday:

    https://www.facebook.com/bretthudson.national
    • lprent 38.1

      14 July 2015 at 12:54 pm

      Indeed. I may have to write about him as well since he seems to have been encouraging this young twerp to be an idiot.

      However I had other things to do this morning.
39. saynowtodrugs 39

    14 July 2015 at 12:29 pm

    i outed ben guerin on reddit yesterday lunchtime. popcorn tastes good.

    here’s ben guerin’s personal blog forever preserved on the wayback machine.
    http://web.archive.org/web/20131208083935/http://bjhguerin.com/

    it seems he’s recently battled depression so you might want to ease off a bit, i dunno.

    perhaps you could try direct some of your vitriol at this jerk as well – https://twitter.com/horrobinnz – apprently he was co-responsible.

    ben has also registered this domain – http://www.bjhguerin.nz/ (he mentions it in the archived blog) but it doesn’t live yet.
40. Tracey 40

    14 July 2015 at 12:53 pm

    bnz chief economist tony alexander agrees with twyford that we need restrictions on foreign ownership. funny that despite all attempts to make this issue important to this govt it took this to get their usual supporters (economists) speaking out.
41. Rosie 41

    14 July 2015 at 2:21 pm

    Hi Lynn. I’ve been trying to reply to Ben Guerin at 35 but I keep getting a notice that I’ve made a duplicate comment but the comment isn’t actually showing……………
    • Rosie 41.1

      14 July 2015 at 3:11 pm

      There now
42. Weepus beard 42

    14 July 2015 at 7:59 pm

    Has a complaint been made to the house over Ben Guerin’s use of the official Labour Party logo in his fake website?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS