PDA

View Full Version : Wot 'appened . . .



Curtism
01-17-2014, 03:17 AM
. . . to the Oz Politics thread?

Peerie Maa
01-17-2014, 03:30 AM
Ian locked it yesterday, may be he decided to delete?

The Bigfella
01-17-2014, 03:45 AM
I deleted it. It had degenerated into nothing but attacks by a couple of guys who never bring anything positive to the forum. It also contained material that should no longer be in the public domain.

Stiletto
01-17-2014, 03:49 AM
Wow. You started it Ian, but it was hardly your thread any more.

Maybe that was the problem.

Curtism
01-17-2014, 04:00 AM
I deleted it.

I'm sorry to hear that. Heck, I was sorry to see the original get lost to the aether in that glitch last year.

The Bigfella
01-17-2014, 04:00 AM
Wow. You started it Ian, but it was hardly your thread any more.

Maybe that was the problem.

Not in the slightest. I'll go toe to toe with anyone on an issue that interests me....

There was material in the thread that is currently being investigated and I couldn't devote the time to tracking down and removing all such references.

The Bigfella
01-17-2014, 04:03 AM
I'm sorry to hear that. Heck, I was sorry to see the original get lost to the aether in that glitch last year.

Me too. If the thread was still the original, I would probably have made the time to find and trim the material at issue, but it wasn't. I still think the process is more interesting than the material. I'm sure there'll be some interesting debates down the track

purri
01-17-2014, 05:37 AM
^Vanity of vanities, all is vanity. And now for a quick out take to the narcissism thread...:cool:

Phillip Allen
01-17-2014, 06:04 AM
^Vanity of vanities, all is vanity. And now for a quick out take to the narcissism thread...:cool:

nailed it!

The Bigfella
01-17-2014, 07:19 AM
^Vanity of vanities, all is vanity. And now for a quick out take to the narcissism thread...:cool:


nailed it!

Two prime examples of opinionated forumites getting it wrong again.

Ian McColgin
01-17-2014, 08:01 AM
And heaven forefend that error should be allowed to creep in.

Our only problem remains detailing the distinction between error and difference.

It's much more relaxing to realize that while ideologues and sociopaths will simply repeat the same factually untrue stuff even after it's been debunked, most of this Forum's members are rational enough that they don't need a superego repressing those falsehoods. In the event, one excellent way to foster mistrust of a point of view is to use coersion to silence others. For those reasons, I am personally happier to not delete anything, to let the record stand for all to see, even when that includes my mistakes that I've had to acknowledge.

The Bigfella
01-17-2014, 08:23 AM
And heaven forefend that error should be allowed to creep in.

Our only problem remains detailing the distinction between error and difference.

It's much more relaxing to realize that while ideologues and sociopaths will simply repeat the same factually untrue stuff even after it's been debunked, most of this Forum's members are rational enough that they don't need a superego repressing those falsehoods. In the event, one excellent way to foster mistrust of a point of view is to use coersion to silence others. For those reasons, I am personally happier to not delete anything, to let the record stand for all to see, even when that includes my mistakes that I've had to acknowledge.


Nothing to do with mistakes. There was stuff on the thread, about corrupt politicians. The material is subject to a police strikeforce investigation. Would you, as a lawyer, advise your client to delete it?

David G
01-17-2014, 09:11 AM
Two prime examples of opinionated forumites getting it wrong again.

Opinionated forumites? Hard to imagine...

Paul Pless
01-17-2014, 09:33 AM
There was material in the thread that is currently being investigated and I couldn't devote the time to tracking down and removing all such references.In what way does an investigation make certain previously posted material inappropriate?

Mrleft8
01-17-2014, 09:35 AM
In what way does an investigation make certain previously posted material inappropriate?

Important generals may be named, and they'd rather remain imaginary.....

Ian McColgin
01-17-2014, 10:07 AM
"Would you, as a lawyer, advise your client to delete it?" [#12]

I don't know.

I took a look at some issues regarding libel and Australian law (https://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Censor/defamation.html) and don't see from that information that WoodenBoat has ought to fear. Even if some individual remarks on a forum rise to prosecutable level, the open debate here would appear to protect WoodenBoat even if this Forum could be found to be under any Australian jurisdiction.

I suppose that if The Bigfella were acting as attorney for Forum members who might be subject to some criminal action, then he would do well to advise more temperate language and perhaps even advise deleting some posts not, I should hope, as a way of hiding evidence of a crime, but rather as a sort of show of contrition and sober reflection. I don't know if The Big Fella communicated such advice to any of the Forum members he apparantly considered at risk of a police raid.

But an attorney would be unlikely to personally and on his own initiative erase the record of a client's past public utterances. Certainly no attorney would presume to do such an erasure as a legal duty a party not his or her client. At least in the US, an attorney would not seek to protect a client by erasing that client's criminally libalous utterances as that would put the attorney in the position of activly covering up the crime. And covering up the crimes of parties who are not clients is a long step beyond.

But those suppositions are moot since the Big Fella is not acting as anyone's attorney but rather - I hope - using the attorney role as a sort of analogy for his public spirited and protective act.

As I read Australian law and cases (a cursory reading and I could easily be wrong), no Forum members were at real risk of Australian police raids from what they posted here. Certainly other Forum members and WoodenBoat corporately were not at risk of police raids for any individually untrue and criminally reckless utterances here. So I can discern no threat of police action except perhaps to some individual who posted here something that was criminally libelous. As I understand the implications, those were utterances with which The Big Fella disagreed. If The Bigfella was acting to hide putative crimes committed here by his political opponents, then indeed he's taken a generous if legally perilous measure.

This Forum's rules permit a threat starter to close or delete a thread for any or no reason. It is within The Bigfella's pervue to delete the thread for good, bad or even no reason, regardless of other Forum members' agreement or disagreement and regardless of the fact that the deletion removes from our view some of the interesting albeit intramural dialectic of Australian politics and personalities.

The spotlight on truth does not show much when turned off.

oznabrag
01-17-2014, 10:30 AM
Pore li'l feller.

Domesticated_Mr. Know It All
01-17-2014, 10:43 AM
Taking your ball and going home eh?




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z99iVXJ8OtA

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
01-17-2014, 12:19 PM
I deleted it. It had degenerated into nothing but attacks by a couple of guys who never bring anything positive to the forum. It also contained material that should no longer be in the public domain.

Now there's a truly fascinating concept.

Durnik
01-17-2014, 12:26 PM
Two prime examples of opinionated forumites getting it wrong again.

and a fine example of one forumite still living in an Egyptian river..



The spotlight on truth does not show much when turned off.

AKA, 'hide the evidence!'. I had thought it interesting he seemed to have taken a page from his main fanboi.. "Don't like what others say? Lock the thread". - Going one step further, still not enough? Delete it! Oh the power he must feel deleting others words.

Bah! always the excuse.



ETA:
Now there's a truly fascinating concept.

on a couple of levels!

enjoy
bobby

Ian McColgin
01-17-2014, 12:29 PM
The Bigfella writes so obliquely that one is left without specifics upon which to base understanding.

He might be taking personal responsibility for deleting materials he wrote that in his opinion should not be public and/or which is under police investigation, or he might be attempting to cover up someone else's purported offenses. The purported offenses might or might not be real.

As the opening poster, he has under Forum rules the prerogative to delete the thread. It does not matter if his reasoning is even remotely intelligible or not.

One thing the exercise shows is that if one cannot or will not explain an action fully and clearly, it is more dignified and adult not to explain at all and simply accept in silence whatever rhetorical slings and arrows may then come one's way.

The Bigfella
01-17-2014, 04:20 PM
Nothing at all to do with libel. Two people are dead. One of them, who I was co-authoring a book with, had received death threats. I'd removed a lot of material from the book draft. I removed some material from here too.

johnw
01-17-2014, 06:29 PM
The Bigfella writes so obliquely that one is left without specifics upon which to base understanding.

He might be taking personal responsibility for deleting materials he wrote that in his opinion should not be public and/or which is under police investigation, or he might be attempting to cover up someone else's purported offenses. The purported offenses might or might not be real.

As the opening poster, he has under Forum rules the prerogative to delete the thread. It does not matter if his reasoning is even remotely intelligible or not.

One thing the exercise shows is that if one cannot or will not explain an action fully and clearly, it is more dignified and adult not to explain at all and simply accept in silence whatever rhetorical slings and arrows may then come one's way.

I think you're talking past each other. Outside the U.S., rules about what can prejudice a trial are different from American rules. I suspect what Ian is dealing with is rules much more like those of Britain than the U.S.

Ian McColgin
01-17-2014, 06:35 PM
I leave it to Ian to explain as much as he feels he should. While I still do not think deleting the thread was something I'd have done, I must say that Ian has reasons so good that were I in his position I'd at least be closer to deleting than I've ever imagined. It's not a matter of personal pique at all.

purri
01-18-2014, 03:31 AM
Yep Attention Deficit Syndrome has kicked in. Next thing it'll be a SWAT raid on the Land Commander's digs at VIC BKS. Tell me Boofella what building number was it again? QUOTE=oznabrag;4034528]Pore li'l feller.[/QUOTE]

Phillip Allen
01-18-2014, 07:47 AM
I leave it to Ian to explain as much as he feels he should. While I still do not think deleting the thread was something I'd have done, I must say that Ian has reasons so good that were I in his position I'd at least be closer to deleting than I've ever imagined. It's not a matter of personal pique at all.



two dead?!... who 'else' has he p**ed off with his needling?

The Bigfella
01-18-2014, 08:12 AM
I leave it to Ian to explain as much as he feels he should. While I still do not think deleting the thread was something I'd have done, I must say that Ian has reasons so good that were I in his position I'd at least be closer to deleting than I've ever imagined. It's not a matter of personal pique at all.


Not going to happen. I'll just watch a few internet heroes carry on a bit. Its quite illuminating.

Phillip Allen
01-18-2014, 03:13 PM
On the Internet (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:wW9roACMeYYJ:forum.woodenboat.com/showthread.php%3F162622-Oz-Politics/page58+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us), is anything truly deleted?

no...