- Date published:
7:00 am, July 21st, 2019 - 201 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 …
Why settle for just Crimea? Looks like Pootee might be setting the stage for a grab at the rest of Ukraine.
Yes, you're quite the Russian scholar. However, I note that your carefully considered theory about those evil masterminds controlling the puppet Trump has yet to be backed up with evidence.
Продолжайте в том же духе, мой друг!
Моррисси это пизда и берет это задницу от коз……..ох как весело !
Вы упомянули коз….
On an Allegro….mon dieu !
President Putin only speaks the truth. The Ukraine was part of the USSR. It's eastern half are Russian speaking. When the Ukraine became independent in 1991 Russia had an historical agreement to use the port of the Crimea. Western Ukraine is nearer to Berlin than Madrid. During WW11 there was a strong fascist group who welcomed the German invaders. The last legitimate government was pro Russian but was toppled by a CIA funded insurrection. If Russia had wanted to it could have taken over the Ukraine in 24 hours. MH17 was shot down by Ukraine fascist forces not the Russians or the independent Russian east of the Country. The Crimea voted democratically to become part of Russia and is now so.
Ukraine was invaded by the Soviets.
Liberated from German Nazi occupation by the Soviets. Re- FIFY.
Reoccupied by the same totalitarian Stalinist regime responsible for the genocidal, man-made famines that cost between 4 and 8 million ethnic Ukrainians their lives.
True, but many Ukrainians who had at first welcomed the Nazis, after getting to know them, did actually appreciate being 'liberated'. The lesser of two evils, believe it or not. But rabid anti-communist, pro-Western propaganda always pushes the meme that Stalin was 'worse than Hitler'. To my mind he was equally evil, but in different ways. The Ukraine was an unlucky country, a bit like Poland, which itself was never the ideal democracy for which Britain professed to go to war.. We are lucky to have been born here rather than there, if you are as old as I am..
President Putin only speaks the truth.
I was pretty sure the rest of your comment wouldn't be able to top that for obvious wrongness, but it was a surprisingly close-run thing.
Have you any evidence of this "CIA funded insurrection"? Comparatively few former Soviet satellites want to return to being Russian clients – something to do with quality of governance.
Austria too had "a strong fascist group who welcomed the German invaders", will you be cheering Putin if and when he decides to annex them, or are they allowed to exercise their democratic franchise without his permission?
It's young Ed…….I humbly suggest DNFTT as I did with Moz upthread.
[Prove that johnm is a sockpoppet of Ed and address the topic instead of guessing the identity of a commenter and playing the DNFTT game; I have warned so many times about leaving sockpoppets to the moderators but it seems to fall on deaf ears. If not, I offer you a three-week ban – Incognito]
If it's Ed he's learned to be a bit less over the top, which is all he needed to do.
You fed me, and you fed me well, me ol' cobber!
Many many countries yearn for warm embrace of Mother Russia comrade morpisski. Is only matter of time.
I have no problem with people being anti-Russian, Gabby—I'm no fan of Putin and his cronies, either. What I am concerned about is this nonsense about Russians—and those dastardly masterminds the North Koreans as well!— controlling Trump as some sort of Manchurian Candidate. Any outlet that repeats these lies, not just once or twice, but daily, weekly, monthly, every single day since Trump got his disgusting carcass into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue can not taken as a serious or credible news organization.
See my Moderation note @ 4:30 PM.
اذهب يمارس الجنس مع نفسك
[Thank you for your most obliging response that avoided any doubt or confusion. Your efforts to lift The Standard to a higher standard are much appreciated and in return, I give the promised three-week ban plus another three for using a language that is not one of the three official languages of Aotearoa-New Zealand – Incognito]
[I checked your history here and it was only early this year that you were given amnesty from a permanent ban. You also seem to have missed out on a three-month ban by Lynn, which somewhat ironically was about bad language: https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-21-06-2019/#comment-1630221, but I will now correct that oversight – Incognito]
See my Moderation note @ 22:23 PM.
An interesting look at electric vehicle production scale-up around the world.
Down the bottom there's a graphic about the motivations to change to electric in different parts of the world. Very little of it is about greenhouse gases and climate change, but air pollution is a big factor along with regulatory compliance. China's economic interest is shown by two of their big motivations being developing an electric vehicle export industry and reducing dependence on oil imports.
There was one, or maybe two, options missing off that list of motivations,
The focus on mandated change is a bit ICE centric, the switch will happen because electrics are better vehicles on so many practical grounds.
Just like you don't see as many extension leads on building sites now, so much is battery tools now.
Yeah, that better driveability is a big one. Pretty soon people that enjoy driving will be going electric because it's so much better. It'll only be genuine petrolheads that live their lives with an extended middle finger left on the dino-juice.
When it comes to cars, I have zero shame about what I'm seen in and I'm a reasonable bush mechanic, so my usual habit is to buy an oldish car and drive it into the ground. Flash cars just don't do it for me anymore, I scratched that itch once long ago and it's never come back. But jeez I'm getting tempted by an i3.
That cost of ownership will also be a big one. In most US markets, the 5 year cost of ownership for a Tesla Model3 is probably already below cars like Corollas, Camrys Accords etc. Won't be long before the cost of batteries drops enough that the initial purchase price of electric is lower than dino-mobiles.
Quick search shows EVs in US are exempt from VED (currently)…the lifetime cost comparison calculation is impacted by that fact
A bit like here, a mix of federal funding, state and local taxes. There is a federal fuel tax, but it's much lower than here and applies equally to diesel and petrol. The federal fuel tax doesn't come anywhere close to covering the cost of national highways (unlike here), the federal component of funding gets a hefty top-up from other taxes.
There's no RUCs on light vehicles anywhere, but I'm fairly sure there's some kind of system like RUCs for heavy vehicles that varies at state levels. You used to see trucks with many different state number plates (don't remember if that was still the case last time back five years ago).
The government needs to signal when rucs will be put on evs. It will have to happen eventually so why not decide now .
they have i believe…2021 I think but that may change depending on uptake…I think there is a fleet percentage tipping point
yes apologies …after asking the question a quick search revealed the answer….hence the change of comment.
Not that it changes many of the advantages of EVs but it should be remembered that current running cost calculations will not continue to apply
There was an interesting article on the subject of EV costs on page F3 of yesterdays DomPost.
I can't find a link to it online at the moment unfortunately.
What he suggests is that, if you allow for RUC at the existing rate, and can't get by with charging at home it will cost more to run a Leaf than a Corolla. Even if you can get by with the limited recharge potential and don't pay any RUC it will take you 150,000 km to recover the extra cost. If you include RUC you will have to drive the EV for 500,000 km to save the extra capital cost to drive the thing.
There are other reasons besides saving money for buying an EV. It is the saving in fuel that most people I have talked to seem to rave about though. If RUCs come in, as surely they must there certainly won't be any fuel savings there to justify people paying for an EV though, will there?
Just why do EVs cost as much as they do. Having looked at the motor in a Leaf, and compared it to the beast under the bonnet in a friends new Honda Civic Type R, which costs the same amount, it can't be the motor that costs money. What do the battery packs really cost?
Last article I saw on battery pack costs were that Tesla expected to go under USD100/kWhr at the cell level later this year, then under USD100/kWhr at the pack level next year. Tesla seem to be widely reputed to be way lower in battery costs than anyone else, even the Chinese.
When EVs become widespread, the whole RUC/excise tax heavy/light vehicle cost split really will need to be looked at. There's some petrol cars already on the market where the petrol cost/km is fuckall more than RUCs for light vehicles.
that would appear roughly correct…assuming a newish 1500cc corolla averaging their claimed 4.5l/100k, however as Andre has noted once the EV fleet increases the whole system of RUC (and fuel taxes for that matter) will have to be reviewed…or I guess we could toll roads,or pay 100% from general taxation….whatever way its cut there will be noise.
Also driven by the change in health & safety standards to require electrical cord testing and tagging every few months. Less cost and interruption if you only use batteries.
The H&S aspect isn't all that different to the emissions issue with vehicles, a move to a better environment, I was pretty much over getting lit up regularly, and there’s also that battery tools are as effective, and in a lot of cases more effective, than mains powered gear
Interesting, especially the fact that China is going to dominate world EV battery production by 2023 with Europe and the USA far behind.
Angela Merkel celebrates Klaus von Stauffenberg's plot to kill Hitler in 1944
She called him and his conspirators "true patriots".
I've never seen a leader of a country celebrating an attempt to kill her predecessor. Theresa May hasn't memorialized Cromwell, nor Macron celebrated Sieyes.
Angela Merkel has class.
She's going to be sorely missed after 2020.
The better the democratic structure/environment, the less it has to be pointing out the blindingly obvious to the blind in the hope of improvement, rather than just moving on to the better know how.
Lprent: the site feed is featuring posts from a blog called "An Average Kiwi," which read like the blog should actually be called "An Average Wingnut." Just mentioning it as it doesn't seem like the kind of stuff we'd usually see in the feed.
Looked at the three posts earlier and thought, "Rubbish!"
Leighton Smith? Sean Plunket? John Banks? Mike Hosking?
The Four Riders?
(Of the pig's back, not the Apocolypse).
both adjective and proper noun
Yes, I saw those last night shortly after they appeared and left a message for Lynn at the back-end. Could have been written by a regular here who calls themselves a “skeptic of climate alarmism”. Anti-CC and anti-CE messages seem be ramping up and although I’m not a conspiracist it does suggest some kind of coordination behind it.
ISTR "An average kiwi" has been a sidebar regular for a long time. But a look at their site looks like all the old stuff has been deleted since they've gone on this denial binge.
While it's rare, it's not wholely unheard of for someone to be mostly rational, but hold some waaaaayyyyy out there views on some topics. Ken at Open Parachute being an example from the sidebar.
Ta, good to know that the ‘system’ hasn’t been hijacked then.
"An average kiwi" may have been hijacked or suffered a substantial blow to the head. But I don't think it's a sign of a problem at The Standard.
Oh, right – I saw there were only a few posts on there and figured it was a new arrival on the feed.
About Bernard Hickey
I have no doubt that the Accountant above is talented and knowledgeable. But he delivers his words very fast.
So that persons of my motor speed – maximising at about an illegal 170 Kph on state highway 1, deliberately I slow the car down. While Bernard heads toward supercallerfragerllisticoutterstreaks. He is flying in the Nether Nether Land.
I think he feels that Grant Robertson is not Spending enough money. His words scrabbled.
But Crikey, The Bloody Great Fonterra Building at Lichfield – running on Coal to purify Milk of all things – is in nasty trouble …
Fletchers Mighty Constructions have slunk back to sucking peppermint lollies – and have cancelled any major buildings. I think they might being doing Letter boxes. But there is not much call for those.
Sir John Key is managing Five Big Businesses and unknown numbers of Blonds.
Cadburys have moved off into darkness.
Northland – has decided to stop all work
The Teachers are on the streets begging for $300 a day for 6hrs a day work. For Auckland has very special cars, very special Streets, very special houses, very special water, very special toilets, very special toilet paper, very special alcohol, very special bottoms and so forth.
Their children are on drugs – keeping out of mischief – apparently.
The Farmers are suiciding. But they always have. They blame it on the Cities.
Grant Robertson is holding some Money for a rainy day. He is not a Hickey Lotto Bloke.
Onya Grant ! You are sane ! Thank Heavens.
In this episode of teleSUR's Days of Revolt, Chris Hedges interviews economist Michael Hudson on the history of classical economics and explores Marx’s interpretation of capitalism as exploitation
In this episode of Days of Revolt, Chris Hedges continues his discussion with UMKC economics professor Michael Hudson on his new book Killing the Host: How Financial Parasites and Debt Bondage Destroy the Global Economy. Hedges and Hudson expose the liberal class’ allegiance to the predatory creditors on Wall Street and their indifference to real economic justice.
Alexandria Ocazio-Cortez wants a commission into the separation of families in the UNited States, through their border services:
We should invite her over here to check the results of the three inquiries we've got going into Oranga Tamariki.
We seem to have had a little glitch.
Seems all good now.
I’m concerned; you only made it to 3 😉
…without complaining about Labour.
One could hope that the Chairman has been testing the meeting of the political waters with his gavel, and has deemed all three coalitions parties' flows to be clean, free of toxins, wadeable, even swimmable, and yea, perhaps potable.
It's more fun when pronounced, "leetle gleech!".
Here's a good read
"But I accept there are people who feel those policies may not have touched them in the same way. We know there's that constant pressure on them. It's something as a Government that we're giving continual thought to."
In other words, they have no ideas as yet. But I see Jacinda is using the old families package line again, although it is wearing rather thin considering the increase in hardship.
"In other words, they have no ideas as yet"
"It's something as a Government that we're giving continual thought to."
Continual, Chairman: "continuing indefinitely in time without interruption"
That's clearly what's required and what Ms Ardern said the Government was doing, yet your re-wording tells a different, your (rhymes with Eeyore), story. Pure dark-cloud speculation on your part. As usual.
If they had an idea of what they were going to do they wouldn't still be thinking about it (ie giving it continual thought) they would be announcing it, Robert.
So you propose, seemingly unable to factor-in some quite simple factors such as; incomplete data, test results pending, advice yet to be received, etc. It's little wonder people here tease you for being one of the Soggy Bottom boys, Chair!
Not at all. But again, if they had done all that ground work they'd be announcing their plan, not still be thinking about it.
Clearly, you fail to see the void batting away a CGT has created. Now they are struggling to fill it.
They will be hard pressed to replace such a revenue generator such as that was going to be.
A man of constant sorrow, huh 🙂
I'm thinking, Delmar.
I see that Ron Mark is proposing that our leader really shouldn't be using the old Air Force 757s and should charter planes. Out of curiosity I had a look at what it would cost to charter Peter Jackson's private jet, a Gulfstream.
There was an estimate that it would cost just over $90,000 to take 10 people on a 2 day trip from Wellington to Fiji. That is about the same distance and time of Ardern's trip from Auckland to Mebourne.
Why can't she simply travel, in Business Class to be sure, instead of having to pretend that we need our own pretend version of an Air Force 1? If the PM is going somewhere where there are only very limited commercial flight taking an Air Force jet. Auckland to Melbourne is just a joke. There are any number of flights available and we commoners don't really smell that bad that she can't travel in the same plane surely?
Peter Jackson should provide at least a couple of jets gratis to the government, considering a large part of his wealth springs from that shabby blackmail deal that his Warner Bros. controllers foisted on us.
1: how many people travel with the PM on these trips?
2: Mark seemed to be proposing this because the jets might not be fit for purpose and tend to break down, rather than it not being an appropriate use.
I'm quite sure that Ron Mark thinks it is appropriate to use the Air Force as private transport for pollies.
After all his Boss, Tsar Winston has also got into the habit. How long do you think Ron would survive if he said it was a total waste of money? Doesn't it make it sensible or a good way of spending the taxpayers money though, does it?
Who is the boss of Hon Ron Mark, Minister of Defence?
The Boss if the Hon Ron Mark is, as I am sure you are very well aware, The Right Hon Winston Peters.
Do you realise that Winston Peters, or Tsar Peters as those familiar with him say, is the only person in the current New Zealand Parliament who is a member of the Privy Council? That is the group of advisors to the person who is our Head of State. He is the only one.
He may, in theory, be responsible to Ms Ardern but in practice he, and the other Ministers in the New Zealand First Caucus, are beholden only to Winston.
Seriously, can you really imagine Jacinda sacking him without Winston's say-so? If you do I would have to say that you are dreaming.
Are you familiar with Winston Peters?
Hmm. When I check the dictionary meaning of the word I would have to say that I did not choose my word wisely.
The dictionary offers, as an adjective
"in close friendship; intimate.
synonyms:close, intimate, dear, near, confidential, bosom"
and as a noun
"a close friend or associate."
So no, I would have to say I am not. I have had quite a lot of dealings with him in the past but I certainly wasn't a close friend.
I'm not quite sure what the right word would be but it isn't "familiar" when I consider the definition. I certainly wasn't one of his mates at after working hours visits to the Green Parrot.
No problem, Alwyn, but in that case you may want to stop referring to the Right Hon Winston Peters as “Tsar Peters”? Just asking.
I see. I am, although not an Initiate of the Peters cult, using some of the things reserved for those of you who are? That nickname is reserved for his closest friends, drinking buddies and for members of his racing partnerships I take it.
Or is it like the Russian use of diminutives for names, where the name used by strangers differs from the one used by very close friends of very close relatives?
Or am I releasing the secrets of the Lodge. Is use of the nickname like someone learning and using the secret handshakes used, at least apocryphally by Masons. Whatever the cause does it upset you that I am using nicknames that I am not supposed to?
Or is it perhaps something as simple as people who get upset by references to the Prime Minister as Jacinda, rather than The Right Honourable Jacinda Ardern MP?
Alwyn, despite your attempts to deflect, the fact is that only you use this term and I, for one, would be quite pleased if you stopped it. IMO, it is on par with the sloppy use of the (denigrating) terms “woke” or “simple Simon”, for example. Just saying.
OK Just for you I'll do it.
Out of curiosity what do you think of phrases like "ShonKey" and "Soiman".
Much appreciated and funny that you need to ask.
Shonkey adj. – not entirely trustworthy, of shady character, ill reputed.
Soimon It's what he calls himself – who are we to argue?
You weren't actually included in this conversation.
Can I refer to you with a variation on your name? It seems appropriate and accurate, given the dictionary definition, to refer to you as "muttonhead".
a slow-witted, foolish, or stupid person; dolt."
But Alwyn, this is Open Mike where everybody is free to join in. Of course, Muttonbird could have asked your permission to join in but instead gave their unsolicited opinion. I think we should update the policy to make it a bannable offence to respond to a comment or post for that matter without explicit permission or personalised invitation. What are people thinking? How rude!
Pfft. The 757s will be replaced some time late 2020z. Probably by secondhand AirNZ planes. Wtf are you guys on about?
The 757s aren't just for ferrying vips around. We use them for disaster response, as well. Not often, but we need them occasionally. Especially the sorts of jobs where the charterer might go "you want to take our plane where? OK, but the danger money is $$$".
So then the question is "if we have the pilots and the plane anyway, surely the 'cost' is largely an internal accounting issue".
economically it only makes sense to charter if you earn over $60m per year. So if you can load up a plane with $60m in salaries then go for it. Otherwise it would make more sense to travel business class. If you can’t Justify air travel then your using the same amount of carbon on an one way to Melbourne than the average person accumulates in a year which is a waste.
Flying a charter works out to be about 3hrs of saved time by not having to go through customs, baggage handling, stop overs ect. Y'know at $6kp/h or $60mp/a this is where it starts to make sense to charter. So first you need the 60m salary and have traveled more than 200hrs a year to justify a buy a Global 7500 business jet with 14hr flight times and upto 18 passengers or just lease.
I'm surprise they haven't charted an AirNZ Airbus for such Flt's across the ditch? Be a lot cheaper than a B757 Flt and some free PR for AirNZ or take a leaf out of the Queen/ Royals who fly's in the odd BA aircraft.
If you charter a plane you have to pay with it in a way that shows up in the Government accounts. Then people can see how much they are wasting just to give them a boost to their ego. That way they can pretend they are like the Donald.
Using one of the Air Force planes is covered up as being training and they would have done the flight anyway in order to keep the flight crew current on their flying time. Thus they pretend it is free.
Of course if you really believe that line of b*s I have a bridge between Manhattan and Brooklyn that I am sure you will be interested in buying.
How did Sirponyboy travel wally?
On heated seats?
Lets hope they get it right this time around, ensuring they put in place a vast pay increase in core benefit rates. Especially for those deemed to be in long-term need, such as the ill and disabled.
Thanks for that – good news and good move by the Green party, wouldn't you agree?
A long awaited move by the Greens and the Government.
AAAP got the ball rolling, the media has run with it, so it was about time the Greens got in there, even the opposition had a go.
Everyone just needs to keep the pressure on.
Yes, it was "a long awaited move", "about time", etc., but that's not what I asked.
Do you, The Chairman, agree that this move by the Green party to apply pressure on the Government (as per your linked news item) is a good move?
Of course. It was a good, long awaited move.
A good move by the Green party – great.
Interesting there is no mention of it on their news feed on their website.
A sign of how important an issue it is to them?
"The Newshub-Reid Research poll had the worst outlook for National, slipping to a 14-year-low of 37.4 percent – well behind Labour, who leapt to 50.8."
Crikey, Chair! Time to celebrate!! Pin on your Labour Party rosettes and let's party!
For a moment there I thought that may have been a new poll perhaps indicating a polling trend.
That was one of two polls at the time with wildly differing results.
Old news, Robert.
Trying to distract from what's absent in the Greens news feed?
Chair, this "wot wosn't in the Green feed" is the weakest ploy from you yet, and there have been a number that have been dishwater-feeble. I'll not even bother, but regarding the stale poll, Labour, 50.8!!
News like that never gets old! 3 chairs for Labour!!
“Three Chairs for Labour” – love it. Here are three quotes that will no doubt bring a tear to The Chair's one eye.
Dirty Politics: How attack politics is poisoning New Zealand’s political environment
It's good to see that you, even based in the deep South, seem to be able to keep so up to date on the news.
You did notice, I hope, that because of the prevailing Southerlies and therefore the very cold weather we have been having over the last couple of months the story you link to was from about six weeks ago? Carrier pigeons really don't like having to hasten through cold winter storms do they.
Does it really take so long for information to get to you? Perhaps in another month or so you will see something from the same time about another poll from TV1 which disagreed with your story. May the Blizzard be with you in the meantime.
Snap. While I was typing this I see The Chairman responded in a similar vein
It is the latest poll. What other information is one supposed to use?
Until the next poll comes out, National are sub 40 and dropping.
Not a great place to be, I'm sure you'll agree.
I didn't notice that, Alwyn, leaving me looking a right duffer! Never mind, I was only playing with the Chair. As for the delay we experience in getting live news, it's a blessing really; I wonder who the next POTUS will be: I've tired a little with Obama.
You could look at the TV1 Poll from the same day. Of course I doubt if you really want to see National having risen and Labour having dropped and National back in the lead. It would probably put you right of your feed.
I am tempted to tell you but I hate to spoil your anticipation as you follow the 2016 Presidential Campaign. I'll give you a hint though. It isn't another Bush. As Barbara Bush said. Two is enough. Past that I will not go. You are just going to have to wait.
I just hope to God they don't elect an idiot.
Ploy you say?
This is no ploy, Robert. Just telling it how it is. The news feed is lacking. And it sends the wrong message.
It took this long for them to comment on the issue and they don't even cover it on their own news feed. Can you believe it?
So much for them putting the pressure on.
Digging your daft hole deeper, Chair? You seem to lack self-awareness but worry not, help is at hand; we'll tell you when you stray into trite territory, make a Wally of yourself and flog that dead horse of your own creation too far. You're claiming that something that doesn't exist "sends the wrong message". Given that there are an infinite number of things that don't exist, your head must be ringing with wrong messages – hang on! I've cracked it, your malady; a head-full, wrong messages clamouring for your attention! No wonder you can't think straight.
No need for any thank-yous, Chair, just be kind to yourself, press your inner reset button and have another go tomorrow when you're feeling rested.
When asked if The Greens actions were good, the Chair was uncharacteristically unequivocal:
"Of course. It was a good, long awaited move."
BUT shortly afterwards, he reverted to type;
"The news feed is lacking.
And it sends the wrong message.
It took this long for them to comment on the issue and they don't even cover it on their own news feed.
Can you believe it?"
That the Chair is Eeyore?
Never doubted it.
It's not just something that doesn't exist, Robert. It's coverage of an important news item (that's meant to be leveraging pressure on the Government) that is actually missing on their own news feed. So, of course it sends the wrong message.
They are either slack at updating their news feed or they don't see it as being that news worthy.
Relentlessly soggy, Delmar.
It's still absent from their news feed, Robert.
Why do you think that is? They don't want to rock the boat too much?
Still absent, Chair!!!
This is even more outrageous than when it was simply absent; no wonder you've your knickers in a painful twist!
I only hope, for the sake of your circulation, the newsfeed isn't empty again, later today! Three-times as empty as when you first declared it empty! I doubt The Greens have any chance at all now, of being part of the next Government! Three times empty!!
I have to commend you, Chair, you certainly have an eye for empty and an ability to fluff-up something from nothing! You're the King of Empty, in my book, the Great Vacuum, the Viceroy of Void.
I wonder what else you'll discover isn't there, oh Dedicated Supporter of the Left?
ex nihilo nihil fit
Yes and I apologise to anyone who might have tried to follow the descent into the void; I take full responsibility for giving The Nothing any oxygen at all. My final word on the non-matter
Ouch! The true Left and ‘more left than most’ collectively seem to regard you as a “frickin clown”, according to their spokesperson. One wonders what they’d call you when you not just not disapprove of the (absent) newsfeed of the Green Party but also not raise some really serious concerns about their perceived abysmal PR and communication on core issues; the mind boggles.
Dedicated supporter of the left indeed, Robert.
And we on the left consider core benefit increases a major issue.
Therefore, compounded by the fact it took so long for the Greens to break their silence on this issue, not covering it on their own news feed is another slap in the face for their support base on the left.
They aren't even doing enough to show their own support base that they care, let alone putting pressure on Labour.
And supporters like you commenting as you are don't do them any favours. In fact, I was just asked by a visitor (who looked at your comments) who is this frickin clown.
You direct your visitors to look at your pointless, substance-free comments on a political blog???
What a strange person you are, Chair.
"Quick, Delores, come see what I jus' writ!"
You sound like McTrash, Robert.
You have a finely-tuned ear, Sam.
i just don't think the woke have nearly as much support as they claim.
If you can point to their “claim” of support, maybe then I can figure out whom you’re referring to. As it stands, it all sounds so vague …
Your favourite word, sam! Oh how you love to use it. It's well and truly a cliche now; perhaps you like to use an equivalent, or at least define what exactly it is you mean by "woke"? Then you might find we can understand what you are attempting to convey; words are like that; they need to be understood by both deliverer and receiver.
Soimon's using it too, in radio interviews. That puts him, the confused Sam, and bearded Bomber Bradbury in special company together.
The woke over inflate Green polling by at least 1%. Come election results there true power is revealed – It's all spin, bullshit, virtue signal, bluster, genital issues, depression, mental illnesses, economic illiteracy, so on and so fourth.
Then you say:
So far, I’ve only seen claims by you and I still don’t know whom you’re talking about.
Yesterday, another commenter got quite shitty with me when I asked to back-up their comment and it ended with that commenter taking a break from the site. It is tiring to have to ask people repeatedly to back-up their statements of fact or to make it clear that they are making up their opinions on the fly because to refuse so would be dishonest at best.
Wonderful comment at 10:14 am (22 July) Robert – top form.
Might I add (humbly): The Sovereign Sultan of Soggy
The Chairman is seemingly imprevious to mockery, and going negative plays to their strength. So go positive, the Ardern way.
I knew the kool aid was strong around here but I didn't know it was this thick.
How about you do your own polling instead of trying to get me to do it for you.
The Greens poll higher than there election results. That's not difficult to do as they're now on 6% support.
What's "woke" and why does its use cause Sam to behave like a sugared-up 5 year-old?
Your wokeness has found some support, incognito. Well done. Green Party polling ought to surge way above there talents now!!! Amazing.
I’m so woke that they made me a Moderator here 😉
Did you the surge in the polls when that happened?
How about you back-up your claims?
No. That the Greens consistently poll higher than their election results needs as much explaining as NZFirst polling consistently lower than there election results. It's so common you'd have to be a genius to be able to ignore it.
So, you cannot back-up your claims and you now appeal to common sense, which is a weak rhetorical tool at the best of times. It wasn’t even entertaining this time; what a waste of my time 🙁
The polls consistently get the Green vote correct to within about 1%? That must be a byproduct of single to low teen populerity levels, given that it's not unusual to for different polls for the 35-50% parties to have 6-9% between them.
Even so, I'm impressed at how accurate the polling of the Greens "consistently" is, according to Sam.
Youd have had to have skulled hard on the kool aid to have so much confedience in popularity polling after BREXIT, Trump, May, Balsinaro (The Brazilian President) Australian Labour. There are so many examples of pollsters drinking there own Kool aid and you just want to drink more. Pfft
what ever. The Greens went from 10% to 6% and they don't have an electorate seat or the brains to do a deal for an electorate seat.
The Greens took a massive hit in the campaign from one decision and still got over the threshold.
The people saying the Greens are in trouble also reckoned NZ1 were done in 2008. Winston isn't the only one who can say "boo".
Well I never said Winston was done. In fact apart of my claim that National had no mates was obvious when John Key started ruiling out a coalition with NZFirst.
what did you think in 2008?
Had he been born in 2008?
Based on US Fed Res actions I thought the gold price would halve, stocks would rally and Obama would be the first black president. And that NZFirst had a lot of dry powder. I wouldn't rule out Labour stepping aside in Northland to give NZFirst a clean run in the Northland electorate. Wish the Greens had the brains for something like that.
And [deleted and your last warning – Incognito] off silky
See my Moderation note @ 10:40 PM.
What did your mentor call me once. He was trying to make some sort of computer programming joke out of me by claiming I was a some sort of dildo. Y'know I'll make this real simple for you incognito. [deleted] off hypocrite.
Drinking the Kool-Aid again? I have never had a mentor.
A dildo named Justin
Well what do you call lprint ? Boss, pal, Lynn. Something.
I call him Lynn or sometimes Sysop; he’s not my boss, pal, or mentor.
You might want to take your finger off that button.
Not a one inch strap on like I just called you.
So you speak calculus as well Alien (sorry if I misspelled your anonymous handle. It doesn't mater that much.)
I'm not anonymous. I am a hideous triumph of form and function.
Incognito asked Sam: "How about you back-up your claims?"
Sam replied, "No".
Sam's taking a well-earned break now?
Not yet. I decided to give him a chance to chill down and engage his brain. It’s up to him to push the self-destruct button or not.
Sam defines "woke" as ,
" all spin, bullshit, virtue signal, bluster, genital issues, depression, mental illnesses, economic illiteracy, so on and so fourth".
He's slandering/bad-mouthing supporters of The Greens and Labour here with seeming impunity, getting away with it because few would want to engage with his menacing persona (Muttonbird's, "What's wrong with you?" summed up the discomfort Sam's comments create; what is wrong with Sam?
Good morning, Robert. I assume that comment was (mainly) for me?
Do you have a link to the quoted text by Sam? I could find it myself but if you have it, handy that would be handy.
I cannot comment on what is wrong with Sam but I do know he can be a tricky
customercommenter and (some) people react to his comments like a bull to a red flag; this doesn’t help.
I’m not happy either about the discomfort Sam might be creating here but it would set a very low bar if moderators would act upon this, wouldn’t you agree?
On this note, there are a few other commenters who regularly create a bit of ‘an atmosphere’ but as long as they don’t break the site’s policy rules we’ll have to learn to live with them – ignoring can be a good and often the best (!) course of action.
Here: 22 July 2019 at 5:26 pm
I'm not suggesting Sam be banned at all, just trying to define the nature of his comments for the sake of greater understanding.
I see you've placed him on "final warning" and that's appropriate, I reckon. Being a tricky customer, Sam'll do something with that, no doubt. Perhaps he'll woke up
Thanks Robert, I value your genuine comment.
When I used the word/verb “act”, I didn’t mean “ban”. I see banning as the last resort of moderation when (all) other options for modification of behaviour and self-moderation have been exhausted or when the Moderator’s patience has run out. There are exceptions, of course, such as deliberately putting the site at (legal) risk and blatant violations of the policy, which can result in an instant and permanent ban.
Indeed, in this instance (with Sam) it is really about clarification of meaning, purpose, and intention of his comments. That was my original angle and I was acting as a commenter rather than a Moderator. However, others object to his use of the term “woke” in a disparaging way. I stepped in/up as a Moderator when Sam started to swear again despite having been warned about that by MS earlier that day. That was what my “last warning” was about.
In the end, I gave him a chance to chill down and come to his senses; his use of “woke” is obviously not going to change and sooner or later he might be pulled up for that, just like he got pulled up for swearing, but I rate as relatively low on the scale of ‘offences’ and more as a ‘nuisance’ rather IMHO.
I hope this makes some kind of sense. BTW, I’m speaking for myself and not for the other Moderators who may have very different views …
See. It does not hurt to acknowledge basic assumptions. We assume many things. We assume we speak the same language. We assume New Zealand is 1200ks in length. We assume many things so we don't have to knit pick and disrespect people by demanding they search for bleeding fucking obvious facts and basically doing your homework for you.
Assumptions are often implicit and rarely checked and validated.
We may think we speak the same language but that still leaves many interpretations, which is a beauty and a curse of language. Unfortunately, some people feel the need to re-define or twist words.
What might be an obvious fact to one may be a complete surprise to another. Often ‘facts’ are, in fact, factoids or even just opinions. Fact checking is crucial in order to separate wheat from chaff.
It shows good faith, respect, and honesty to oblige when asked to reveal one’s assumptions and sources for one’s facts. When one makes claims, it is only natural that one backs them up when asked. If one becomes defensive, aggressive, or outright abusive when challenged it creates a bad atmosphere that spoils it for others. This, in turn attracts the attention of moderators.
If a fact is all that obvious, it shouldn't be difficult to point to it's source.
And links are wonderful things.
Yknow the Standard authors team are like top 4, I don't think any one would place them lower, most likely 3rd. Yknow really knowledgeable, really smart on a bunch of stuff. And lots of commenters that are really cleaver Y'know. So I'm not going to win pretty against them, it's not going to happen.
Me personally if I was outside of myself watching what I was saying I'd be shocked at what I'd be able to say. So I just want to say a couple things. Y'know I do think that political correctness leads to communism which is a totally failed left wing project. The other thing to me is that when people say the correct things, to me. That people recognize in particular, they recognize the intensity of the struggle and really that's the one. That people recognize how much of a struggle it is for both me and who ever says no I'm incorrect for this or that reason.
Now this is what I really want to talk about. There's a relatively small group of people that talk about the left and they talk about me. For the most part when people talk about it it doesn't really bother me unless you're actually the Prime Ministers or some one really noteworthy. I just feel that the debating community is for fighters and winners. And the thing that just sickens me is when people complain, and whine, and talk about land, people and politics, and they speak about these things in away that embodies a type of weakness that just makes me sick.
So for example when people (when woke people) try and talk about The Greens and try and box it in, and try and imply that The Greens shouldn't fight till the end. That to me is sickening.
You're given an opportunity on this planet to fight until death rips you from this planet, and everything is a metaphor, politics is a metaphor. It's a metaphor for how you want to live your life. Y'know certain people may want to live by certain rulz or codes but in the end all that maters is survival. I promise you you will survive if you want to fight and this is what we see in the debating chamber. You see people use fighting words until they are ripped out of there.
So when I see people of a certain caliber, people who have authority, a bit of power, people who've created a body of work and a reputation. When I see these woke people imply that you shouldn't go to the line or imply that you shouldn't do everything humanly possible to win, it makes me want to puke.
Just consider this. Jacinda Ardern is reaching as many if not more people than the All Blacks. We are a population of 4 million and some social media accounts of her views at 10, 20 million or more. John Key started the social media PM and Jacinda kept it up. So it's a reality, the debating community is a reality, it's about fighting till the end. There is nothing cowardly about any debating technique. There's nothing cowardly about making a comment. The only thing cowardly is not being proud of your country and refuse to fight for it.
Y'know I'm convinced that all political correctness does is make people feel in touch with themselves. The thing is internal experiences do not manifest in reality. So this rant is just for the voices that Iv heard. Not often do I get words of support from members of the standard, it happens but it happens more else where, this rants for you. You're not actually going to die in the debating community for real, let it teach you.
That was indeed quite a rant, Sam. You seem to be saying that you have a physical reaction to what you read here, which explains the nature of some of your comments. Sometimes, your comments are great, but other times you get carried away with hostile and aggressive comments.
I think very highly of authors and commenters here; they are a bunch of good people who are generally, but not always, considerate and respectful of others. I also think that not many come here to ‘fight and win’, but some do. Quite a few come here to debate in good faith, learn, find common ground with others, have a bit of a joke and a laugh, share good, bad, and sad stories, ask for advice, et cetera. At least, that is how I see it.
Asking you to back up your claims and challenging you is not saying you are incorrect or fighting you, it is not about winning, but that is what you think it is and that is how you respond. And then people react to your fighting words and win-lose attitude and before you know, we have ‘fisty cuffs’ here. It turns off many people, which is a problem.
You talk a lot about fighting for a (good?) cause, which I find hard to reconcile with your other comment today @ 7:15 PM in which you said that you couldn’t be bothered to put any effort into your comments and that you’re only interested in mocking us; your overuse and abuse of “woke” is a case in point.
You’re a conundrum, Sam, and I cannot decide whether you fit into the TS community or whether you’re a disruptor. Which shall it be, Sam?
Nah, I stopped putting any effort into writing up comments on the standard when Lynn and other authors moved my comments into open mic for attacking the author or some shit.
you see when I see the opinion piece and then the proceeding comments are overwhelmingly to one side like with the great free speech war or the great Russia gate war. That's when I like to bring it with the facts bring it with the facts and so on. And Lynn especially simply doesn't like it when I do that so I just don't bother anymore. Now I'll just moch you remorselessly for being low IQ, lo low energy, low intellect, as well as being physically and emotionally challenged.
When you attack an author, you usually receive a ban instead of just being moved to OM. The latter is more for OT comments.
If you “stopped putting any effort into writing up comments on the standard” and you “just don’t bother anymore” because of some treatment in the past by Lynn and you just show up here to mock us “remorselessly for being low IQ, lo low energy, low intellect, as well as being physically and emotionally challenged” then why come here at all? Why don’t you do yourself a favour and go somewhere else where you don’t have that ‘burden of the past’?
Since you ran down the Greens polling, they have jumped 3%.
Keep it up! 🤣
You sound like a fresh Uni grad day one on the shop floor.
Because woke identitarian fan girls of the Green Party is letting the whole squad down which makes me write, literally commen sense. LMFAO.
You choose disruptor then? Still intent to continue using “woke” in the disparaging way you do?
A sure and short path to martyrdom, Sam, but I’m giving you the choice.
if you feel that way then ban me because that's hella childish and lame. Lmao
If you want to continue along the same lines and self-destruct that is your choice, not mine.
Make wise choices in life, Sam.
Bro. You are. Almost, inspiring. Lmfao.
You do know the AAAP hold these clinics regularly? There are always queues because lots of people need help with asking for their full entitlements.
Out of interest, what was your take on Metiria Turei's speech and the fallout from it?
Out of curiosity where is the lady now? And did she ever pay back the money she defrauded from the taxpayer? I seem to remember she promised she would do so but I fear that promises from politicians, even disgraced ones, are seldom honoured.
You can be so spiteful, Alwyn.
I wonder why that is?
That's up to WINZ. I'm sure they'll be onto it.
That reminds me that you still have to provide an adequate response as to why you criticised and complained about Weka’s previous comments and moderation & banning of you with regards to your incessant questioning about the Electorate Offices of the Green Party.
In the meantime, here’s a piece for your edification: https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/114333975/after-a-dreadful-2017-can-the-greens-do-better-in-2020
And if ever find yourself stranded outside Wellington and you need to contact the Green Party: https://www.greens.org.nz/contact
I read that Stuff piece by Stacey Kirk's replacement, Thomas Coughlan
2017 was the year the Greens made government and are now part of big positive changes for New Zealand.
Swing and a miss, Thomas.
Days after the Greens got sworn into a coalition government Golriz goes and outs Andrew little for braking some law. That was the Greens first move as a coalition partner in a government. They are woke, inclusional, and they lost there bloody co-leader weeks out from an election. So, let's not shine warm fuzzy rainbows up each other. The Greens have a lot of appeasing to there base to do. Y'know there's like 3000 permaculture members, even less vegans, even less radical lefties and even less trannies. The rest are main fucking stream climate adapters. And I could care even less about free fucken speech or cunt, or even how delusion large your national campaign footprint is relative to the puny number of voters being signalled too. Y'know the big fucken green vote goes to the one who will literally go into bare knuckle fight, win while cleaning plastics and planting trees okay? Not fucken rainbows up everywhere.
What is wrong with you, for Christ's sake?
I could ask you the same question. How much prescription medication have you consumed today?
You’re a day out, Sam.
and The Greens have a year to sort there shit out
So, you voted for the Greens in 2017 and will do again in 2020? I like it when somebody nails their colours to the mast in such an eloquent and unequivocal way.
While AAAP hold these clinics regularly, the queues are growing. Just as they are at food banks.
Moreover lots of people that need help getting their full entitlements aren't getting it without AAAP help, which was also meant to change.
Metiria Turei's speech saw the Greens go up in the polls. Their management of it was their downfall. Things were uncovered that weakened their position.
The Righteous Right got riotously het-up over that arrogant solo-mum Maori greenie and gave her the serve she so richly deserved. Aye.
Not at first. Yet, when things were uncovered that weakened her position, indeed they did, Robert.
Indeed they did, like sharks in chummed-up water, their dead eyes fixed on their prey, their bellies aching with Righteous hunger. Oh, how they whipped themselves into a furious fever! Oh, how their long-held suspicions were confirmed. Best weeks of their lives, they just KNEW she was no good! Alwyn's heart still races at the memory
How do you know the queues are growing?
You haven't said what you thought of Turei's speech. I have to assume you agreed with what she said and that it was a good idea to say it. After all, she was batting for the very people you claim to bat for.
That is reflected in the massive increase in the demand for hardship grants and also the massive increase in emergency housing demand.
Personally, I initially thought it was a good speech and it resonated with many, but as I said, it all unraveled when things were uncovered.
Hit Now to see what was going on with Apollo 11 exactly fifty years ago.
The Dismal-crats and their ridiculous outlet MSNBC are paving the way for another term of Trump.
Leading Dismal-crat analyst Donny Deutsch in the house! That's Zbigniew Brzezinski's awful daughter nodding her head gravely and vacantly as he rants….
Jesus. You really do try and spoil our Sunday evenings don't you?
Please, please come to your senses America. To play with a variation on a 1968 theme. "Dump The Trump".
Oh dear. There are now two asterisks next to England's CWC win**.
One because there was no winner of the game. And the other because the umpires screwed up on ball 298 of 300.
Two asterisks and a massive bucket of your tear soaked kleenex 😆
I did think twice about commenting on this, and another article a day or so ago on reports the MCC will review the laws which played such a significant part in this remarkable game.
I thought twice about it because the other day you'd got a bit upset that people might question the outcome. You then went off on some sob story about starting from nothing and having nothing now. I didn't want to upset you further.
Still, this is a major development and you are acting like a middle England twat again so I'm glad I did.
Salty tears won't heal your pain. Dry your eyes, mate. 😆
Also, this development has removed your only defence which was ambiguity around what constituted 'the act' beginning an overthrow.
And now, time for a music break
Seeing this (link below) on the news tonight reminded me of this guy