Open mike 06/01/2024

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, January 6th, 2024 - 191 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

191 comments on “Open mike 06/01/2024 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Jenny 1
    6 January 2024 at 6:49 am

    '

    #1 South Africa Vs. Israel

    This Lawyer Reveals Why Israel's Gaza Onslaught Could Be Stopped By Genocide Case….

    (It's not often we get to hear the rare voice of Jewish people born in Palestine before the creation of the state of Israel, who had to leave their homeland because they opposed the Zionist state.)

    ….both my parents were born in Palestine as it then was, and uh Israeli citizens, who um became very concerned about um what was happening in Israel as they were growing up in the 1950s. And then when following the sixth day war they were one of a relatively small number of Israelis who immediately opposed the fact of the occupation.

    I'd just like to read you something that my father was a co-signatory to, with a very small number of Israelis, including a Palestinian citizen of Israel.

    This is what they said in a declaration that was published by Haaretz newspaper. Obviously I'm reading you an English translation of the Hebrew, this was on the 22nd of September 1967.

    [deleted]

    [please stop spamming TS with long copypasta. We want people’s own ideas, with links and targeted quotes as back up or further explanation. This is not a place to just dump what you are reading and expect others to read it too. I see you have written a longer post in your own words, that’s good stuff.

    From now on, you are restricted to 3 paragraphs max of copy and paste in any comment. Please use this wisely and don’t abuse the privilege. I would also strongly recommend less overall copypasta comments – weka]

    • SPC 1.1
      6 January 2024 at 7:53 am

      A very accurate perception as to the dilemma facing Israel in 1967, occupation required empowering locals in Gaza and WB to govern themselves, whether they chose to declare a state, or not.

      That would have counter-acted the formation of the PLO by the Arab League (not recognising the state of Israel) in 1964 with someone Lebanese as its first chairman.

      In 1974 ʿArafāt advocated limiting PLO activity to direct attacks against Israel, and the Arab community recognized the PLO as the sole legitimate representative of all Palestinians. It was admitted to the Arab League in 1976

      https://www.britannica.com/summary/Palestine-Liberation-Organization

      The absence of any policy led not just to the Egyptian and Syrian attack in 1973, but the formation of Likud in 1977 (with a policy of peace with Egypt, the invasion to the north against the PLO in Lebanon and settlements in the occupied territories). And its current leader BN has always opposed the Oslo Accord process to a two state peace (a legacy of the Labour era of rule which ended in 2001).

    • weka 1.2
      6 January 2024 at 9:05 am

      mod note.

  2. Jenny 2
    6 January 2024 at 7:14 am

    #2 Ukraine vs. Russia

    Israel says that they will appear before the ICJ to defend themselves from South Africa's charge of committing genocide. This is exactly analogous of the Russian Federation's response to the case taken against them in the ICJ by Ukraine. Only two countries, Malaysia and Turkey, have filed submissions to the ICJ as 'Intervening States' Compare this to the 32 'Intervening States' including New Zealand that gave their country's submissions to the ICJ in the case of Ukraine vs. Russia

    Ukraine filed a case with the ICJ that Russia had falsely claimed that Ukraine had committed the crime of genocide.
    The Russian Federation sent a team of lawyers to defend Russia's position that Ukraine had committed genocide against ethnic Russians and Russian speakers in the Donbas. An accusation that Ukraine strongly denied.

    The proceedings of the ICJ are live streamed. I found it worthwhile to review these video recordings of the Ukraine vs. Russia case before the International Court of Justice in the Hague, in the historic and grandly named 'Peace Palace'.

    https://www.vredespaleis.nl/?lang=en

    I recommend anyone interested in how the case of South Africa vs. Israel will play out to watch the recording of the live stream of the Ukraine vs. Russia case.

    Streamed live on Sep 18, 2023 #Ukraine #VladimirPutin #Putin

    The UN's top court in The Hague, Netherlands began five days of hearings, where representatives of Russia and Ukraine clashed over President Vladimir Putin's allegations of genocide in eastern Ukraine, as a pretext for the "special military operation" to “demilitarize and denazify Ukraine”

    From the live stream of the hearing in the Peace Palace, Ukraine vs. the Russian Federation

    The livestream of the opening address by the presiding ICJ President, Joan E. Donoghue begins @0:00 minutes

    The court meets today and will meet in the coming days to hear the oral ligaments of the parties on preliminary objections raised by the respondent in the case concerning allegations of genocide under the convention on the prevention and Punishment of the crime of genocide.

    Ukraine versus Russian Federation 32 states intervening as well as the oral observations of the intervening states with respect to the subject matter of their interventions.

    This morning the court will hear the first round of oral argument of the Russian Federation…..

    I can highly recommend watching the recording of these proceedings
    After watching the live stream of Ukraine vs. the Russian Federation, I am of the opinion that the two cases. Ukraine vs. Russia, and South Africa vs. Israel, are apposite, but opposite. These two cases are apposite in that they are mirror opposite images of each other.

    The main difference between the two cases being US allies like New Zealand will not be making legal submissions as intervening states party to the genocide convention in the case of South Africa vs. Israel, as they did in the case of Ukraine vs. Russia.

    Our parliamentary journalists and opposition MPs need to be asking the Minister of Foreign Affairs to explain the reason why New Zealand intervened in one case and not the other.

    To them I would say: 'If you ever wondered what you would have done during the Holocaust, you are doing it now.'

    • SPC 2.1
      6 January 2024 at 7:33 am

      New Zealand was at war with Germany during the holocaust.

      It is for the collective security of nation states from aggression.

      It is for a two state peace process to realise the outcome intended in 1947, despite the war in 1948.

      Given the action of Oct 7 and the right of nations to self-defence (including defeat of the military that attacked them), Israel is accountable for its "war-time" actions. Otherwise for the occupation of the West Bank, which Hamas might claim was its provocation (given Gaza was more under blockade than occupation itself).

  3. Jenny 3
    6 January 2024 at 7:44 am

    ‘
    New Zealand intervenes

    INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
    —H———————————————————-
    ALLEGATIONS OF GENOCIDE UNDER THE
    CONVENTION ON THE PREVENTION AND PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME OF GENOCIDE
    (Ukraine v Russian Federation, 32 States Intervening)

    WRITTEN OBSERVATIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF NEW ZEALAND
    (PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS)
    4JULY2023

    …..New Zealand intervenes in its capacity as a Contracting Party to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide 1948 ("the Convention").2
    It does so in response to the gravity of the circumstances giving rise to this case, its implications for the maintenance of international law, and its impact on the
    obligations shared by all parties to the Convention.

    https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/182/182-20230705-wri-06-00-en.pdf

    • Jenny 3.1
      6 January 2024 at 8:19 am

      New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs, (MFAT), Statements and speeches: 20 September 2023

      Delivered by Andrew Williams, Chief International Legal Adviser (acting), 20 September 2023

      1. Madam President, members of the Court, it is an honour to appear before you today and to present New Zealand’s submissions in these critical proceedings.

      2. New Zealand has chosen to intervene in these proceedings because we consider that the issues in this case go to the very heart of the international rule of law and the protection of this Court’s role in the peaceful settlement of disputes.

      Support for the submissions of Ukraine and intervening States

      3. Madam President, I do not intend to repeat every point put forward in New Zealand’s Written Observations. Nor will I rehearse the arguments made by Ukraine and the intervening States in their written and oral submissions. We broadly support the points they have made.

      https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/media-and-resources/new-zealands-oral-submissions-on-jurisdiction-in-ukraines-international-court-of-justice-case-against-russia/

      In my opinion, it would be the height of hypocrisy, and an international embarrassment, if New Zealand did not repeat our nation's intervention, in its capacity as a Contracting Party to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide 1948

      https://www.democracynow.org/2024/1/2/south_africa_israel_genocide_icj?fbclid=IwAR3luU2oDM596vKJYn5bv4-4Hl4MWDCK55ti65w5lILdRVA3tDB15IOEVkU

      Government urged to join genocide case against Israel

      Justin Wong

      January 4, 2024

      A group of the country’s legal experts, including two King Counsels and two emeritus legal professors, are urging the Government to join South Africa’s case that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza at the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

      Ten lawyers and academics, including leading human rights lawyer Frances Joychild KC, as well as Auckland University law professor emeriti David V Williams and Jane Kelsey, penned the open letter on Friday to Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, Foreign Minister Winston Peters, Attorney-General Judith Collins and Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith…..

      https://www.thepost.co.nz/nz-news/350142118/government-urged-join-genocide-case-against-israel

  5. weka 5
    6 January 2024 at 9:21 am

    does anyone have a term that can be used in place of cooker to refer to people who were anti-mandate, anti-mask, pro-libertarian and so on?

    I need neutral not pejorative words, and catch all terms so I don't have to write a long sentence each time I refer to them.

    • Francesca 5.1
      6 January 2024 at 9:24 am

      Covid dissidents? or sceptics

      • weka 5.1.1
        6 January 2024 at 9:50 am

        covid dissidents is very good, thanks.

        • Bearded Git 5.1.1.1
          6 January 2024 at 10:38 am

          Covid rebels?

          That is precisely what they are so I prefer it despite the tougher language.

          But covid dissidents is OK.

          • weka 5.1.1.1.1
            6 January 2024 at 12:30 pm

            Pandemic Rebellion!

            Covid rebels, mandate rebels might work too. Good to have a range of terms to induce nuance, cheers.

      • weka 5.2.1
        6 January 2024 at 9:43 am

        that's a pejorative Anne.

        • Anne 5.2.1.1
          6 January 2024 at 9:57 am

          That is precisely what they are – anti-science. They are extremely dangerous and there needs to be a concerted international effort to curb their increasing influence. Their anti-mandate/anti mask stance is just a manifestation of their denial of scientific evaluation and modelling.

          The best equivalent are the flat earthers of a couple or more centuries ago. People who flatly denied the Earth was round and executed people for holding 'scientific' views based on actual evidence.

          • Robert Guyton 5.2.1.1.1
            6 January 2024 at 10:09 am

            "…people who flatly denied the Earth was round…"

            Elegant!

          • weka 5.2.1.1.2
            6 January 2024 at 10:16 am

            That is precisely what they are

            Who are 'they' in that sentence Anne? Be precise.

            • Bearded Git 5.2.1.1.2.1
              6 January 2024 at 11:04 am

              Weka….it was me who suggested "rebels" and "they" are the rag-tag mass of people with disparate aims/objectives who camped and demonstrated on the lawn outside parliament using covid as their excuse.

              • weka …
                6 January 2024 at 12:32 pm

                agree that they are disparate group. Not sure it's entirely about the parliament protest but also agree that the Freedom protest gave people a focus for a wider range of grievances. It certainly brought things to a head.

              • Anne …
                7 January 2024 at 10:29 am

                Thank-you BG. I didn't see weka's response.

                Much respect for weka and the work she puts into this site, but disagree with her views on this subject. That rag-tag mass of disparate individuals who behaved so badly during the parliament protest were indeed who I was referring to. I thought it was obvious. I would add the individuals from NZ and off-shore who supported and enabled (financially and otherwise) their activities.

        • UncookedSelachimorpha 5.2.1.2
          6 January 2024 at 11:08 am

          Quite a few of them don't consider "anti-science" to be a pejorative.

      • weka 5.2.2
        6 January 2024 at 10:23 am

        since you brought up anti-sciencism, and referenced Scientific American, there's this to consider about accusations of being anti-science.

        Scientific American takes a pro-gender identity ideology position. It publishes articles that say there are more than two sexes in humans, or that sex isn't binary.

        This is SA's editor in chief being anti-science on twitter.

        from @laurahelmuth

        White-throated sparrows have four chromosomally distinct sexes that pair up in fascinating ways P.S. Nature is amazing P.P.S. Sex is not binary https://audubon.org/news/the-fascinating-and-complicated-sex-lives-white-throated-sparrows via

        @audubonsociety

        https://twitter.com/laurahelmuth/status/1658952315032698883

        A community note (where registered people can add notes correcting incorrect tweets), was attached to that tweet

        White-throated sparrows have 2 sexes with 4 unique chromosome combinations. There are still just 2 sexes that produce either sperm or eggs. The female types are the white-striped females and the tan-striped females. The male birds are white-striped males and tan striped males. audubon.org/news/the-fasci…

        Colin Wright, evolutionary biologist, also replied,

        No, these birds have 2 sexes. Stop spreading scientific disinformation. https://realityslaststand.com/p/debunking-ps

        https://twitter.com/SwipeWright/status/1658977019118383106

        And his article explaining the problem,

        https://www.realityslaststand.com/p/debunking-pseudoscience-multimodal

        So if you want to claim that every covid dissident is anti-scientific, then by your argument I can claim that every person who isn't gender critical is anti-scientific, which means you (and Robert) are anti-scientific. See how that works?

        The point here is to have political terms that aren't pejorative so we can get past the name calling and superficial political analysis and really get to grips with the issues. I agree that something needs to be done, but I don't think what we need can be achieved by ostrasisation and ridicule.

    • Robert Guyton 5.3
      6 January 2024 at 9:43 am

      Does the group you're trying to label include those who fear Agenda 21? Those who donated money to Liz Gunn's campaign and for the whistleblower's legal defence? Those who subscribe to Sue Grey's channel?

      Are they the people who wanted to string "Jabcinda" up because she's a witch?

      Hard group to give a respectful title to, imo.

      • weka 5.3.1
        6 January 2024 at 9:56 am

        probably does. Just like the term 'left' includes people who believe weird shit.

        I'm thinking a broad term, with other more specific terms for sub groups. Just like we do for other political and social categories.

        For instance,

        Covid dissidents

        Covid dissidents who are conspiracy theorists

        Covid dissidents who are conspiracy theorists and violent fantacists

        Covid dissidents who are fascist or protofascist

        But, there are also covid dissidents who aren't down the rabbit hole. The term cooker renders them invisible, another reason I dislike the term.

        • Robert Guyton 5.3.1.1
          6 January 2024 at 10:04 am

          Are there "Covid dissidents" who aren't also conspiracy theorists?

          If they opposed the Governments authoritarian behaviour around mask-wearing, mandates and vaccination programmes, they surely held views that the authorities were conspiring against the people. Those who I spoke to over that time certainly do. There will be some (relatively few) who, for reasons of health etc. were opposed but how many of those didn't end up extrapolating bad intent by the Government? Genuine question.

          • weka 5.3.1.1.1
            6 January 2024 at 10:14 am

            Of course there are covid dissidents who don't believe in conspiracy theories.

            It doesn't require a conspiracy theory to think there were problems with the mandates. Or to feel uncomfortable with a new vaccine.

            I think your surety here speaks about your own politics and positions rather than being about the wide range of people with a wide range of beliefs that we are talking about.

            • Belladonna 5.3.1.1.1.1
              6 January 2024 at 12:57 pm

              Absolutely agree with this.

              I know, personally, several people who were firmly anti-mandate and personally anti-Covid vaccination.

              Some of them chose to be vaccinated because of Covid risk to elderly family members; some of them felt coerced into being vaccinated by the government mandates (and were very angry about this). Some of them held by their principles, and refused Covid vaccination, and weathered the storm of public disapproval and exclusion (these were even more angry)

              [Please note the word 'felt' above, I have no interest in relitigating whether or not the Government mandates actually amounted to forced vaccination]

              None of them are 'anti-science' in general (no conspiracy theories in other areas). And, indeed, a smattering of 'science' made them more concerned over a novel (mRNA) and untested vaccine (untested, as in no longitudinal studies). And within living memory we have instances of 'science' recommending medical treatments which caused major issues (thalidomide).

              • Muttonbird …
                6 January 2024 at 2:47 pm

                Some of them felt coerced into being vaccinated by the government mandates (and were very angry about this).

                The mandates worked then. As far as I know the concept was to encourage (you said coerce) people to get vaccinated for their own health and for the health those around them, and to reduce the burden on the health system.

                • weka …
                  6 January 2024 at 2:58 pm

                  encourage is a kind of weasel word the right like to use. Let's encourage beneficiaries back to work by forcing them to live in poverty, kind of thing.

                  The mandates were what they said on the label. People were required to vaccinate or lose their jobs. That wasn't encouragement, it was a mandate.

                  Part of the damage done by the mandates was the refusal of some to acknowledge the damage that was being done. The comms and social commentary added to that. The left taking an ostracise and ridicule approach is part of why we have a right wing government currently.

                  • Muttonbird …
                    6 January 2024 at 3:03 pm

                    It hard to know how many more vulnerable people's lives would have been lost were it not for mandates. Perhaps someone will model it if they haven’t already.

                    If some people didn't have to get vaccinated, they simply wouldn't do it (those people more concerned with the self rather than the many, which is a thing peculiar to the right wing) and we would have had less vaccine coverage.

                    • weka …
                      6 January 2024 at 3:05 pm

                      yes, the point of the mandate was in part to coerce vaccine hesitant people into getting vaccinated. It wasn't encouragement, it was mandatory if one wanted to keep a certain job.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      6 January 2024 at 3:23 pm

                      Everything is mandatory if.

                  • Robert Guyton …
                    6 January 2024 at 7:12 pm

                    "…encourage is a kind of weasel word…"

                    It's also a genuine word, meaning, "give support, confidence, or hope to (someone)." and so on.

                    Why the wry take?

                    • weka …
                      6 January 2024 at 8:31 pm

                      My comment was about the word encourage in a specific context. Your comment seems to be about teh word generally.

                      If the government could have encouraged the NZ population to a high vax rate without the mandates, it would have. It couldn't, hence coercion.

            • Robert Guyton 5.3.1.1.1.2
              6 January 2024 at 4:17 pm

              How could a dissident not hold conspiratorial views about the government?

              Could they convince themselves that the politicians were simply stupid, or reckless?

              Unlikely.

              I'm keen to hear from a "Covid-dissident" who doesn't think their view of Government is "it's a conspiracy".

              • weka …
                6 January 2024 at 4:29 pm

                I wouldn't call myself a covid dissident, but I'm sure there are some who would give me that label. For instance when I have talked about the problems with the vaccine mandate. I'm also vaccine hesitant (although double vaxxed against covid). None of my views or beliefs on that requires belief in a conspiracy theory.

                I value dissent as a cultural practice very highly, and probably have a higher tolerance for it than many.

                Also, if I said that there is an overarching system, run by wealthy and powerful people, that operates to control all the money in the world for the benefit of rich people and it is killing the planet, is that a conspiracy theory? Or it is just a plain language sentence about late stage neoliberal capitalism?

                Besides, I'm willing to bet that you hold some beliefs that the science geeks here would find anti-scientific. Me too. We've all got our weird ideas. I find it bizarre that there are still people who think alternative medicine is the devil's work. Or that putting salmon genes in strawberries is a good idea. But here we are.

                My own theory is that many of the covid dissidents and wider counter culture around alt health have solid intuitive understandings of something being wrong, but they don't have the science literacy or cultural concepts to parse that into something meaningful to wider society. They are as susceptible to power and control culture as the rest of us. And because they were already both fairly libertarian (or tactically libertarian as Psycho Milt pointed out on twitter) and used to being counter culture, they both care and don't care about being ostracised. Ostracisation isn't working other than to motivate them to organise.

                I think they also have some seriously problems thinking critically, and other issues. But that's not all they are.

                • Robert Guyton …
                  6 January 2024 at 5:26 pm

                  If you're a dissident, you have baulked at the Government's actions; you don't approve of them, that's what the word means, doesn't it?

                  How would you explain the Government's actions in that case?

                  Incompetence?

                  Relying on bad advice?

                  Or that they conspired to deceive or force their programme, for reasons other than the health of the people?

                  Most of the cooker/dissidentsI have engaged with on the issue have settled on the latter. Is this not the general case? Happy to hear otherwise.

                  You have indicated that you believe loss of confidence in the Government over this issue cost the Left the election.

                  Are you really a Covid-dissident?

                  • weka …
                    6 January 2024 at 5:48 pm

                    I think Labour did an incredible job during an unprecedented and very difficult time. I also think they made some mistakes. Much of that I put down to overload, but I also think some of it was simply ideological (Ardern's two NZs interview is an example).

                    Most of the cooker/dissidentsI have engaged with on the issue have settled on the latter. Is this not the general case? Happy to hear otherwise.

                    Again, I think this reflects your experience as much as anything. There are certainly lots of people down the rabbit hole. But not all people that would get called cooker are that. Maybe you need to get out more? 😉 By which I mean, the people that engage in the ostracise and ridicule strategy have boxed themselves into a corner, they see what they see.

                    Whereas the people I know who are covid dissidents are for the most part ordinary people with some strange ideas who take part in my community just like everyone else and contribute a great deal. Some of them are so far down the rabbit hole it's nearly impossible to talk with them, some of them just think the government fucked up on things like the mandates and the vaccine programme. I have friends who are the latter, but who were relatively ok with the lockdowns because of their lifestyle. I know others who think the lockdowns were heinous.

                    In all of that I still see them as humans first. What I observe about the use of the word cooker is that it's starting to move towards dehumanisation. The people all get lumped togethers, they're a hive mind, and they're all terrible. See Joe90's comments blaming them for LC when it's actually the government and health authorities and MSM that are letting this tragedy unfold.

                    Are you really a Covid-dissident?

                    No, as I said, I am not. But I remember the vaccine convos here in the first few years of the pandemic, and how difficult it was to talk about my concerns about the vaccines being developed, as someone with a long term illness and not knowing how it might impact on me (and others). It wasn't a supportive environment (fair enough, it's a political blog), but it was a feature that people's beliefs were driving their politics across the board.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      6 January 2024 at 9:00 pm

                      "(Ardern's two NZs interview is an example). "

                      I'd love to talk about those, sometime!

                      Reactions to and perceptions of details of those interviews are pivotal to the discussion, imo.

                      I still reel/marvel at the different takes on Jacinda's words (spoiler: I believe cookers received Jacinda's words wrongly and have tried many times to bring this issue to (some of their) attentions. Much hatred was spawned from those moments, and I attribute the negative responses to the cookers, or whatever lable you care to give those folk.

                    • Incognito []
                      6 January 2024 at 9:20 pm

                      You make a good point, Robert. My textbook example would be from one of the most empathetic speeches in Parliament, in my opinion, by Michael Wood, which was received by some in such a way that it caused much bad blood [no pun intended].

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      6 January 2024 at 9:37 pm

                      Thanks, Incognito and yes, you are, not unexpectedly, on point with your comment. I don't expect a fruitful discussion will in fact eventuate, but at least I'm encouraged to find that others (you, at least), are aware of this situation.

                      Today's discussion around differentiating and assigning lables to the lively players in the Covid Event has been really interesting, imo, though there have been no definite lines drawn, rules set, as I expected. That there weren't is not a reason to despair about the process of debate; it's natural, imo.

                    • Incognito []
                      6 January 2024 at 10:01 pm

                      I can see weka’s point(s) and I have considerable sympathy for it. It was brave to attempt initiating a discussion around the use/over-use/mis-use/abuse of the work “cooker”. However, it was entirely predictable that it would go in many different directions given the background context akin Pandora’s Box (or the proverbial can of worms).

                      My take-home message for today would be to avoid such loaded (and often meaningless, ironically) terms and/or try articulating clearly and specifically what one means (aka say what you mean). This won’t avoid all confusion and misinterpretation but it might go some way in alleviating the worst ones.

                      The additional problem is that the ‘baggage’ from one discussion thread tends to follow to other threads like a bad on-line review that’s impossible to shake off. People build some kind of (assumed) persona/avatar of themselves but also of others and they (we) strengthen & confirm these images in & through our future interactions here on TS. And so on and so forth.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      6 January 2024 at 10:11 pm

                      I'll not use the term again.

                    • Incognito []
                      6 January 2024 at 10:21 pm

                      Respect!

                      I’d consider this a positive outcome of today’s discussion.

                    • weka []
                      6 January 2024 at 11:04 pm

                      respect from me too.

                      I thought the conversation today was interesting too, and it was good to see people hashing things out. Having a conversation about the two NZ interview etc would be great, I can’t see why that can’t be a good debate 🙂

            • Rosemary McDonald 5.3.1.1.1.3
              6 January 2024 at 5:49 pm

              Or you could call us "widely read"…ie don't blindly accept the pap pumped out by mainstream media.

              Or perhaps, since we find and reference peer reviewed scientific papers that show data that proves that despite the "safe and effective" narrative the mRNA products were nether, you could call us "not as gullible as the mainstream".

              Or perhaps you could call us "ban-hammer" bait since we cop a blow for suggesting that the mRNA shots were not such a good idea risk/benefit wise for the Young People. As was advised by the government of the day's very own Covid Vaccine Advisory Group. As was revealed via an OIA a while back. Not that the true lefties on TS would have mentioned it.

              Or you could simply call us "Legends". I haven't spoken to a single person who regretted declining the Pfizer product. (And no…we are not dead.) I've spoken to plenty who took it and have vowed never again.

              Of course the Good, True Lefties on TS would have to be brave and step outside their echo chamber to meet any of them. Or the regretful simply wouldn't risk the rabid opprobrium by telling their true thoughts on the matter.

              [1. you’re flaming. 2. I looked at the mod notes (front and back end) for the past three years and what I see is you repeatedly being put into premod and/or banned for failing to present evidence when asked by a mod, or failing to respond to mod requests. 3. you also tend to disappear when the mods ask for a response.

              All three of those are consistent patterns of behaviour that have taken up a lot of moderator time on TS.

              I can also see that moderators put a lot of time into trying to get your to change the patterns of behaviour and the last mod notes in the backend were basically about us giving up because it’s clear you had no intention of changing.

              You are back from a very long ban and straight back into the flaming, and misrepresenting moderation. Neither of those are tenable here.

              I’m not willing to use my time trying to get you to change your behaviour, nor wait around for you to respond.

              I really wish you would sort this out in yourself, because you have a much longer history of bringing good debate to TS. Please give this some thought on your next ban. 6 months – weka]

              • weka …
                6 January 2024 at 6:46 pm

                mod note.

              • Molly …
                7 January 2024 at 8:40 am

                Hi Rosemary,

                Missed seeing you on here, but not here often. Do you have a Twitter account, or can I find you elsewhere?

              • SPC …
                31 January 2024 at 6:41 pm

                Those vulnerable to any infection because of poor immunity (in some part age related) were dependent on being in a country with a successful border bubble, or privilege of a secure personal bubble – in part created by others having up to 6 months immunity by vaccine.

                Of course those who survived have no regrets about not taking the vaccine and those who did, now only threatened by a milder omicron and with the health system able to cope (and with anti-virals etc), wonder if they had to vaccinated to be safe.

                That is because we vaccinated before ending the bubble, and then had a vaccine (for up to 6 months prevention from infection from delta) but then got hit with the transition to the more infectious but less deadly omicron.

                That those in good health wonder at the need for boosters on and on, when it does not prevent infection and the illness is milder, does not make a case for not being vaccinated before this was known and some safeguard before ending the border bubble was required.

          • Cricklewood 5.3.1.1.2
            6 January 2024 at 6:35 pm

            Yes Robert, I was and still am firmly against the mandates. They did more harm than good if you look at the bigger picture. For very little extra gain in vaccine coverage we've managed to alienate a significantly large group of people and it will take years to repair the damage to society.

            Mandates are a big reason we have our curent govt as the dissafected vote swung in behind Winston.

            Id argue the damage we're going to see over the next 3 years is a direct result of Jacinda Arden going back on her word and introducing the mandates.

        • UncookedSelachimorpha 5.3.1.2
          6 January 2024 at 11:18 am

          The last three on that list are who I think of when the term 'cookers' is used.

          So maybe it is a perfectly good term, just is being misused to include #1 on the list.

          Bit like the word 'nazi', has specific and real meaning, but often misused by applying to non-nazi things..

          • weka 5.3.1.2.1
            6 January 2024 at 12:22 pm

            The last three on that list are who I think of when the term 'cookers' is used.

            So maybe it is a perfectly good term, just is being misused to include #1 on the list.

            It's also being used to include anyone who dissents from the the mainstream view on the pandemic whether they hold problematic views or not.

            I don't think there is any coming back from that misuse, the term is now solidly a pejorative.

            Cooker is an Australian idiom used as an othering word. It doesn't have the kind of history that Nazi does. Not terribly surprising, but I am seeing a number of lefties in this conversation wanting to reinforce their prejudices.

            The problem I have is that cooker is probably in breach of the site Policy in the way it gets used here,

            What we’re not prepared to accept are pointless personal attacks, or tone or language that has the effect of excluding others. We are intolerant of people starting or continuing flamewars where there is little discussion or debate.

            https://thestandard.org.nz/policy/

            As a mod, I'm increasingly feeling like I need to address this, in the same way I had to address the use of terf.

            Lefties are often not good a looking at the mote in their own eye.

            • Robert Guyton 5.3.1.2.1.1
              6 January 2024 at 12:26 pm

              "Lefties are often not good a looking at the mote in their own eye."

              "Lefties" is a pejorative term on Kiwiblog.

              • weka …
                6 January 2024 at 1:06 pm

                and? I'm not understanding your point here Robert.

                • Robert Guyton …
                  6 January 2024 at 1:37 pm

                  Meaning, meaning is also dependent upon the audience/user group. What's pejorative to one group can be benign to another.

                  • weka …
                    6 January 2024 at 2:18 pm

                    ok, I agree with that. I think this conversation has demonstrated that the people on TS that like to use the word cooker here, use it as a pejorative.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      6 January 2024 at 3:07 pm

                      Ah, but there is more than one group here on TS. Some find it provocative, others quite mild (probably) as I do.

                    • weka []
                      6 January 2024 at 4:14 pm

                      true, but from a mod pov, it’s not about how you feel about the word, it’s about how the word gets used in conversations in the wider political context.

                      For instance, if someone decided that the word slag was mild but used it to talk about women in pejorative ways, I would moderate irrespective of the user’s feelings about the word.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      6 January 2024 at 4:05 pm

                      Imho, 'conspiracy theorist(s)' is a fairer and more descriptive term, if a bit long-winded, although some would consider it pejorative too.

                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conspiracy_theories

                      Liz Gunn didn't make it onto Wikipedia's list of COVID-19 conspiracy theorists, but she is on a NZ-specific list of anti-vaccination activists.

                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:New_Zealand_anti-vaccination_activists

                      During the 2023 election, NZ Loyal received 1.20% of the party vote (34,456 votes), and won no electorates, so did not enter parliament. Gunn had claimed during the campaign that her NZ Loyal party would win 2 million votes. In response to the preliminary results, Gunn stated that New Zealand was being ruled by a "criminal cabal and at the very least, utter bullies."
                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liz_Gunn#2023_general_election

                      I don't like bullies, but Gunn's anti-vaccination activism is not for me.

                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine_misinformation_and_hesitancy

                    • weka []
                      6 January 2024 at 4:18 pm

                      the problem with conspiracy theorist as a term is that not all covid dissidents believe in conspiracy theories. See Belladonna’s comment below.

                      I think covid conspiracy theorists are a subset of covid dissidents, but perhaps it’s more a Venn diagram with overlaps.

                      Gunn is fascinating because she’s obviously disconnected from reality in important ways without being classically mentally ill. She’s also probably dangerous. Will be interesting to see what she does over this term.

                      My own view is that while I think people like her need to be addressed directly, I think that on its own is insufficient, and we also need to build bridges with the much larger group of people that have been or are being radicalised to that culture. Literally none of the lefties who favour ostracisation and ridicule as an approach have explained how that would work and what the endgame is.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      6 January 2024 at 4:21 pm

                      But no-one would decide that the word "slag" was mild.

                      The assumption being made around "cooker" is that it's in the same category as "slag". Has that been established anywhere?

                    • weka []
                      6 January 2024 at 4:37 pm

                      Red Logix once referred to me as a trollop. He was trying to make a play on the word, but obviously thought the joke was ok. The feminists and some leftie men in the room were unimpressed and took him to task. This is what I mean about it not being about the feelings of the person using the word when there is a wider political context.

                      I don’t think cooker is the same as slag, but I still think it’s sufficiently problematic in ways you might not be appreciating.

                      The trollope comment, back in the days when the debate was more personalised,

                      https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-10012015/#comment-949181

                    • weka []
                      6 January 2024 at 4:38 pm

                      terf is the better comparator, but you and I sit on opposite sides of that fence, so it didn’t seem that useful in our conversation.

                      It has the same dynamic of users not understanding just how harmful the term is though.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      6 January 2024 at 5:15 pm

                      Most, if not all readers here would regard "trollop" as rather unkind and wouldn't be used fondly, unless accompanied by a note.

                      "Terf" is clearly inflammatory, as would be obvious to anyone who's been reading here over the past year or 2.

                      "Cooker" though, has no history like "slag", "trollop" or "terf".

                      What I'm asking about is whether it is in fact, inflammatory to anyone other than a cooker 🙂 and if not, why not use it, if you so choose?

                      (I don't buy the "meth" allusion, btw)

                    • weka []
                      6 January 2024 at 5:38 pm

                      Pejoratives are generally inflammatory to the people they are about/directed at. Does it matter if its only covid dissidents who are upset about the word?

                      I’ve been increasingly uncomfortable about how the word is used and almost never use it now myself. The conversation today has shown that a number of people here who use the word, think of it as a pejorative. I also asked on twitter, and likewise, there were those who understood and those who came up alternatives such as ‘fuckwits’. Do you really think it’s ok to use a term that people consider a synonym of fuckwit?

                      I remember a time when many lefties used the term terf, unaware that it was also associated with the worst misogyny many of us have seen online. Gender critical feminists knew about it though.

                      In the end I had to moderate the use of the word on TS, because the leftie liberals were committed to their ignorance about how the word was used and its impact. Or maybe they knew and didn’t care.

                    • Cricklewood []
                      6 January 2024 at 6:40 pm

                      Cookers not a great word, in Aussie it gets used to describe people that have signifcant mental health issues (bipolar etc) it does way more harm than good and honestly beneath you.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      6 January 2024 at 6:39 pm

                      the problem with conspiracy theorist as a term is that not all covid dissidents believe in conspiracy theories.

                      Yes, including Venn diagrams – was suggesting 'Conspiracy theorists' as a less derogatory alternative to 'cookers', on the basis of my current understanding of this particular meaning of 'cookers'.

                      Cooker – a derogatory term for conspiracy theorist; according to the National Dictionary Centre, "a derogatory term for a person involved in protests against vaccine mandates, lockdowns and a range of other issues perceived to be infringing on personal freedom". Emerging during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia, the word made the shortlist for "Word of the Year" in 2022. The term is also loosely associated with the far right. An explanation of the term given by an Australian in answer to a question on Twitter is that "It refers to soneone(sic) whose brain has been cooked by overexposure to conspiracy theories and unhinged online rhetoric"

                      Anyway, this convo has left me behind. I too like Francesca's “Covid dissidents” @5.1, although since Covid dissidemts/dissenters are typically opposed to one or more aspects of the pandemic response, maybe consider 'pandemic response-dissidents'.

                      [Edit: this is the missing link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_English_vocabulary#Words_of_Australian_origin – Incognito]

                    • weka []
                      6 January 2024 at 6:51 pm

                      link please

                    • weka []
                      6 January 2024 at 6:54 pm

                      some Ocker on twitter reckons?

                      That dictionary def is broader, and that’s what I observe. As explained, there are people who oppose government pandemic response who don’t believe in conspiracy theories about covid.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      6 January 2024 at 7:19 pm

                      " Does it matter if its only covid dissidents who are upset about the word?"

                      It should only be cookers who are upset by the word, surely?

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      6 January 2024 at 7:24 pm

                      "I remember a time when many lefties used the term terf, unaware that it was also associated with the worst misogyny many of us have seen online. "

                      But is "cooker"" associated with the worst (anything) many of us have seen online. "

                      Nope.

                      Not fair to conflate the 2 terms.

                      That said, I'm not going to die in a ditch for "cooker", though you might be assuming that I would. I could hardly care less. Call them dingbats, or crack-pots, if you want to. I thought "cookers" was kinda cool 🙂

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      6 January 2024 at 9:55 pm

                      Weka @6:51 pm – sorry for not giving the link for that definition.

                      It's cut and pasted from a Wikipedia list of words of Australian origin – 'Cooker' is listed between 'Bogan' and ''Didgeridoo".

                      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_English_vocabulary#Words_of_Australian_origin

                      I understand that there are people who oppose government pandemic response who don’t believe in conspiracy theories about the Covid-19 pandemic, for instance some of those opposed to vaccine mandates or MIQ.

                    • Incognito []
                      6 January 2024 at 10:08 pm

                      Ta

                      I’ve added the link to your comment for the convenience of others.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      7 January 2024 at 9:26 am

                      "Gunn is fascinating because she’s obviously disconnected from reality in important ways without being classically mentally ill. She’s also probably dangerous."

                      "Gunnites"?

                      (Those who align with Liz's thinking?)

                      That'd be a sub-group but a definite measure; you could ask, "Do/did you support Liz Gunn's New Zealand Loyal parties pronouncements 🙂

                    • weka []
                      7 January 2024 at 10:01 am

                      Gunnites works! Seems an appropriate term for that subset.

            • David 5.3.1.2.1.2
              6 January 2024 at 1:15 pm

              My understanding is that the pejorative form of the word 'cooked' is associated with meth, as in 'cooking' meth. The implication is the target of the pejorative is impaired by drug use. It's use is far wider than applying to covid (I was called a 'cooker' for supporting wider tree protections in Auckland); it's become a lazy go-to for people who prefer labelling people than understanding or discussing their point of view.

              • weka …
                6 January 2024 at 1:16 pm

                pretty much. Or even people who prefer labelling people than understanding them enough to have a meaningful political critique.

                • Robert Guyton …
                  6 January 2024 at 1:42 pm

                  Labeling?

                  Isn't that what you are seeking to do here, weka?

                  "Cooker" has enough objection here for it to be rejected, it seems to me.

                  Finding a new, appropriate lable is quite tricky but also quite fun, imo.

                  • weka …
                    6 January 2024 at 2:21 pm

                    dunno. I guess it depends on what you mean by label 😉

                    Terms are useful for shorthand. I use leftie a lot despite it having quite the range of meanings. Language is about communication, and the goal here is to look at whether certain language is used and understood as intended, and whether that's useful or not.

              • Robert Guyton …
                6 January 2024 at 1:39 pm

                The pejorative form may be, but the light-hearted form isn't.

                "Nazi" is rarely used light-heartily, cooker often is, imo.

                Good to hear of your work with trees.

        • Tony Veitch 5.3.1.3
          6 January 2024 at 11:36 am

          English is a wonderfully inventive language – so how about "covidents"

      • francesca 5.3.2
        6 January 2024 at 10:25 am

        Let's face it

        Back in those days anyone who questioned the govt response, or even possible quibbles about Pfizers trials (as published by the BMJ)were absolutely pilloried and mocked .

        I myself noticed a kind of patriotic fervor in myself,….sacrificing for the common good !….buying the Ashley tea towel…privately judging others.."no way is that a bubble!!"

        that I'm not now all that happy about.

        At the time children had very little risk, they were to have the vaccine to protect their grannies.

        But was that justified?re the fact that transmission wasn't blocked by the vaccine and generally children weren't affected badly enough by the virus to develop full blown symptoms

        Yes there was a tiny risk we were all made aware of

        A very few young children died of covid.

        But when people died of vaccine related myocarditis those deaths were valued differently

        In that climate of obedience to the science there was a very real struggle to have vaccine associated injury recognized and treated. Thank goodness for those people who did go against the current and speak up

        • francesca 5.3.2.1
          6 January 2024 at 10:45 am

          "Spoke"..

        • Nic the NZer 5.3.2.2
          6 January 2024 at 12:12 pm

          A lot of this seems like how people behaved rather than any official insights (which were backed by evidence). In particular Children under 12 were never expected to get vaccinated and the health departments message indicated the risk of unvaccinated under 12s being severely effected by covid was thought extremely small. I also never saw any official suggestion that transmission was blocked by the vaccine. The suggestion was that the severity of infection would be limited by the vaccine making people less infectious, but officially nothing stronger was ever presented (or tested in trials).

          I also was well aware of the few vaccine related myocarditis deaths as these were reported in NZ. It shouldn't be a trade off, buy these would likely have been treated by those people with symptoms after vaccine seeking medical advice. The 'advice' presented by the anti-vaccine groups was not to be aware of the risks but instead to be exposed to the virus unvaccinated, and this always carried higher risk of myocarditis than vaccination.

          • francesca 5.3.2.2.1
            6 January 2024 at 12:56 pm

            I gathered that those at risk of myocarditis were also the group unlikely to suffer severe effects from covid .

            The govt was strongly encouraging parents to get their children vaccinated.

            There were social consequences for those that chose not to , just as there were in the wider population

            Personal anecdotes available.

            I also remember the struggle for young women to have recognized changes in their menstrual cycles and also their endemetriosis post vaccine.

            They were also called anti science and hysterical until it was validated.

            We are still learning the effects of covid and the vaccine .

            Science is science because scientists are always re evaluating according to new evidence.

            Blind faith is not helpful

            • francesca 5.3.2.2.1.1
              6 January 2024 at 1:13 pm

              Those at most risk of myocarditis from the vaccine were younger males from 12 to 17
              Those at most risk of myocarditis from covid infection were males over 50.
              One group is not the same as the other

              None of us were forced to take the vaccine but there was a very strong expectation in the public messaging that we would be selfish and negligent leading to our grannies deaths if we
              didnt

              Overall

              I have no regrets at being fully vaccinated, but I did have some qualms about the messaging

            • Nic the NZer 5.3.2.2.1.2
              6 January 2024 at 1:30 pm

              "I gathered that those at risk of myocarditis were also the group unlikely to suffer severe effects from covid ."

              I don't think this is relevant (and I assume you mean younger males are at higher risk of this adverse vaccine effect?). As far as I am aware the mechanism for myocarditis is the same in both the vaccine and via infection. This means its a question of risk trade off. All the studies demonstrated reduced risk of adverse effects from covid infection after vaccination in all age cohorts. Even in this age cohort its trading off accepting a larger risk for a significantly smaller risk (which could also be mitigated by decent vaccination follow up).

              The only thing I do think that the health department could have done better was to recognise that this vaccine needed to be injected muscularly, and that the standard practice in NZ didn't check that the injection had not directly penetrated a blood vessel (this check can discomfort the patient). The procedure for administration should have been part of the vaccinator training as soon as this was understood and this may have significantly reduced (maybe eliminated) this risk.

              "The govt was strongly encouraging parents to get their children vaccinated."

              Not U12s as far as I observed. There was a track on the vaccination rate, but every message I saw was very clear that U12s didn't need to be vaccinated for participation in any kind of activity.

              • Francesca …
                6 January 2024 at 2:57 pm

                Those most at risk of myocarditis from the covid vaccine were young men between 12 and 17.

                Those most at risk from myocarditis from covid infection were older men after the age of 50

                And the govt was strongly encouraging parents to get their 5-11 year old children vaccinated

                “The government is strongly encouraging parents to have their children vaccinated against COVID-19, but I want to be clear that this is a choice for parents. The Government has no intention of making COVID-19 vaccinations mandatory for anyone in this age group,” Chris Hipkins said.

                https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/government-confirms-covid-19-vaccinations-protect-tamariki

                Once again, no one was forced to have the vaccine, but there were strong pressures produced by the public messaging that had social consequences .

        • Bearded Git 5.3.2.3
          6 January 2024 at 2:18 pm

          I'm pretty sure the science said that people who were vaccinated shed less covid and so were less likely to infect others.

          Nobody scientific was saying that covid transmission was "blocked" by having a vaccination.

          It is generally accepted that the Jacinda/Ashley approach saved 15-20,000 NZ lives compared with Boris's ham fisted efforts.

          • Francesca 5.3.2.3.1
            6 January 2024 at 2:48 pm

            The inference was that younger people should be vaccinated to save their grannies .As younger people were less inclined to have severe covid and therefore less inclined to be shedding, the connection between getting vaccinated and saving granny wasn't quite correct .But it served a purpose.

            • weka 5.3.2.3.1.1
              6 January 2024 at 2:54 pm

              I don't think is quite true. With earlier variants, vaccination helped prevent transmission.

              Also, most vaccination works because populations do it. It is inherently an act of solidarity as well as personal protection. The narrative that said we shouldn't vaccinate children to save old people because children shouldn't be expected to help old people by personal sacrifice, is odd to me. But then I think old people are worth saving and I see the benefits to children of both having old people around and of being involved in protecting them. Likewise helping people with health disabilities.

              • Francesca …
                6 January 2024 at 3:15 pm

                I think the lockdowns did more to prevent transmission .Transmission was never tested for in the vaccine ,but I do remember the puzzlement when people started getting covid two or more times after the vaccine ,.There was uncertainty around it, as in , is this residual from the first infection?Why is this happening ?

                It was a setback.Like a lot of things, we were learning as we went, there were no certainties, as in the masking.First absolutely not required, then required in all public places.It took a while before we realised it was transmitted aerially.

                I suggest we still have a long way to go.Science is not fixed or settled, we test what we think we know all the time.

                • weka …
                  6 January 2024 at 4:08 pm

                  I was thinking about this recently too, about how much we didn't know at the start and having to err on the side of caution. People leaving their delivered groceries to sit for three days, hospital staff doing major cleanse routines before going into their home they shared with vulnerable people. It was full on and understandable. Reasonable imo too.

                  I think there was a lot of confusion and poor comms around different kinds of vaccinations. Probably the health bods assumed people knew that some vaccines don't prevent all instances of a disease, but we really needed clear and persistent explanations about that and we just didn't get them.

                  Yes lock down was a big part of it. And masks and hygiene etc. We needed all the things. That too was hard for some to get their head around at the time.

                • Nic the NZer …
                  6 January 2024 at 7:02 pm

                  The lockdowns were effective at the time, but only with the earlier variants. NZ (and Australia) was fortunate in being able to effectively close its borders and put all entries through quarantine. The same approach would simply not have worked in places like the UK however as they are more connected and by the time this was operational you would have been years of constant lockdowns away from allowing free movement in any country where that was tried. NZ started lockdowns with still a reasonably small number of cases in NZ which is why you could see they had a limited time frame.

                  By the time NZ was vaccinating delta variant was arriving and due to its higher infection rate NZ quarantine was becoming no longer effective. Omicron was worse again and there was probably a case per day getting through quarantine and infecting people after arriving into NZ.

    • gsays 5.4
      6 January 2024 at 9:44 am

      Heroes of the resistance.

      Just kidding.

      Will have a think, although a term is still risking implying a hive mind. As I have said before, in regards to those who gathered on Parliament grounds, there was diversity in the motivations for the congregation.

      • weka 5.4.1
        6 January 2024 at 9:57 am

        quite. We have the same problem with terms like left and liberal. I don't think that is insurmountable, it's that we just need to develop language for a new political dynamic and cohorts that have arisen.

    • Pat 5.5
      6 January 2024 at 9:47 am

      The most accurate, encompassing and respectful descriptor may be 'people whom I disagree with'.

      • Robert Guyton 5.5.1
        6 January 2024 at 9:49 am

        …on a number of issues, however…

        • gsays 5.5.1.1
          6 January 2024 at 9:54 am

          Surely it is way more constructive and beneficial to both parties to seek what there is in common?

          And no, not the cohort you mentioned at 5.3, but those who aren't right out on the fringe.

          • Robert Guyton 5.5.1.1.1
            6 January 2024 at 10:07 am

            Are those from the "cooker" party 🙂 seeking recognition of that commonality, do you think? Is there anything you can point-to that would illustrate that?

            • gsays 5.5.1.1.1.1
              6 January 2024 at 10:21 am

              My Nana said it was rude to answer a question with a question.

              Surely it is way more constructive and beneficial to both parties to seek what there is in common?

              • Robert Guyton …
                6 January 2024 at 12:21 pm

                What was your question? You didn't ask one. Surely your Nana would have known that 🙂

                • Francesca …
                  6 January 2024 at 1:20 pm

                  Maybe your Nana could have shown you what question marks mean.I understood GSays question and agree with him.I would answer his question with the word yes

                  • Robert Guyton …
                    6 January 2024 at 1:27 pm

                    It's easy enough to put a question-mark at the end of a sentence that isn't a question.

                    • Francesca …
                      6 January 2024 at 1:39 pm

                      I read it as a question .Maybe a rhetorical question, but still a question you could give a yes or no answer to.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      6 January 2024 at 1:45 pm

                      What was the question?

                      Please (my Nana encouraged the use of good manners 🙂

                    • Francesca …
                      6 January 2024 at 2:42 pm

                      The question as I read it was , and this is a paraphrase "Surely its more useful to find common ground ?" GSays not laying down the law, gently enquiring

                      I'll ask it too

                      Do we exclude, or do we find common ground?

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      6 January 2024 at 3:13 pm

                      "Surely" makes it a statement, not a question, but I know what you've taken from the comment, so…it's, imo, wiser to keep your enemies close 🙂 Maintaining lines of communication and a friendly atmosphere is sensible. My question is: are those-who-are-sometimes-referred-to-as-cookers acting in that way? Or are they excluding themselves by communicating at closed meetings, on less-used social media sites etc?

                    • francesca []
                      6 January 2024 at 6:47 pm

                      Well when you use such an inexact term as "cooker"you can't with any confidence predict their behavior

                      We had friends who absolutely were not going to get the vaccine

                      But they treated our decision with respect, didn't visit us during lockdown and kept in touch via phone

                      I could never call them cookers or even anti vaxxers .They are our friends and respect our choices.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      6 January 2024 at 7:14 pm

                      "cooker" is an "inexact term"?

                      Can you provide a more exact…term..?

                    • francesca []
                      6 January 2024 at 7:26 pm

                      Well I thought I already had by suggesting covid dissidents
                      And I wouldn’t presume to have any clue about how such a varied group communicates
                      It would be just as varied as their rationales

                    • Francesca []
                      6 January 2024 at 7:39 pm

                      The thing is you can't be exact when covering a whole group of people with differing motivations.

                      You can at least be peaceable and respectful by using a broad term that's not insulting .

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      6 January 2024 at 7:52 pm

                      "The thing is you can't be exact when covering a whole group of people with differing motivations.

                      You can at least be peaceable and respectful by using a broad term that's not insulting ."

                      Indeed.

                      Can you suggest …a broad term that's not insulting" ?

                    • francesca []
                      6 January 2024 at 8:10 pm

                      Really?

                      I suggested …as you know.. "covid dissidents"to cover that broad group

                  • gsays …
                    6 January 2024 at 7:43 pm

                    Thanks Fransesca, more important things came up in my day…

        • Pat 5.5.1.2
          6 January 2024 at 10:06 am

          Id suggest the quantity is irrelevant…and it is also reciprocal.

    • gsays 5.6
      6 January 2024 at 11:32 am

      It's just occurred to me 'cooker' is a thought terminating cliche.

      Straight out of the Denton Document. Don't discuss the issue, pillory the messenger.

    • bwaghorn 5.7
      6 January 2024 at 11:39 am

      Act voter, springs to mind as a suitable name

      • Robert Guyton 5.7.1
        6 January 2024 at 12:22 pm

        (With the radical cookers coalescing around Winston)

        • bwaghorn 5.7.1.1
          6 January 2024 at 12:53 pm

          I know 3 ,ones was in full p addiction (14 months clean now wohooo) 1 is full libertarian and ones a fear full alternative lovey, hard to get one name for them in all honesty.

          • weka 5.7.1.1.1
            6 January 2024 at 12:59 pm

            we just haven't coined the language yet.

            But think about who here might be covered by the term leftie, and the range of beliefs involved.

            weka

            Bill

            Ad

            micky savage

            Lprent

            then

            bwaghorn

            Robert Guyton

            Rosemary McDonald

            Adam

            Joe90

            Anne

            Visubversa

            etc.

    • Obtrectator 5.8
      6 January 2024 at 11:56 am

      Another suggestion:

      SURD – Self-obsessed U-[your choice of adjective] Rationality Denier.

      Kind of apt, seeing that "surd" is another term in maths for an irrational number (i.e. one which can't be expressed as a ratio of two whole numbers, such as √5). Lends itself to such expansions as ab-surd, etc.

      (If you include the "O" as well from "obsessed" you get SOURD – also rather fitting, as it's French for deaf.)

      • Rolling-on-Gravel 5.8.1
        6 January 2024 at 7:12 pm

        Please don't use that word as an insult. I am Deaf myself and I do not appreciate that word being used to insult other people whether it is in French or English, thanks.

    • joe90 5.9
      6 January 2024 at 12:33 pm

      term that can be used in place of cooker

      Nope.

      Forecasted costs associated with long covid (PASC) are astronomical and a study showed that vaccination and multiple boosters dramatically lower the risk of long covid (PASC).

      Those actively opposing measures that mitigate the impact of covid on the community deserve every pejorative coming their way.

      • weka 5.9.1
        6 January 2024 at 1:02 pm

        those that actively oppose measures to retain women's sex based rights deserve every pejorative coming their way.

        There are plenty of things that the mainstream did to make LC the disaster it is too. Including people here who are agin covid dissidents.

        Meanwhile, on TS, that's how flame wars happen and then communities implode. And I'm not going to moderate a bubble of sanctimony.

      • Belladonna 5.9.2
        6 January 2024 at 1:10 pm

        Those actively opposing measures that mitigate the impact of covid on the community deserve every pejorative coming their way.

        Except that all of the restrictive measures (apart from facemasks in A&E wards in hospitals) – have been removed. There is no requirement for vaccination, for masking, for social distancing, for limits on gatherings, or any of the other 'Covid restrictions' which happened in 2020 & 2021.

        All of those people who resisted those measures (whether passively or actively) then, are indistinguishable from the rest of 'the community', now. They haven't changed their behaviour, we have.

        [Yes, Yes, I know there are some people who still mask in public – less than 1 in 500 from my observation – they are the outliers, now]

        • Bearded Git 5.9.2.1
          6 January 2024 at 2:25 pm

          I have had 6 covid vacs now Bella…oddly few of the pro vaccine people I know have kept up with their vaccines despite knowing full well they should have.

        • weka 5.9.2.2
          6 January 2024 at 2:29 pm

          really good point about behaviour change.

        • Muttonbird 5.9.2.3
          6 January 2024 at 2:54 pm

          All of those people who resisted those measures (whether passively or actively) then, are indistinguishable from the rest of 'the community', now. They haven't changed their behaviour, we have.

          Do we know their behaviour hasn't changed? Next time perhaps they will be a little more socially conscious knowing their predicted mass deaths and birth anomalies from the mRNA vaccine haven't eventuated.

          My behaviour has changed. I'd not had a flu vaccine until before last winter when I did the double (flu and Covid). I'll probably do this from now on but would have been unlikely to were it not for the pandemic.

          • Robert Guyton 5.9.2.3.1
            6 January 2024 at 3:18 pm

            "Next time perhaps they will be a little more socially conscious knowing their predicted mass deaths and birth anomalies from the mRNA vaccine haven't eventuated."

            Ha! Those who predicted that, believe it more than ever before, thanks to their gullibility, their crack-pot social media feeds and the "obvious cover-up" of "their" whistleblower, doncha know!

        • Obtrectator 5.9.2.4
          6 January 2024 at 6:56 pm

          "I know there are some people who still mask in public"

          Me, for one. And all vaxxes up to date. When you've a disabled partner with at least two co-morbidities, you can't afford to chance it. I've only recently stopped keeping my going-out clothes separate from my indoor ones. But I still sanitise on entering any store, and wash and sanitise after coming home.

      • Francesca 5.9.3
        6 January 2024 at 1:31 pm

        Well Joe , you better come to this neck of the woods and protest.Covid is absolutely rampant in the area, no one wears masks, there is no campaign up and running for people to keep their vaccines up to date, super spreader events go unrestricted and people are still getting sick and dying of covid

    • David 5.10
      6 January 2024 at 6:54 pm

      The problem is that the 'them' are not a homogenous group. Their views are often nuanced, and in some cases are worthy of consideration.

      The term 'dissident' has been suggested, but dissident generally means someone who opposes official policy. I would suggest that if you consider the totality of the official response towards Covid (including the lock downs and mandates) the 'them' may end up being a hell of a big group!

  6. Obtrectator 6
    6 January 2024 at 9:51 am

    Nimps – Not In My Personal Space.

    • Robert Guyton 6.1
      6 January 2024 at 10:11 am

      Nimps is good and cuts to the heart of the matter; "Get your needle out of MY arm!"

  7. Visubversa 7
    6 January 2024 at 10:15 am

    There are many forms of science denial from chemical to biological. They overlap in some places, but not others. It would be hard to find an all encompassing term to cover that sort of range.

    • weka 7.1
      6 January 2024 at 10:25 am

      completely agree. I just pointed out the problem with referencing Scientific American when calling other people anti-scientific 😈

      I'm not asking for a term for anti-scientific people though (whatever that means in this context).

  8. Reality 8
    6 January 2024 at 2:30 pm

    The recently screened Breathless on TV1 was a potent reminder of the chaos in British hospitals when Covid was rampant three plus years ago. That same chaos never happened here due to necessary steps taken by Government and health experts.

    However, I will never ever forget the then National opposition screaming "Open the Borders" almost on a daily basis. Only concerned about businesses struggling but no concern for people's health, or pressure on our hospitals. Just as cold and cynical as the last edict "keep smoking kiwis, we want your tobacco taxes".

  9. Muttonbird 9
    6 January 2024 at 2:39 pm

    If we're banning words, could we also do away with the word woke? If the test is pejorative or not, woke is certainly pejorative.

    • weka 9.1
      6 January 2024 at 3:03 pm

      it's not the only criteria (and it's not a ban), but give me three examples on TS of what you mean and I'll take a look.

      • Muttonbird 9.1.1
        6 January 2024 at 3:14 pm

        Agreed, it's probably not the only test. Others might be whether the word is widely accepted by the mainstream, or has been in use for a long time.

        Oddly (or not) the use of the word woke here has reduced since the the departure of Jacinda Ardern…and Redlogix.

        • weka 9.1.1.1
          6 January 2024 at 4:04 pm

          woke is a problematic word for a whole bunch of reasons. It's not at the top of my radar of issues in the commentariat on TS.

    • Incognito 9.2
      6 January 2024 at 3:15 pm

      With very few temporary exceptions, we don’t ban words here on TS as such. We moderate on intentional behaviour that runs counter the site’s Policy and if/when this becomes pattern behaviour, we ban the commenter after one or more warnings depending on the severity of the behaviour.

      • Muttonbird 9.2.1
        6 January 2024 at 3:30 pm

        Ok, I wrote that after reading weka's comment:

        The problem I have is that cooker is probably in breach of the site Policy in the way it gets used here,

        What we’re not prepared to accept are pointless personal attacks, or tone or language that has the effect of excluding others. We are intolerant of people starting or continuing flamewars where there is little discussion or debate.

        https://thestandard.org.nz/policy/

        As a mod, I'm increasingly feeling like I need to address this, in the same way I had to address the use of terf.

        Lefties are often not good a looking at the mote in their own eye.

        I guess people using the word woke can't fall foul of the policy because we're mostly woke lefties and need a good telling off every now and then.

        • weka 9.2.1.1
          6 January 2024 at 4:02 pm
          1. to reinforce what Incognito just said. I haven't said I would ban the word cooker. Like the word terf, it depends on how it is used. Atm it strongly appears that cooker is mostly used as a pejorative. My thinking rn is to limit its use because there are people who comment here who would find the language had the effect of excluding others. I can't see the rationale for letting people use it in the same way I wouldn't for lots of other words directed at commenters or potential commenters.
          2. I have offered to take a look at the word woke, but instead of you doing the mahi to back up your concern, you seem to just want to sit on TS and yet again take pot shots at moderation. You have history of this and its tedious. I will now take it that your point about 'woke' wasn't a point about the word at all and will ignore your complaint.
          • Robert Guyton 9.2.1.1.1
            6 January 2024 at 7:59 pm

            "My thinking rn is to limit its use"

            So, not a ban on "cooker" but a use-limit" somehow..?

            How might that work?

            • weka 9.2.1.1.1.1
              6 January 2024 at 8:28 pm

              someone uses the word cooker pejoratively, I ask them to stop, they either do, or they don't and they cop a ban. Usual process and pretty much what I did with terf.

        • Incognito 9.2.1.2
          6 January 2024 at 4:17 pm

          You are missing the point. The use of certain words/language can be trigger points for moderation of intentional behaviour, especially when used in a repetitive habitual manner (i.e. over-used) although it then often tends to lose its original meaning (e.g. misused) and become ‘weaker’ bordering on meaningless and therefore useless (in/for robust debate). As always, it depends on the context and, as always, it depends on sound & fair judgement.

          With written communication, as we do here on TS, it’s much harder to interpret meaning and intention than with in-person face-to-face interaction. Some people are more prone to jumping to (right/wrong) conclusions (e.g. if the shoe fits) than others are. Humans and human communication are fascinatingly beautiful and complex (awesome) and are always richer and more diverse than we can imagine (thankfully).

          • adam 9.2.1.2.1
            7 January 2024 at 9:49 am

            Not true sorry, I was banned for a year for the use of a word. So you may think what you wrote is how you behave and most of the time it is, but the reality is not so wrapped up in a nice little bow. I stand by what I said by the way. And have learnt all the banned words that their are on the standard. You all have fostered the best and most visceral type of censorship – self censorship.

            • weka 9.2.1.2.1.1
              7 January 2024 at 10:03 am

              which mod banned you?

            • weka 9.2.1.2.1.2
              7 January 2024 at 10:21 am

              this one?

              https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-08-10-2020/#comment-1757390

              A 6 month ban because you posted something potentially defamatory and thus put the site owners at legal risk, and then you doubled down and posted it again and had a go at the mods

              Not quite being banned for the use of a word is it. I don't remember what the word was, but I'm willing to be it could be used on TS in other contexts and not be a problem.

              What you were actually banned for was something else entirely.

              • weka …
                7 January 2024 at 10:30 am

                actually I can see the original comment in the back end. You accused JK of money laundering for drug cartels. Maybe what you actually meant was that in his previous life in international banking he worked for organisations that turned a blind eye to whose money they were handling, but maybe not, maybe you really meant that FJK personally was knowingly laundering money for drug cartels. Which is defamatory and you can't post things like that on site without evidence.

                You could have clarified all that at the time but you didn't.

                The thing about TS is that there have been some bad moderations at times. But generally the only content we moderate on is legal risk stuff. The rest is all about behaviour: flaming, trolling, long copypast etc, but mostly wasting moderator time and attacking mods/authors. I don't know what is so hard to understand about this.

                • weka …
                  7 January 2024 at 10:32 am

                  case in point. In that same thread, you said,

                  Key is a Tory cunt and needs to be called out for his shitfuckery, but no. Can't say that, someone will get offended.

                  to which I, who had moderated your defamatory comment, replied,

                  you can call him a Tory cunt (honestly held opinion). You can't make claims of fact about him that might end up with Lynn and Mike in court. Nothing to do with being offended, so fuck off with that bullshit lying about moderation. If you have a problem with the site policy take it up with Lynn and see how you get on.

                  apologies for telling you to fuck off though.

                  • adam …
                    14 January 2024 at 10:57 pm

                    Nope not that – it was how my expression of my opinion of the US VP which I got banned for a year for. An opinion I stand by, by the way.

                    Because when people kill your friends sons, you can forgive them – but still think of them as a specific type of scum.

                    [Again, you fail to back up your accusations with the necessary evidence such as a link to the comment that allegedly resulted in a one-year ban. Weka tried to find it, so I also tried and couldn’t find it either.

                    So, you have a few days to produce the evidence or I’ll ban you for one year and this time for real – Incognito]

                    • Incognito …
                      16 January 2024 at 10:52 am

                      Mod note

                    • adam …
                      16 January 2024 at 3:44 pm

                      My apologies mixed things up. This comment was just censored – it did not get me a ban. Happened around the same time as the 6 month ban (mentioned above by weka) which I thought was a year.

                      https://thestandard.org.nz/biden-harris/#comment-1740467

                    • Incognito []
                      16 January 2024 at 4:13 pm

                      Okidoki, apology accepted.

                      Please do yourself (!) and me a favour and research the difference between censorship and moderation. I’m fed up with accusations of censorship here and will take a hard line from now onwards with anybody who’s stupid enough to go there.

                      FYI, and a repeat of what I said before in this thread, we moderate mostly on behaviour and particularly patterns of behaviour that run counter to this site’s Policy. The most extreme moderation tool is banning and as such, we ban for behaviour and rarely for words/language only.

                      Some content might be banned too, e.g., when it is harmful (and we have a low tolerance for violence in any form), defamatory, or puts the site at legal risk and these could be considered as censorship, especially when we also delete the offending parts. However, ideas or ideologies are not banned by default unless it’s the ‘ideology’ of trolling, astroturfing, and/or DP.

                      Let’s draw a line under this and I hope I will never have to moderate you for this again.

                  • adam …
                    14 January 2024 at 11:04 pm

                    apologies for telling you to fuck off though.

                    No need to apologies, did not take it personally then, and don't now. You were well within your rights to call it out as you did.

                    And anyway I was the wanker who started the whole "fuck off" shitfuckery in the first place – So you’re the one who deserves an apology, not me.

                    So apologies for telling you to fuck off.

  10. Muttonbird 10
    6 January 2024 at 6:24 pm

    In other news, the National/ACT/NZFirst coalition government's record on crime is officially in tatters:

    Police investigate nearly double usual rate of deaths over Christmas and New Years holiday season following eight homicides

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/police-investigate-nearly-double-usual-rate-of-deaths-over-christmas-and-new-years-holiday-season-following-eight-homicides/BHE44G7EN5FL3IRKPOTS5MHRMI/

    Not a great environment out there since the election, clearly.

    • Cricklewood 10.1
      6 January 2024 at 6:45 pm

      Unfortunatly theyre still in their able to blame the previous govt time window.

      • Muttonbird 10.1.1
        6 January 2024 at 7:11 pm

        Road toll and murders both up under the new government. The numbers don't lie.

      • Muttonbird 10.1.2
        6 January 2024 at 7:27 pm

        Despite the three headed government campaigning on reducing crime and the road toll.

        Oh wait, they didn't campaign on reducing the road toll at all so the increase is in line with their policy.

        • Bearded Git 10.1.2.1
          6 January 2024 at 7:56 pm

          Didn't they campaign on road toll up (higher speed limits), smoking deaths up (we all know about their daft smoking policy), Maori deaths up (Maori Health Authority) murders up (gun policy) sub-standard domestic water deaths up (3 waters)…hell of a policy platform.

    • millsy 10.2
      7 January 2024 at 6:14 pm

      Having National in power isn't going to fix this so-call malaise that this country is in

  11. Obtrectator 11
    6 January 2024 at 10:33 pm

    Very disturbing article by George Monbiot in Saturday morning's Guardian. Any NZers known to be connected with this Atlas Network?

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/06/rishi-sunak-javier-milei-donald-trump-atlas-network

    (I’ll repeat this post in tomorrow’s Open Mike, as I don’t think many will find it now in this one.)