Written By: - Date published: 12:12 pm, December 6th, 2008 - 134 comments
Categories: blogs -
Tags: dpf, farrar, ps, slater, whaleoil
A mate just pointed out that the metadata of David Farrar’s election analysis document suggests it was authored on a Parliamentary Service computer. With the document open in Microsoft Word go to the ‘File’ menu then down to ‘Properties’. You’ll see something like the image below:
Of course you’ll notice that the document title looks historical but Word is pretty aggressive when it comes to updating its metadata automatically (particularly when it comes to local user data on the machine in use).
A month or so ago, our own IrishBill pointed out Cameron Slater’s (Whaleoil’s) own admission to The Herald that he was working closely with the National Party research unit raking muck.
Perhaps his mate Davey is back in there too…
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
Lprent
Well, that is the perception. Its up to the standard team if they want to change it, otherwise nothing else is going to change.
sd: Incidentally, that behavior by Cam with my previous employers are why I’d be extremely unhappy if anyone else here does want go public.
There would be virtually no remedy against the type of stalking behavior that Cam followed without going through a very long (and expensive) defamation court case. It would be a hell of an effort to probably get nothing more than an enforced apology. Which is of caurse why the pathetic idiot does it.
Hopefully that defamation case that he got caught in earlier this year will provide some case law.
I would even prefer the comments on here to be psuedonymous as a matter of policy. Stuff put on the net is liable to be around for a very long time. Which of course is why most people commenting here (and everywhere else), and most posters prefer to remain psuedonymous.
Besides in the end knowing who you are doesn’t really help much in evaluating the veracity of opinions.
I wouldn’t worry Lynn – the problem the right have is they think they own the internet. It was ticking along so nicely for so long with Farrar doing his wee thing and the various actoid losers abusing anyone posting from the left (or even the centre) into submission…
Problem is they don’t own the internet and the Standard drives them crazy by reminding them of this. Every. Single. Day. That’s why they have to pretend to themselves that the Standard is professionally run – because that’s the only way they can rationalise the fact that their nasty little blog-world could be taken off them…
They are essentially petty little bullies. I wouldn’t indulge them if I were you Lynn. In fact all of the ones I have identified – thanks to Cameron’s security breach – have been little nobodies…
There are two or three that work as National party staffers and there may be an interesting story behind how their salaries and/or living costs were funded – I’m still looking into that – but for the most part they are impotent punters as is demonstrated by how upsetting they find the Standard.
Oh and righties? I know a couple of the Standard guys and they ain’t on the payroll – they’re just smarter and better company than you bunch of festering sores and it shows in their posts…
Goodness me. What a slow news day it must have been. Storm in a teacup, and frankly I can see that people on both sides need to lighten up a bit. I understand that some of the Standard’s posters are sensitive about revealing their identities for whatever reason so it was a bit hypocritical for AYB to try and smear DPF in this way. From what I can gather DPF took the smear in good humour and AYB appears to have a bit of egg on his face. Trying to justify it based on “oh but he did it first” just looks lame.
Right, are we past the petty infighting from both sides now? Have we all got it off our chests?
Oh Robinsod, I suspect I’m a little old for you to be my father and my mother died many years ago, but that was an amusing response!
For those of you on the right who think that differing opinions aren’t accepted here, I manage to comment quite freely here by not being too obnoxious. Remember who owns this site. It’s their home. They seem to welcome genuine debate but really you wouldn’t go into somebody else’s home and start abusing them and expect them still to serve you a cup of tea.
For what it’s worth Bomber’s NZ Blogosphere rankings hasn’t been kind to either of them. While Farrar may still have the top spot Whaleoil has slipped a number of points.
Lprent
there are lots of left wing bloggers who use their real identities..Trotter, Jordon Carter, Tony Milne. Everyone knows who they are and what they are. They seem to live a normal life free of stalking. Same on the right side.
It seems to be only the standard gets this kind of attention.
“I would even prefer the comments on here to be psuedonymous as a matter of policy. Stuff put on the net is liable to be around for a very long time. Which of course is why most people commenting here (and everywhere else), and most posters prefer to remain psuedonymous.”
Yet, loads of other bloggers seem to be okay at having their identities out there. Granted, there are cases where people feel they have to vent, but are in a position that if their identity was known it may have consequences. This sort sort of answer leads us back, with regards to a left wing blog, to the bloggers at the standard, and alleged conenctions to the labour party.
TE: The short answer is no.
I realize that DPF would probably like to put this smear technique behind him. But personally it will take quite a while before I work the accumulated irritation about his appalling behavior out of my system.
In the spirit of mutual deterrence, I rather like the idea of turning the dog whistle tactic back on him. In the long run, it is only by having the tactic equally accessible to all sides that it will start being regarded as being unusable. I have to thank a_y_b for highlighting it again.
I doubt that it will ever be much of a site focus, if only because DPF has been around the nets almost as long as I have, but when the opportunity arises….
Cam of course is another matter. I consider that his particular brand of bile is something that should not be tolerated. I’ve seen that kind of crap help destroy usenet.
sweeetd – that’s ‘cos it’s only the standard that lays down the hits on the National party and its bloggers and ‘cos it’s only the standard that has gone to second biggest blog in its first year and a half. who are you?
But while we’re on the subject of identities – how about you tell me who you are? I mean it seems a bit rich to have you bleating on about everyone else when you’re also anonymous… So why not like – just tell us… After all there are plenty of other commenters who use their real names so why not you?
sd: The difference is that all of the people you’ve referenced have public profiles that they’re trying to enhance (as is DPF, Hooten, and maybe Clint Heine?).
The bloggers here are not trying to do so. This is something that we do in our spare time and is meant to be separate from RL. I’d have to ask the motivations about why people want to know the identities. It has bugger all to do with evaluating the opinions, they become pretty clear very fast. As far as I can see there is only one possible motivation and that is to do a Cam style stalk. But I guess that is what the national smear research unit want, so that is why there is this insatiable obession on the topic.
As I said, just look at Cam’s stalking of my previous employer.
I’ve gotta say Lynn – it’s got a bit dull around here lately. Even the trolls are being polite… At this rate I may have to go elsewhere to satiate my taste for ridiculing the right!
sd,
I think there are probably genuine reasons why some people don’t like posting under their own names. It gives them a degree of freedom to express what they would really like to say without having to be called on it, for sure. You would think that people who have the courage to post under their real names moderate their behaviour accordingly. DPF is pretty moderate and so are Tony Milne and Russell Brown, to name a few. I haven’t seen Matthew Pilott here for a while, but he’s a very thoughtful guy with some strong arguments who adds a lot to debate.
On the other had, exceptions to the rule appear to be Chris Trotter, who doesn’t seem to have a self-moderation setting in his brain, and Matthew Hooton. I liked the contrasting mix on that combined blog because they frequently came up with such preposterously extreme arguments. Perhaps I’m getting a bit conservative but Cam is a bit much for me, and not just his political opinions. It tends to be the little things that annoy me in his case. He did a post a while back with a photo of a triple-bunked room as a model for an ideal prison. When I saw that photo all I could think of was Auschwitz and I was just appalled.
Among the anonymous bloggers, I don’t have any idea who Dancer is, but s/he comes up with thoughtful, moderate posts that stir debate, often with new insights on issues that aren’t often covered. Lew is a highly intelligent, structured, logical debater who is a real challenge to talk through issues with. Gomango, on the other side, is also very interesting to read.
I enjoy the debate here. I think I’m coming to the view that anonymous or not, each commenter and poster has a certain identity, with various degrees of authenticity (some being more a projection rather than a reality), and what they contribute to debate has less to do with who they are or what their background is, but how seriously they engage others. It seems to me to be a bit of a cop-out to shout somebody down with “oh you would say that because you work in the Prime Minister’s office” or “yes that’s what we expected of a National Party stooge”. I don’t care what a person’s background is and from my observation it has little to do with the content of their argument. It’s just lazy to dismiss what people say by shouting CROSBY-TEXTOR! or COMMUNIST!
I think we can all judge who is here for serious discussion, and who isn’t. Those who come by throwing around allegations about other people and try to disrupt really say more about the weakness of their own argument than they do about the other person.
Well you’re always welcome back with us ‘sod
Lprent
I disagree with your conclusions as to why posters at the standard want to remain anon. But, I can see we will have to agree to disagree on that one.
Robinsod
Firstly I think AYB can respond for himself, don’t you?
“But while we’re on the subject of identities – how about you tell me who you are?”
Sure, my name is Steve, I am a Sagittarius and I like long walks on the beach. I don’t belong to any political parties but have an interest in politics. I like 80′s music and have traveled extensively. Anything else you would like to know I am sure you can dig through my rubbish to find out.
“that’s ‘cos it’s only the standard that lays down the hits on the National party and its bloggers and ‘cos it’s only the standard that has gone to second biggest blog in its first year and a half.”
In my opinion the standard was, to a part responsible for labours loss; the constant theme of attacking Key. so, from my pov, keep on doing what you are doing, it is doing the opposite from what you desire.
‘sod: I suppose that it is a problem. However I prefer to read comment that is readable. Of course you could post at your own blog?
TE: “I think I’m coming to the view that anonymous or not, each commenter and poster has a certain identity, with various degrees of authenticity (some being more a projection rather than a reality), and what they contribute to debate has less to do with who they are or what their background is, but how seriously they engage others”
Exactly. That is what has happened in every net comms channel I’ve ever been on from the fumbling attempts to get inter-university comms running in the early 1980′s (and the intra-university multi-player star trek games at 3am) to the current blogs.
I’m pretty harsh at moderating on some types of commentators purely because I’ve seen the cumulative effects of their behavior destroying some forums. Others get a lot of leeway (like the ‘sod or sweeetd or burt have in the past). While they often appear cranky and act very close to trolls, periodically, they contribute with ideas of value (like the ‘sods Guest post analysis of Wisharts book).
Besides I prefer not to moderate, it is a lot of persistent work.
Talking about persistent work, I’d better finish this caching plugin… (and the washing)
LP I realise this has hit a raw nerve for you and it is your blog so you can do whatever you like, but trying to use the blog to exercise your frustration just looks petty and it doesn’t do you justice. Mutual deterrence doesn’t work in blogging, because no matter what you do, there is always somebody out there crazier than you who will try to virtually mug you when you’re walking down the street and least expect it. Mutual deterrence might have been a good idea in the cold war when only two powers had a large nuclear arsenal where they could assure each others’ total annihilation. It made them careful. Blogging is much more democratic than that. It’s the equivalent of gifting nuclear warheads to everyone. When you do that you know that not everyone will behave appropriately. Some people will set the bugger off.
Turn the other cheek. If you need catharsis, go to the driving range and whack the cover off a golf ball. Evidently you have got very annoyed with Cam so you have two options. You can either dip into the sewer with him, or act like an adult. If you do the former you won’t be dignifying yourself. If you do the latter then he’ll get bored with winding you up and ignore you.
Moreover as much as this feud might be important to you (and granted it is your blog), I just don’t think it makes interesting reading for others. It just looks petty. You guys do a really good job filtering out the most obnoxious behaviour here by setting a good standard of debate. I can’t speak for others, but I don’t come here to read about what nasty things LP has to say about CS today in retaliation for what nasty things CS has said about LP the day before. I know you’re a reasonable person LP, and I listened to you on publicaddress radio a few weeks back and had a new level of respect for your contribution to the blogosphere. You’ve obviously done some fantastic work setting up this forum. Don’t undermine it by letting others get under your skin.
How the hell was The Standard responsible for Labour’s loss? I think you’re making blogs out to be a bigger influence than they are. If blogs had any real influence on elections National would be down to 25% on the count of Farrar alone.
LP wrote:
I agree. Sometimes they come off as a group of hecklers at a meeting. They generally aren’t very abusive (although sometimes are) and are often very amusing. I find them entertaining and a few times ‘sod has made a dig at me because I’ve been a bit pretentious or long-winded and he’s brought me down to earth and I’ve laughed out loud.
TE: It is not so much of a feud as an obligation. If the type of behavior is not made costly. then it will result eventually in real problems as it escalates. I’ve seen it before in other forums and it is part of the inherent nature of the net.
This time it impacted on me and this site. Next time it could impact on someone who is less able to take care of themselves. It is better to stop it now with a controlled escalation. In this case it means turning the tactics on the perpetrators. The history of the net is replete with this type of conflict. Another area that this type of problem is being fought out is in places like the social networking sites, eg bebo. Previous examples are things like viruses, spam, denial of service attacks, RPC’s, usenet forums, etc
BTW: Do you have a link to the publicaddress radio thing – I don’t think I’ve ever heard myself on radio? Russell Brown was a bit short so I filled a gap. Found it…
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
. That was interesting. Definitely not one of my major skillsets
Definitely not one of my major skillsets
I thought you did just fine!
Funny you should mention what happened to other fora, Lynn.
I saw nz.politics (to which I used to contribute) turn into an unusable flame pit, and thanked the dieties when blogs started appearing. No one who finds The Standard interesting and stimulating wants to see it meet that fate (and your moderating is the only thing standing between the blog and and a sewer outfall, I appreciate that, and commend you on the work you put in to keeping it usable).
So maybe it’d be a good idea if a_y_b didn’t set off exactly the sort of thing you claim to condemn by writing inflammatory, poorly researched, ad hominem posts, then.
What Whaleoil did in relation to yourself was totally unacceptable, IMHO. But as Tim Ellis says, choosing to go for a quick dip in the same sewer might make you feel better, but doesn’t do much for your overall standing. Having said that, I know how you feel – I’m probably lucky I’m several thousand miles away from Ron Mark and am not about to waste an air fare on him, or I’d have done something pretty undignified too (and probably ended up being shot by the DPS).
Tim Ellis: Since we’re trying to douse the fire with sugar water, I should mention I find you to be someone whose arguments are always worth reading and considering, and in particular your comments above are very apt, I think.
Farrar reminds me of one of those people who would love to be a politician but simply don’t have the skills – sort of like an uncle I had growing up who was always going on about how boobies and chicks but who was hopeless with the ladies.
Spot on Tigger, reminds me of Trevor Louden on New Zeal sniffing his way through the underwear of the left, always outside looking in, destined never to know what it is really like at the centre of the action.
So we are all in agreement then?
The evidence AYB presented is worthless and his entire post is nothing more than easily discredited speculation. It makes him and everyone who agrees with him look like fools.
“In my opinion the standard was, to a part responsible for labours loss; the constant theme of attacking Key…”
Perhaps responsible isnt the right word. Certainly the attitude and character of The Standard is reminiscent of the attitude and character that caused people to turn away from Labour.
The muck-raking was a big part of it, and that is almost all that The Standard is; it is just one big muck raking group blog. It wasnt a pro-Labour site, it was always simply anti-National.
The Standard is just a gossipy little fart of a site that never provides any discussion of alternatives, it never takes a position that is the opposite of Labour policy (even on blatantly corrupt policy).
Labour was out of ideas mid way through their second term. The Standard started out with no ideas and regressed from there.
Its posters exhibit the sort of arrogant incompetence people associate with the last Labour government.
Eventually you have to stump up with more than “its all Nationals fault”. Labour didnt realise that and were doomed because of it. The Standard will never realise it and that is why it will remain nothing but an echo chamber.
[lprent: Curious, if you believe all of those things, why do you keep coming back, over and over again? Have a written flatulence problem perhaps? If you ask, I could assist in helping you to resist the temptation. It really is little effort (rather like the level of thought you put into your comments).]
…why do you keep coming back, over and over again?
Why do people slow down when going past traffic accidents?
Looks like we’re getting under the skin of a certain puerile blogger. As per normal he can’t resist lying
Lie: “The self rated best sysop in the world”
Never said it, never would. There are always going to be better sysops.
Lie: “You would think with the lack of blogging a_y_b would have had time to update the site since he managed to keep his job, albeit in a different office now that has a view that isn’t quite so appealing.”
a_y_b is still in his origional office that he has been working in since I’ve known him. He is one of the few authors on here that I do know. Of course if you lie the first time, then a liar has to keep following the same stupid line.
Ok I stand corrected – he does not lie all of the time.
Partial truth: “I have been banned from responding because Lynn (that surely is a girls name) thinks I am technically illiterate and because I am a creep.”
Yes I do think that he is technically incompetent and a creep. The latter appears to be a common perception. However he has been banned because he wastes my time and I don’t think he adds anything to this site. The mere fact I detest him helps admittedly.
David Farrar
December 7, 2008 at 1:55 pm
You just had to use the word ‘key’ didn’t you. Did you get paid for that?
burt re your need to know
December 7, 2008 at 10:27 pm
re my need to know
Tell me who donated money into National’s secret trusts. It was Key and NZBusiness Roundtable wasn’t it. He bought his Act-place in National.
Phil
Re December 8, 2008 at 5:39 pm
People go slow past traffic accidents out of respect and care for the injured, dead and dying.
Anyone not doing that are the very people who caused them. Which group are you in?