At last whirlpool mod "WarT" has finally managed to lie his way via dishonest, unjust, unbalanced, and abuse of authority type moderating (as this very derblat list continues to bear witness to) to having "derspatz" permanently banned from "broadband" forums and my voice silenced there on the subject of ISP Level Content Filtering.
And there was great rejoicing from the anti-ILCF pro-pr0n circle-jerkers ?! :)
Actually, they are so starved for a whipping-boy that they've resorted to manufacturing their own "turn on and off at will" devil's advocate. Heh.
Anyway, here is the message delivering the perma-ban. Apparently it was sent on Friday but as I rarely actually log on I didn't get it until a moment a go. Enjoy.
Friday at 5:42 am
Forum Ban
As per previous warnings and your inability to refrain from trolling and hijacking discussion in the Broadband forum, you now no longer have the ability to post there
Such bans are permanent
Sorry Harlen, I know that playing the D.A. is wearing you down but I can't offer to tag and take over from ya now. :)
regarDS
Showing posts with label Thor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Thor. Show all posts
Monday, March 30, 2009
Friday, March 27, 2009
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt36
Ok, now that I've done my pro Conroy and pro Bolt thing by way of balance here is a bit of free info that some might want to use as ammunition from the other side of things.
As a Born Again Christian since 1982 I reckon I can offer some insight into how that particular brand of human Generally thinks when it comes to "Free Speech/expression" and "Democrazy".
Fear not, I'll be brief and it should mostly be obvious to ya'll anyway (though remembering back through the last 35 clusters of pages, maybe not).
In short, us xtoids (especially the Fanatical Religious Zealots) really only reckon GOOD speech/expression should be made free and easy, and to hell with the rest. No surprises there.
As for democrazy, this next one may come as a surprise.
We don't really want it, it isn't want we are working towards and we only put up with it because it can be made to serve us while we wait for God to sort us all out once and for all. We actually want a theocracy/benevolent dictator but will accept no-one for the job but God (coz we don't want Taliban or Priests tellings us what for either), so merely put up with/use democrazy in the meantime.
Have you ever heard or read in the ancient writings usually deemed sacred to xtoids about the "Democrazy of Heaven" ?
But Of Course not - but why haven't you noticed that before hmmm ?
Tis always "Kingdom of Heaven" this and "Kingdom of Heaven" that, along with the promise do away with the governments and kingdoms of man on earth and replace it with the same kind of system used in Heaven.
THIS is what we are working towards and want and THIS is why we don't really care about protecting "democrazy" nor any freedoms of speech or expression that are so easily deemed to be less than worthwhile or ultimately profitable to one's soul.
Now, aren't both Senator Conroy and PM Rudd of somewhat xtoid persuasion ?
Glad to be of service.
regarDS
As a Born Again Christian since 1982 I reckon I can offer some insight into how that particular brand of human Generally thinks when it comes to "Free Speech/expression" and "Democrazy".
Fear not, I'll be brief and it should mostly be obvious to ya'll anyway (though remembering back through the last 35 clusters of pages, maybe not).
In short, us xtoids (especially the Fanatical Religious Zealots) really only reckon GOOD speech/expression should be made free and easy, and to hell with the rest. No surprises there.
As for democrazy, this next one may come as a surprise.
We don't really want it, it isn't want we are working towards and we only put up with it because it can be made to serve us while we wait for God to sort us all out once and for all. We actually want a theocracy/benevolent dictator but will accept no-one for the job but God (coz we don't want Taliban or Priests tellings us what for either), so merely put up with/use democrazy in the meantime.
Have you ever heard or read in the ancient writings usually deemed sacred to xtoids about the "Democrazy of Heaven" ?
But Of Course not - but why haven't you noticed that before hmmm ?
Tis always "Kingdom of Heaven" this and "Kingdom of Heaven" that, along with the promise do away with the governments and kingdoms of man on earth and replace it with the same kind of system used in Heaven.
THIS is what we are working towards and want and THIS is why we don't really care about protecting "democrazy" nor any freedoms of speech or expression that are so easily deemed to be less than worthwhile or ultimately profitable to one's soul.
Now, aren't both Senator Conroy and PM Rudd of somewhat xtoid persuasion ?
Glad to be of service.
regarDS
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt36
Mark Newton writes...
He was defensive. It was almost embarrassing to watch, and he looked defeated.
... and yet my partner (who until tonight had heard nor knew anything about the filtering issue or my involvement in online "discussions" about it, or the "waa, waa, waa"ing going on from a certain minority, etc) and I thought completely the opposite of your above suggestions, Mark.
Unbidden, she (a school teacher, BTW) found herself of similar view to Andrew Bolt (who I ButOfCourse thought was brilliant and right on the money as per usual) and was scornfully laughing at the irony and hypocrisy and assault upon both reason and the higher responsibilities of freedom/democrazy that both the audience questioners and female and/or more left-wing panel members were spouting forth.
What we both noticed and appreciated the most though was that although Senator Conroy was in the company of both initially a mostly hostile audience and panel, by keeping to the bottom-line and fundamentals, both the panel and audience (who weren't necessarily the rabid rabble they first appeared to be) he soon won them all over to a mostly respectful and understanding silence.
Sure, Andrew Bolts aided in this (to the degree that the lady in the scarf shared her agreement, though no prizes for Andrew for the way he received that agreement. The lad just can't help himself. heh.) but it was obvious that despite the initial planned (and yes, obviously expected) ambush and hijacking of Senator Conroy on the ILCF topic, he won the studio over and not even Tony seemed game to weigh in with his predictable opinions like he usually does.
Based on the uproar usually exampled in these forums one would have expected the TV audience to be comparably vocal (especially considering other episodes of qanda and Tony's calls for order in the past), but no, it would seem that under studio lighting, folk more prone to anonymous outbursts and ranting may well be more inclined to behave reasonably, especially when their confrontations with cold hard logic are rendered a tad more accountable.
All in all, I reckon that it looks like the ALP has a winner with Stephen Conroy and I would expect that they will be keeping him out in front for some time to come, and that the general public will be more likely to side with what he and Andrew had to say on the matter than the publisher and that climate change bloke.
Congrats Senator Conroy on a job well done (you certainly earned your travel allowance for that one !) and cheers to you as always Andrew Bolt (btw, I luvved and cross-posted heaps your stuff on the Uncle Bill and his happy snaps of kiddies thang last year.)
Mark, you obviously might wish that this ILCF thing is a major player on the good Senator's dinner plate, but I doubt if it even rates as a garnish, let alone as one of his essential food-groups.
AFAIC, by the end of that aspect of qanda, the body language of most of the audience and panel seemed to indicate an attitude that the topic was at most much ado about nothing and could we please now talk about something else.
regarDS
He was defensive. It was almost embarrassing to watch, and he looked defeated.
... and yet my partner (who until tonight had heard nor knew anything about the filtering issue or my involvement in online "discussions" about it, or the "waa, waa, waa"ing going on from a certain minority, etc) and I thought completely the opposite of your above suggestions, Mark.
Unbidden, she (a school teacher, BTW) found herself of similar view to Andrew Bolt (who I ButOfCourse thought was brilliant and right on the money as per usual) and was scornfully laughing at the irony and hypocrisy and assault upon both reason and the higher responsibilities of freedom/democrazy that both the audience questioners and female and/or more left-wing panel members were spouting forth.
What we both noticed and appreciated the most though was that although Senator Conroy was in the company of both initially a mostly hostile audience and panel, by keeping to the bottom-line and fundamentals, both the panel and audience (who weren't necessarily the rabid rabble they first appeared to be) he soon won them all over to a mostly respectful and understanding silence.
Sure, Andrew Bolts aided in this (to the degree that the lady in the scarf shared her agreement, though no prizes for Andrew for the way he received that agreement. The lad just can't help himself. heh.) but it was obvious that despite the initial planned (and yes, obviously expected) ambush and hijacking of Senator Conroy on the ILCF topic, he won the studio over and not even Tony seemed game to weigh in with his predictable opinions like he usually does.
Based on the uproar usually exampled in these forums one would have expected the TV audience to be comparably vocal (especially considering other episodes of qanda and Tony's calls for order in the past), but no, it would seem that under studio lighting, folk more prone to anonymous outbursts and ranting may well be more inclined to behave reasonably, especially when their confrontations with cold hard logic are rendered a tad more accountable.
All in all, I reckon that it looks like the ALP has a winner with Stephen Conroy and I would expect that they will be keeping him out in front for some time to come, and that the general public will be more likely to side with what he and Andrew had to say on the matter than the publisher and that climate change bloke.
Congrats Senator Conroy on a job well done (you certainly earned your travel allowance for that one !) and cheers to you as always Andrew Bolt (btw, I luvved and cross-posted heaps your stuff on the Uncle Bill and his happy snaps of kiddies thang last year.)
Mark, you obviously might wish that this ILCF thing is a major player on the good Senator's dinner plate, but I doubt if it even rates as a garnish, let alone as one of his essential food-groups.
AFAIC, by the end of that aspect of qanda, the body language of most of the audience and panel seemed to indicate an attitude that the topic was at most much ado about nothing and could we please now talk about something else.
regarDS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
