Comments on: Shipley to knife Banks?

By: Armchair Critic

Armchair Critic — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 09:40:20 +0000

I don’t believe that was graham, he only spelled one word wrong. And he should have still been hosing down the yards or cleaning out the milking machine at 5.33

By: r0b

r0b — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 08:11:31 +0000

OK, I for one will leave it be. Shouldn’t mess with Great Art.

By: Smokie

Smokie — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 07:58:33 +0000

felix – agreed. It’s o for oarsome.

By: felix

felix — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 05:36:02 +0000

Please please please leave graham’s comment here. It’s just beautiful, in a way.

By: graham

graham — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 04:33:29 +0000

GET FUCKED LOSERS you are baned from my life

By: graham

graham — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:05:37 +0000

Again it comes down to the ends justifiy the means iprent [lprent: It is a standing policy in the about. Live with it or live without access. Has been there since the site started. Banned for 2 weeks. ]

By: graham

graham — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 23:03:56 +0000

[lprent: patience exhausted - banned for a week]

By: felix

felix — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 22:57:50 +0000

Still waiting for an example or an apology, Jared.

By: Jared

Jared — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 22:52:38 +0000

You have completely missed the point of what I was saying Lynn. If a member of Len Browns campaign is running a series of vitriolic posts against the opposition then they should outline at a minimum their position. Anonymous blog posting is a privileged right as I am sure you know, however, to retain any credibility Sam Cash should say who they are. The Standard were stinging in their criticism of anonymous donors, and particularly the Brethren for not disclosing who they were and their motivations. As you well know, blog posting , particularly on a high profile blog like the standard is akin to a delivered publication regardless of the readership. Are you not interested in transparency? or are you more interested in hiding your own? I am not railing to have all authors unmasked, only “Sam Cash”. Or do you do what Trevor Mallard does and when he disagrees with a Point of View and just break out the ban stick?

[lprent: So when Whale runs a vitriolic set of posts against the North Shore mayor it doesn't matter whom he is friends with? Or that DPF is frequently mistaken for being part of nationals communications team? The principle you are espousing cuts all ways.

Basically the only reason that Sams posts are good or bad is the opinions and facts he expresses. Deal with those.

The standard is that we let selected people post here. Who Sam Cash is, I have no idea for the reasons in the about. He has been posting here since the site began on a variety of topics. In the same way that I frequently post on climate change, rocky posts on animal rights, Irish posts on union stuff, Marty G posts on numbers, Demeter on green issues, etc. Sam currently seems to post on the Auckland mayoral campaign. We all have areas of interest.

In the absence of any actual information all you are doing is trying to make rumor out of unsubstantiated speculation. Totally pointless.

Deal with the post and its opinions. I look at attacks on the posters as being from people incapable of doing that. They find it easier to construct conspiracy theories. pretty damn lazy in my opinion. ]

By: felix

felix — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 22:45:18 +0000

You used to give a shit Felix, not so long ago either, or is it different when you are trying to protect your own, ala Phillip Field?

Please show an example or apologise.

By: lprent

lprent — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 22:40:26 +0000

It was always a banning offense since we started banning.

By: Jared

Jared — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 22:28:03 +0000

You can complain all you want about transparency of trusts, about disclosures of pecuniary interests, and special interest groups like the brethren. But when [deleted] allegedly posts under a pseudonym on your site, offerring 11 "opinion pieces" his anonymity is protected? You used to give a shit Felix, not so long ago either, or is it different when you are trying to protect your own, ala Phillip Field? [lprent: Read the about about who we are and quit whining. It is absolutely clear where we are coming from, our sources of finance, roughly how much it costs from posters here, and what you can expect from posts here. If you want to do something then start your own blog and raise the topics there. If the NACTs or SST operated on the same basis then we'd have a lot better idea about who is manipulating politics in NZ. But basically I suspect you are too damn lazy to actually do the work required to get a profile, plus of course you're a lousy writer. ]

By: Pascal's bookie

Pascal's bookie — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 20:58:04 +0000

Is the standard being stuffed in people’s letter boxes now is it?

By: graham

graham — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 20:47:57 +0000

The point about this post is it just a left wing view or is it part of the election campaign by [deleted]? Remember you cant complain about the bretherian and pull the same stuff [lprent: In case you hadn't noticed, Len is a competent left-leaning candidate. It is highly likely that any of the posters here would tend towards supporting him (including me). Are you then going to assert that I'm part of some f*ckwit conspiracy? Read the about and policy. I'm going to start banning shortly rather than simply amending. ]

By: felix

felix — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:40:08 +0000

zOMG!!!! I KNOW WHO JARED IS!!!!!1

Like anyone gives a shit.

Didn’t Lynn make this a banning offense lately?