Social Media – Sunday

22 November 2015

Social Media Watch is an open forum similar to Open Forum where any topic can be introduced, but with a focus on New Zealand blogs and social media.

This expands on the aim for Your NZ to be a joint project with the more people contributing and the more variety the better.

A general guideline – post opinion on or excerpts from and links to blog posts or comments of interest, whether they are praise, criticism, pointing out issues or sharing useful information.

If being critical address the issues and don’t do personal abuse. Constructive and reasonably balanced criticism is more effective than general moans.

As usual avoid anything that could cause any legal issues such as potential defamation or breaching suppression orders.

Whale Oil started calling Your NZ the ‘Blog of the Damned’  – this is the blog of the damned well determined to express opinions and hold to account regardless of attempts to shut us up.

Also remember that keeping things civil, legal and factual is more effective and harder to argue against or discredit.

If you want to display screen shots the images will need to be saved on the Internet and a link put in the comment. Sometimes full links don’t work, if I see any like this I will try to repair them in the comment when I get time. Note that image links should normally end something like .jpg .jpeg .png etc.

Note that sometimes other blogs get irate if their material is highlighted elsewhere but the Internet is specifically designed to share and repeat information and anyone who comments or puts anything into a public forum should be aware that it could be republished elsewhere (but attribution is essential).

If comments raise issues deserving of a full post I may use content to do a post, and may expand on it.

Leave a comment

54 Comments

  1. Two quotes of the day from Whale Oil.

    Daily Proverb: “The wise have wealth and luxury, but fools spend whatever they get.”

    Irony (word) of the day: magnanimous (adj) – Highly moral, especially in showing kindness or forgiveness, as in overlooking insults or not seeking revenge.

    Reply
    • Mike C

       /  22nd November 2015

      @George

      I am pretty sure that Belt picks the Daily Proverb and Word of the Day content 🙂

      Reply
      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  22nd November 2015

        It’s a tough call, Mike, trying to guess who there could be so blatantly thick. But I have to concede I think you’ve picked it, but mainly on the basis of diligent stupidity beyond the call of duty.

        Reply
        • Mike C

           /  22nd November 2015

          @AlanW

          I based my opinion on the fact that Belt has had complete Editorial control at the Whale for more than a year now.

          Plus … I am not so sure that this was just an oversight or stupid mistake on the part of Belt … because Slater and Belt had a big online barney with each other in one of the Whale posts the other night.

          I am wondering if Belt wrote today’s Daily Proverb and Word of the Day deliberately 🙂

          Reply
      • Wrong assumption on the Daily Proverb, they follow a pattern. Tomorrow’s will be Prov 22:20

        Reply
        • With their record they will probably struggle against quite a few Proverbs.

          Reply
        • Mike C

           /  22nd November 2015

          @Duncan

          If Belt has computer generation for things like the Daily Proverb and Word of the Day … and does not bother to check what they are going to be the night before they auto-post the next day … then the man really is an idiot. LOL 🙂

          Reply
      • He doesn’t.

        Reply
        • Mike C

           /  22nd November 2015

          @TravDog

          Who does ???

          Reply
          • No physical person 🙂 It is generated, but before the Worlds Greatest Moderator Chimp came along they were hand picked by Cam.

            Reply
            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  22nd November 2015

              So indirectly you were right, Mike C. Belt picked the computer and the computer picks the quotes – so we can laugh at them both.

            • The computer is the innocent party here, don’t be too harsh Alan.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  22nd November 2015

              Very true, Trav. It probably has the most integrity and certainly the most modesty too.

            • jaspa

               /  22nd November 2015

              Maybe God is trying to send them a message 😉

  2. Pete Kane

     /  22nd November 2015

    “Three people prominent in the Dirty Politics controversy have been back in the news lately, but for very different reasons.” (10 mins. duration)
    http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/mediawatch/audio/201779410/dirty-politics-players-back-in-the-frame

    Reply
    • jaspa

       /  22nd November 2015

      “Iwi now have extensive databases of members who they can easily mobilise. Assembling a team of 50 or 100 iwi members to get out the vote is straightforward, legal and effective if it is possible to raise some koha.” – Simon Lusk

      Can that really be legal?

      Reply
      • That must be skirting the borders of treating I would have thought….

        Reply
        • Pete Kane

           /  22nd November 2015

          Dave and Jas – I couldn’t believe what I was hearing re the ‘koha’. What I found interesting was Garner and DPS stating how much of this was the norm. Makes me think of journalists still a little nervous of how they may emerge from any further ‘revelations’.

          Reply
      • Mike C

         /  22nd November 2015

        @Jaspa

        Yes this does indeed happen 🙂

        On General Election Day back in 2011 … when we were living in the city … a maori guy wearing a bright red tee shirt came running down our drive.

        I was out in the garden … and he didn’t see me as he was galloping towards our front door.

        As soon as I saw him … I was under no illusion as to his reason for being on our property … so I called out to him “Can I help you?”.

        He turned to me … and said some thing like “Have you Voted yet today?”

        I smiled at him and said “Yes we have … and it wasn’t for your Party”. LOL.

        My curiosity was aroused by this blatant piece of Election Day advertising … so I went out onto the street … and was amazed to see about half a dozen red shirted maori people running down the footpath and up people’s driveways whilst a huge people mover was driving along the gutter at a snails pace.

        Reply
        • jaspa

           /  22nd November 2015

          :/ Thanks, Mike. One of the joys of living in the city, I suppose. Luckily I don’t, and I have a large dog who would not tolerate anyone galloping up to my front door uninvited – even the Jehovah’s Witnesses won’t get out of their car here (they open their window a crack and try to poke their pamphlets out at me as they turn around, lol).

          So these Maori are essentially treating votes as a tradable commodity? Wow.

          I would never sell my vote.

          Reply
          • Pete Kane

             /  22nd November 2015

            in fairness, that was not what was described (although inferred). She was encouraged to vote – part of many and legitimate election day organisation.

            What we are talking about (I suspect) is people being paid to go and muster the troops. Now this would need to be declared if for a Party specifically (ie Red Shirt) but the better question is, would it (if in general – ie no declared Party interest) need to be declared under the third party interest status. And when I say ‘no declared’, I mean by specific verbal or physical identification – but was it none the less implied or obvious.

            I’m not familiar with the new Electoral Finance Act, (new the old stuff well). but I don’t think we have heard the last of this somehow.

            Reply
            • jaspa

               /  22nd November 2015

              Yes, sorry, my final couple of comments were my thoughts on the story you linked, and the link I went on to from that at http://www.3news.co.nz/tvshows/story/lusk-goes-public-on-koha-to-vote-2015111714#axzz3riGoIrzV, rather than Mike’s personal story. I should have made that a bit more clear.

              From Lusk’s statement, I suspect something a bit more dodgy is at play here, and I suppose it’s the whole idea that has me gobsmacked.

              Just thinking about it today has given me a strange possessive (? if that is the right word?) feeling about my right to vote and the fact that I would never sell it, for anything.

              As the RNZ article says “But that statement didn’t answer key questions: How much was paid? By whom? And for what purpose? “

            • Pete Kane

               /  22nd November 2015

              Actually Jas, sorry my fault, I was very clumsy, Too much lunch. Three things here:

              1. Were people ‘paid’ (if ‘koha’ for expenses still must be declared) to canvas/work in some way? (A problem if yes and not declared.)

              2. Were people given a ‘koha’ to participate in the form of vote? (Big problem.) Were people given a ‘koha’ to participate in the form of vote – with implied (big, big problem) guidance or even clear ( HMP rock breaking problem) ‘guidance’ as to how said vote is ‘best’ cast?

              3. Did Lusk admit to being hired by a third party to campaign for an election outcome (either Party Vote or TTT or both)? Was this declared under the EFA requirements?

              Note: In the pragmatic sense – it’s really Mana/Internet vs Labour, National and NZ first here. Wouldn’t have a clue how the Greens might approach this (although Nicky vs Lusk?). So not easy – but I would think there are people, not only from Internet/Mana interests, but political and legal academia, just sneaking a little peep at all this.

            • Pete Kane

               /  22nd November 2015

              Jaspa: “As the RNZ article says “But that statement didn’t answer key questions: How much was paid? By whom? And for what purpose? “

              When I heard it on Thursday (was away when broadcast so don’t really no level of wider discussion), I took the koha thing as a general approach rather than specific to Internet/Mana.
              For some reason I had in mind the dam in the HB. So the “Hone” link didn’t specifically register with me until the way it came over on Media Watch this morning (I’ll go back and listen to the original). So without the full interview transcript it’s hard to say. And (unless it’s just poor editing), Garners interviewing is pretty b……………y disjointed at times. I still think there’s water to flow though.

            • jaspa

               /  22nd November 2015

              2. is my biggest worry – re the guidance. And the fact that it is necessary to tiptoe around certain issues – eg, if some one were to suggest that iwi leaders are accepting “koha” in return for influencing people who are not well-informed, they run the risk of the old “He called Maori dumb! He’s racist!” accusations.

              Of course, there is nothing wrong with trying to influence people about something you believe in, but if money is being accepted it should be known, IMHO.

              As for the Internet/Mana part of things – yeah, well, that worked out well for them didn’t it? Way to go, Lusk. But it still needs to be known – who paid what, to whom, for what?

    • jaspa

       /  22nd November 2015

      Interesting screenshots of the ‘hunting’ a deer in a small paddock, too. I saw some comments on Facebook about that that weren’t very complimentary.

      Reply
      • Mike C

         /  22nd November 2015

        @Jaspa

        The way Lusk shot those deer … was like shooting fish in a barrel.

        What a big he-man Lusk is … shooting a captive animal 😦

        The man is a joke.

        Reply
        • jaspa

           /  22nd November 2015

          Heh, yeah, we have a guy who does that here – the home-kill guy.

          Reply
        • jamie

           /  22nd November 2015

          And it is via this cowardly man that Slater claims to be connected to the rugged outdoors lifestyle.

          Pathetic.

          Reply
  3. Had an amusing read of ‘another blog’ this morning, to which a particular comment caught my eye.

    “More Americans need to read the Quran, which kind of makes it obvious.”

    I’m guessing it was made in the context as though it was solely responsible for radical Islam/extremism, despite the majority of Muslims not being violent murderers.

    So it got me thinking, “let’s have a look at the bible”.

    Leviticus 25:44-46

    “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.”

    Ephesians 6:5:

    “Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.”

    Deuteronomy 21:18-21

    “If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, 19 his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. 20 They shall say to the elders, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard.” 21 Then all the men of his town are to stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid.”

    Now what I want to know is, where is my allowance of slaves? And how did I make it through my childhood alive”?

    Reply
    • Kevin

       /  22nd November 2015

      I’m sure there are extreme Christians who if they could would own slaves and stone bratty kids. Fortunately since our laws are based on reason and not a particular religion, they can’t.

      Happy?

      Reply
      • No. Point is, you can’t blame a book for a persons actions. I’m sure there are plenty of non religious people that wouldn’t mind a slave or two as well. The Quran, or the Bible for that matter are completely irrelevant in terms of the argument about Islam as a whole and extremism.

        It all comes down to interpretation.

        Reply
        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  22nd November 2015

          I’m glad you made this point, Trav. My impression of commentary at WO even when you were there was that this was not the common opinion.

          Reply
          • No it won’t be common opinion, especially when the blog narrative is to generalize in terms of Islam, Muslims and extremism all in the one pot. Scaremongering makes you look like a lunatic. What I noticed in the time after I left, is that I began to take more moderate and sensible outlook on many topics from different angles, rather than from an angle that you think ‘fits the flavour’ of what is expected.

            The stance I take is that most terrorists/extremists are Muslim, but not all Muslims are extremists/terrorists. But as we know Alan, the requirement to comment there is to take your place in the circle, and reach over to the man next to you…..

            Reply
        • Mike C

           /  22nd November 2015

          @TravDog

          I used to own some Slaves once 🙂

          But then they grew up and left home. LOL.

          Reply
          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  22nd November 2015

            Hmm, not sure the slavery was all in one direction in my case.

            Reply
            • Mike C

               /  22nd November 2015

              @AlanW

              I know what you mean 😦

              Up until about the age of 10 … my children were the best “Yes Kids Ever”.

              Then they became teenagers … and found the Internet.

              It was all down hill from there for me. LOL 🙂

        • Kevin

           /  22nd November 2015

          “No. Point is, you can’t blame a book for a persons actions.”

          Sure you can. Well you can at least blame a book for encouraging a person actions. If there were Christians owning slaves and stoning people and using the Bible to justify would I be blaming the Bible for their actions? You bet I would.

          Reply
          • Mike C

             /  22nd November 2015

            @Kevin

            Who were you replying to … because it is not very clear to me 🙂

            Reply
          • I suppose this is where we start blaming the rest of societys social problems on TV and video games?

            Reply
            • No it’s just video games, no one of any consequence watches TV now do they?

            • Sky Sport, fishing programs, hunting programs, and that’s about it.

            • Kevin

               /  22nd November 2015

              Except there’s no evidence that video games cause violence whereas we currently have the situation where nearly all terrorists are Muslim. Sure, they believe in an extreme and literal form of Islam but nonetheless, they follow the Koran.

              Do I believe the Koran should be banned? No. A man is absolute king over the thoughts in his head. It’s actions that count. The current strategy is not to target Islam the religion but to bomb the terrorists into submission.

            • Kevin

               /  22nd November 2015

              *correct* not *current*

            • Most terrorists are Muslims. A small percentage of Muslims are terrorists. Most Muslim terrorists are Arabic or African/North African. We live not too far geographically from the worlds most populous Muslim nation which doesn’t have these problems.

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  22nd November 2015

            The book didn’t do anything. The guys who wrote it might deserve some blame but the guy who read it deserves most all of it. After all, most others who read it did not act the same way.

            Reply
            • Mike C

               /  22nd November 2015

              @AlanW

              Yeah … a few hundred years ago … they were like the only books in the Library … so every man and his dog read and acted upon them.

              In this day and age of the Internet … you’d have to be an idiot to only want to read and believe in what is in the Bible and Koran 🙂

  1. Koha for votes? | Your NZ

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s