A response to Lynn

February 25th, 2010 at 1:36 pm by David Farrar

Lynn Prentice has responded to my post calling for an end to anonymous smears on , by … well mainly calling me some names.

I usually don’t respond to such posts, as the advice which I give to people about responding to Whale Oil, applies equally to The Standard, which is “Remember if you wrestles with pigs in mud, you just get dirty and the pigs enjoy it”.

Having said that, I will break my own advice and respond on this occasion.

he is upset about Eddie pointing out Murray McCully and his mining shares. There wasn’t an value known when the post was written, so Eddie reasonably asked if there was a conflict of interest.

No Eddie did not ask if there was a conflict of interest. He tagged the post corruption, and said McCully had been “caught”.

Eddie could have written a good post on the question. I have no issues that he raised the issue. But Eddie, along with many other Standard authors, have a history of using extreme language against political opponents. They label almost everything corruption (even a post on me). And it is not just that tag – they often attack journalists as being incompetent, corrupt, seeking jobs from National, biased, etc etc. Now I often point out errors in stories also, but try to avoid suggesting ill motives from the journalists involved.

But almost all the authors of The Standard do nothing but slag off and smear people’s motives. You disagree on Maori seats, and you are a racist.

And the reason they do this, is because they are anonymous. Lynn himself tends not to do it often, as he is a known person who can be held accountable for his posts. Rochelle Rees has admirably made herself known, and I think her posts are generally excellent (of course I disagree with them, but she makes her case well). I’m pleased to see Mike Smith join The Standard and that he will blog under his name. I am sure he will not resort to such extreme language as the anonymous authors.

I know many journalists resent the fact the people who do not have the courage to blog under their own name, will smear them and try and damage their professional reputation – while unwilling to expose their own reputation.  They don’t mind fair criticism, but having anonymous posters declare they are lackeys of the Government is tedious.

So getting back to the post in question, I have no problem with the content of the posts, it is the extreme language and rhetoric from anonymous posters.

Now I will admit Whale Oil also uses extreme language against those he disagrees with – which often includes me, and half the Cabinet! But at least Cameron does so effectively under his own name, and he is prepared to take the consequences of what he says.

Anyway back to Lynn:

He seems to think that The Standard has a ‘view’. Now I know that Farrar isn’t particularly technically literate. But surely even a fool would understand that “The Standard” is just some software running on a server. It is the people who write opinions – not a machine. I program the computers for a living and the only thing more stupid in my opinion are some of the trolls that I deal with periodically in this site.

David has read our About he knows that this site runs as a cooperative. Authors write their own opinions and there is no editorial control apart pulling a post after it is put up. I know that he is aware of this because he has written many posts about our site and how it runs in the past. So why is David pretending that the site has an editorial policy? Well the alternative is that he’d have to be upfront about his attacks and direct them at a person. It is easier (and probably safer) to direct it at an abstract concept that can’t defend itself.

I know Lynn gets frustrated that people refer to The Standard collectively, but I don’t think he has considered why people do, so often. First of all Eddie himself declared:

The Standard can now reveal …

So even his own authors talk collectively. But that isn’t even the reason so many refer to the site collectively. The reason is that so many of the authors are anonymous. If a poster is known to be a real person, then their posts ted to be identified with them. But an alias not connected to a real known person doesn’t resonate with people. And to make it even worse, many of the posters have a very similiar style – extreme language and smears against people they disagree with.

If you don’t want people to see you as one entity, then the answer is have your posters reveal themselves. This is in fact Social Media 101 – people relate far better to individuals, as they understand their background, their biases, their interests etc etc. Now if you want to have a policy of anonymity, because all you are about is attacking people you disagree with, then so be it – bt there are consequences – it means the brand of The Standard is far stronger with readers, than those of individual authors. You can’t have it both ways.

I would also mention that the posting style of Eddie has changed dramatically since the election, raising some suspicions that aliases do not relate to unique individuals, but have represented different people at different times. Again, because readers have no way of knowing if an author is a genuine unique individual, one associates things they say more with the site, than them as an individual – because we do not know them as an individual. Again – you can;t have it both ways.

Lynn then gets into the Winston issue. He concludes:

There was no evidence of corruption or even conflicts of interest apart from in your hysterical fantasies.

Now here I just find myself in a different dimension to Lynn. He actually says Winston had no conflicts of interests!!!  He failed to disclose two personal significant donations, and both donors were people whose interests he lobbied Ministerial colleagues on behalf of. And Lynn thinks that is not a conflict, yet McCully was.

I doubt there is a single former Labour Minister who would state on the record that they do not think Winston should have disclosed his donations from racing interests, while he was lobbying them for more money for race prizes.  In fact, I know at least a couple of them are furious that he compromised their collective integrity by not doing so.

But this is not a debate about Winston – it is about always assuming the worst motivations about your opponents. Already today, one author has concluded that as Heatley’s offences were so trivial, that it must mean Key is covering up some bigger scandal.

I’ve several times referred to Phil Goff as essentially a decent bloke, and that if he becomes PM I think he will be a conscientious PM. I regularly swipe at him for stupid things he says, and disagree with many of his policies, but I do not believe he is in any way a bad man, seeking to do bad things. But on The Standard, under the protection of anonymity, that is almost all they do – portray everything as being motivated by vile intentions. It may not be a collective decision, but it is certainly the culture of the site.

David, over the years you have set a very low standard for political blogs in this country.

Oh Lynn, you really can do better than that.

Your wee outburst today appears to simply be because you don’t like a much milder questions of the same sort directed at your friends in your favored party. I’d suggest that you get used to it because asking questions of your friends is part of what this site was setup for.

Questions are good. Go for it. But when you have one to two posts a weeks labelling someone corrupt, then maybe the rhetoric could be less extreme – which it would be if posters had to take responsibility for what they say.

In my opinion, you’re known as being a bit of a hypocrite, frequently a bit of an idiot, and I think that you should also do something about that hysterical streak you have.

I rest my case.

Tags: ,

77 Responses to “A response to Lynn”

  1. nickb (3,686 comments) says:

    DPF you have by far the best and well reasoned political blog in NZ.

    The fact the left are getting hysterical and personal only highlights this.
    Keep up the good work, and keep smiling at their pathetic attempts to smear you. No-one outside smelly hippies and BA students read the rubbish that is the Standard.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. dad4justice (8,097 comments) says:

    Who is the d4j imposter over at the sub standard sewer Lynn or Trevor?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. RRM (9,786 comments) says:

    In other words, The Standard is authored by people similar to Big Bruv, Redbaiter & Murray.

    Now you know why THIS leftie has never bothered to subscribe :-D

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. big bruv (13,689 comments) says:

    RRM

    That is a bit harsh it is not?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. RRM (9,786 comments) says:

    ^^^ Look in the mirror chap. As DPF said:

    “[ ] could have written a good post on the question. I have no issues that he raised the issue. But [ ], along with many other [ ] authors, have a history of using extreme language against political opponents. They label almost everything corruption (even a post on me). And it is not just that tag – they often attack journalists as being incompetent, corrupt, seeking jobs from [ ] , biased, etc etc. Now I often point out errors in stories also, but try to avoid suggesting ill motives from the journalists involved.”

    “But almost all the authors of [ ] do nothing but slag off and smear people’s motives. You disagree on Maori seats, and you are a racist.”

    “And the reason they do this, is because they are anonymous.”

    “And to make it even worse, many of the posters have a very similiar style – extreme language and smears against people they disagree with.”

    [ ] = Delete “The Standard”, substitute Big Bruv/Redbaiter/Murray.

    Surely you’re not going to claim this ISN’T your modus operandi in a nutshell?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Sonny Blount (1,777 comments) says:

    The reason Kiwiblog is the best and most widely read political blog in NZ is The Standard, WhaleOil, Tumeke, etc make it so easy for DPF. And all they can do is trumpet their righteous moderation methods (which is usually undisguised elitism), while missing the point that DPF understands the value of free speech (defending the voice of those you disagree with).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. big bruv (13,689 comments) says:

    RRM

    “Surely you’re not going to claim this ISN’T your modus operandi in a nutshell?”

    Damn right I don’t think this is my modus operandi.

    The bloody cheek of it, I am as pure as the driven snow.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. dad4justice (8,097 comments) says:

    Anonymous “driven snow”.
    What a crackpot.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. m@tt (625 comments) says:

    You both had a wee rant. Lynn’s was better.
    Now shake hands and play nice.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. ben (2,375 comments) says:

    Well said, David.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. bearhunter (853 comments) says:

    “In my opinion, you’re known as being a bit of a hypocrite, frequently a bit of an idiot, and I think that you should also do something about that hysterical streak you have.”

    Sweet Jesus, given Lynn’s prim, pursed-mouth self-righteousness whenever anyone offends his delicate sensibilities (eg referring to The Substandard as an entity), images of pots and kettles spring to mind. The increasing hysteria there is shocking; shrill screamers “full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Murray (8,845 comments) says:

    So DPF, you’ve been savaged by Bambi… how are you holding up?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. expat (4,049 comments) says:

    Don’t you just love wee Lynns’ purposeful misuse of “the Stundurd ain’t no entity, youse are just thickos and I have used all of my benevolence today” argument when as David notes duh!stundurd is intentionally a veil for muck racking and shit slinging, probably for legal reasons as well as venal poltical reasons, to distance union reps, bneficiaries and bitter socialists from the shit slinging.

    Now the standard has a tabloid format their transformation into a self parody is complete.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. scrubone (3,092 comments) says:

    Just hover over a few links on The Standard’s blogroll. The snipy comments that they’ve hidden there show just how classy they are.

    I actually give their comments threads (in the rare times I read them) a better mark than those here – but their posts are vastly below the standard on Kiwiblog, it’s not even close on that score.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. serge (108 comments) says:

    Good on you David. I get quite saddened by the uses of words such as corrupt and so on, are we New Zealanders or what? Sure, truths can be stated without derogatory remarks, they are more effective.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. scrubone (3,092 comments) says:

    Hm, re: the “The Standard is just software on a server” – he’s very, very sensitive on that one. It’s patently weird, sort of like saying “I didn’t say it my mouth did”.

    Who cares?

    Yes, there are different authors with different variations of left-wing politics, but they’re all in the same ballpark for most things or they wouldn’t be blogging there in the first place. But given I know of even lefties who think they’re idiots I generally ignore them nowadays.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. aardvark (417 comments) says:

    instrumental intro…. de-da, de-da…

    “When two blogs go to war, one is all that you can score…

    Go to war, go to war.

    When two blogs go to war, one is all you can score…”

    Thanks to Frankie Goes to Hollywood for the inspiration ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Bevan (3,923 comments) says:

    In other words, The Standard is authored by people similar to Big Bruv, Redbaiter & Murray.

    Hardly, Murray and Bruv are no where near as bad as the standard – murray is quite restrained and is not anonymous – you can find out about murray by clicking the link he posts with, Bruv can hardly be compared to any of those sycophants at the standard – Bruv at least is not blinded by party loyalty and regularly vents at Nat MP’s here. Even Redbaiter – while his rhetoric is too over the top IMO – the fact that he has the ability to be critical of Nat MP’s means he holds a much higherr ung up the ladder than a bunch of anonymous loosers.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Murray (8,845 comments) says:

    And I’m not paid to do it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. expat (4,049 comments) says:

    Look Murray, say that again and I’ll ban you right after I’ve demonstrated my omnipotence/impotence [delete as applicable] by talking about Unix sysadmin stuff.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. queenstfarmer (764 comments) says:

    Bitter personal attacks are standard operating procedure of many on the Left. The Left (generally) has a vested interest in generating resentment by the many against the few, “exposing secret agendas”, and smearing (racist, corrupt, etc). Appeals to reason won’t stop it – the Left cannot give up its main electoral weapon. Of course some on the Right do it too, but it is the exception rather than the rule.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Pete George (23,437 comments) says:

    Who is the d4j imposter over at the sub standard sewer Lynn or Trevor?

    Lynn said he would check it out.

    I think this is important. Amongst a bunch of blogs on Anonymous Smears and Hypocrisy and Idiots it looks like someone has posted under someone else’s well known moniker (who frequently identifies himself) to post something quite nasty – and that post still stands unmoderated on a site that tries to make something of it’s standard.

    I’d be very surprised if the real D4J had anything to do with it. It’s very unlikely it is an inadvertent coincidental use. So it seems some anonymous smearing idiotic gutless nasty bastard has been at work.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. oob (190 comments) says:

    Look Murray, say that again and I’ll ban you right after I’ve demonstrated my omnipotence/impotence [delete as applicable] by talking about Unix sysadmin stuff.

    That’s one of the real ironies.

    Lynn Prentice is technically inept. Really inept. As an example, he literally cannot distinguish between the Linux Operating System, the BASH shell and the Fortune application. Ask your local Unix guy where that places him on the technical competence scale.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Murray (8,845 comments) says:

    Sock puppetry at the stranded… gosh.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Pete George (23,437 comments) says:

    Bitter personal attacks are standard operating procedure of many on the Left.

    Of course some on the Right do it too, but it is the exception rather than the rule.

    And this is another example of gross partisan conceit. KB has a reputation for nasty attacks for good reason, it happens a lot here. From “the left” and “the right” and from in between. Most “bitter personal attacks” are anonymous anyway, so how can you know what spectrum initiates it? That’s the point DPF originally raised.

    Ironically D4J has a reputation (probably why he was clumsily used) but at least he is up front and identifies himself.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. burt (8,206 comments) says:

    oob is right, people who know what they are talking about cringe when lprent tells us all how brilliant he is and laugh when he describes things that he clearly has trouble understanding.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. RightNow (6,975 comments) says:

    “KB has a reputation for nasty attacks for good reason, it happens a lot here” – agreed, but invariably the attacks here are by the commenters and not the blog author, who displays a more even temperament than both KB commenters and Stranded authors. DPF has the moral high ground, at least this time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. burt (8,206 comments) says:

    oob

    In the early days of the standard lprent once did a big tech rant. I responded that if I were intending to hack into his server that the level of detail about his configuration, OS, and the software bits-n-bobs (including version numbers) he was using would all be very helpful. He got angry with me and in the process of trying to shout me down he spouted even more details that most competent sys-op’s would never publicly release.

    I think he is mad (certifiable) – but he’s so much fun to wind up.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Inventory2 (10,270 comments) says:

    I repeat the question that I posed yesterday; which version of Eddie wrote the post referred to? Was it the female Eddie who some say might be named Jenny? Or was it the male Eddie, who others say goes by the name of Conor?

    It would be much easier and less confusing if the identity of Eddie wasn’t duplicated – or should that be duplicitous?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. dime (9,805 comments) says:

    The Standard are just envious that DPF’s blogs can withstand robust debate.

    Cant be easy pushing an ideology that has failed time after time.

    Needless to say, Dime didnt last long at the Standard! I lasted ok when I was Rex, til election night hehe

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Grendel (993 comments) says:

    i always get the impression that the more they say that they are a classier bunch, that their comments are better, that this place is full of trolls, that they never ban people who simply point out how wrong they are; the more they believe it to be true.

    and the more they beleive it, the more their sycophants beleive it and state it as fact.

    and then when you are discusing policitical blogs with lefty friends who don’t read many of them frequently, you get them telling you that they have heard as a fact that the standard is a paragon of political discourse and Kiwiblog is just a front site run for national by a guy who works for them. wherease the truth is pretty much the reverse (especially in terms of who is being funded).

    i’ve had that conversation, and i tell you, that becuase they hear this from friends of theirs who think NRT is cutting news etc they beleive it.

    its one thing lefties have figured out (and execute better) more than others (maybe cos they have more time on thier hands?) is that perception is more important than reality.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. dime (9,805 comments) says:

    Grendel – what the hell are you doing having lefty friends? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Grendel (993 comments) says:

    slowly working on them :) especially as they earn more, and see no hopers sitting on their arses, its harder and harder for them to stay lefty as the great myth of why its good to pay tax erodes and they realise the money would be better on their mortgage.

    some of them i have admittedly given up on, but theres hope for some of them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. David Farrar (1,883 comments) says:

    Generally a site is not accountable for the comments of the readers – only the blog authors. I will however delete or give out demerits for the worst abuse.

    Yesterday I dermited someone 50 demerits and deleted their description Lynn. I note with amusement that Lynn has left standing the comment of someone comparing me to Mark Lundy, who killed his wife and baby daughter.

    This is why I find it so amusing when they take the moral high ground. It is like being lectured by Iran on women’s rights.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. big bruv (13,689 comments) says:

    Dime

    “what the hell are you doing having lefty friends?”

    You are about as close to a pinko as one can get Dime yet I still reckon you are OK.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. big bruv (13,689 comments) says:

    “Yesterday I dermited someone 50 demerits ”

    I hope it was for the “pull the trigger” comment.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Kimble (4,428 comments) says:

    The Standurrrrd doesnt have robust debate in their comments sections. Most posts just have sycophantic cheer and jeer-leading from resident arse-lickers. And the few posts that do attract debate are far too often drowned out by a cacophony cheers and jeers.

    The mods at The StalinDad regularly cut off commenters they dont like, removing their posts. Attempts to have genuine debate fail far too often for anyone to bother anymore.

    I still recall a very simple question I was trying to get a response to at The Stankhard a while back. I put forth a very good case why a chart they presented as showing one thing, actually showed something very different. I gave a logical reason why I held that view and asked if anyone there could tell the logical story of their position. No one could.

    What I DID get were insults and arrogant accusations that I hated poor people, am a racist, etc. Now it would be a different story over here if I held the opposite view. I would get the same accusations, for sure, but I would also get a lot of really good, constructive responses.

    I havent been back to The StunnedTurd since. I figured if the mods were going to take it upon themselves to police their comments, but wouldnt restrict the ad hominem attacks on people from the right, then they wouldnt allow proper debate anyway.

    Over at The Scumfart (a stretch but I am almost tapped out here:) the resident commenters dont bother making reasoned polite responses, because they know they dont have to. All they have to do is scream at people with opposing views until they leave. They know the mods wont do a damned thing to stop them, but will ban inconvenient right thinking posters.

    It isnt so much an echo chamber as a single large, intellectually handicapped, psychopath muttering to itself while sitting on a mound of its own excrement.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Pete George (23,437 comments) says:

    I note with amusement that Lynn has left standing the comment

    IrishBill has now taken the obvious action, good on him.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Pete George (23,437 comments) says:

    Was it “Eddie” that impersonated d4j?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Inventory2 (10,270 comments) says:

    DPF said “Yesterday I dermited someone 50 demerits and deleted their description Lynn. I note with amusement that Lynn has left standing the comment of someone comparing me to Mark Lundy, who killed his wife and baby daughter.”

    Perhaps he saw the thread on the wine bottle stoppers DPF, and was comparing you to Lundy in terms of consumption of plonk, or something along those lines ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. johnbc (15 comments) says:

    I read the Standard during the election to get a feeling for the hysteria the left were trying to generate around the “slippery” Key. Mostly I was left with a yucky sensation of being around something nasty -especially from LPrent. I seldom visit these days -it’s vile and depressing mostly.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Le Grande Fromage (145 comments) says:

    Banned at the Standard, 50 demerits at Kiwiblog, it just gets harder and harder to launch a good groundless slander these days.

    Apologies DPF but it is hard to resist having a pop at a dickhead as big as Lyn Prentice

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Sonny Blount (1,777 comments) says:

    I got banned from The Standard for this:

    Sonny Blount
    19 February 2010 at 2:16 pm

    “Ads. We’ve been pissing a bit of money away, basically. We could be using that money to pay for the server, rather than out of Lynn’s wallet and the generous donations. We can also use it for enhancing The Standard and left activism. The point of ads is not to enrich ourselves. The money will be held by The Standard Trust and used to pay for the site and to advance the progressive left principles the site was founded on.”

    This statement suggests to me that you believe that you are able to maintain adherence to your vision whilst receiving advertising revenue, why would you think RNZ are not capable of the same?

    [lprent: You're a bit of a dickhead.. The site doesn't cost anything to run and we don't rely on it. If Irish (?) hadn't already banned you then I would. This is what the 4th thing saying essentially the same thing. That is trolling and more importantly pisses off the moderators. ]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Robert Black (423 comments) says:

    Well said DPF.

    I could have sworn her name was Lizzie, haha.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. scrubone (3,092 comments) says:

    Re: whether the left or the right are more abusive.

    There’s certainly a strain of bad behaviour through the right, with Whale Oil being the most odvious example.

    But I’ve looked at literally thousands of blogs (and what’s more, I can give the addresses to anyone who asks!) and one of the first clues that a blog is on the left is the attitude of the posts – F** this and F** that, Key is a liar, Bush murders small children, coprorates are raping our land, fat cats are stealing from the poor, Palin (Beck et al) are f**d in the head…

    you get the idea.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. expat (4,049 comments) says:

    Le Grande Fromage,

    Farrars comment about 50 demerits had me checking some of my comments but they must have landed juuuuust on the right side of slander.

    Respect. And can you email me the offending slander, I could do with a chuckle…. kiwiexpat007@gmail.com

    ta.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Murray (8,845 comments) says:

    um… question Sonny, are they paying for the server or not because they seem to be undecided about it.

    But good to see they have a reasonable banning policy. If you’re reasonable they’ll ban you.

    Scrubone i have no f**king idea what you’re talking about.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. expat (4,049 comments) says:

    scrub,

    can you email me the url’s of ‘those’ websites, ahem…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Repton (769 comments) says:

    As an example, [Lynn] literally cannot distinguish between the Linux Operating System, the BASH shell and the Fortune application.

    You mean the Linux kernel and the GNU/Linux operating system :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Repton (769 comments) says:

    one of the first clues that a blog is on the left is the attitude of the posts – F** this and F** that, Key is a liar, Bush murders small children, coprorates are raping our land, fat cats are stealing from the poor, Palin (Beck et al) are f**d in the head…

    And one of the first clues that a blog is on the right is the attitude of the posts – F** this and F** that, Clark is a liar, Obama murders small children, socialists are raping our land, beneficiaries are stealing from the taxpayer, …

    [I don't know enough about US politics to come up with an opposite to Palin]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Murray (8,845 comments) says:

    Clark is a liar, bad day to mention beneficiaries steeling from the tax payer, socialists are raping our wallets, not out land, please pay attention.

    You are the only person I’ve every heard of claiming Obamas murders small children.

    Obviously you’re a rational moderate.

    But nice timing on the beneficiaries ripping off the tax payer thing Einstein.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. expat (4,049 comments) says:

    Repton: Palin = Winston Peters

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Dirty Rat (504 comments) says:

    I thought Lynne was a chick

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. GMDI (70 comments) says:

    “Eddie could have written a good post on the question”

    Oh Dpf, you slay me. the entity known as eddie would struggle to right a crooked post, let alone write a good one.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Barnsley Bill (983 comments) says:

    David. Stop fucking about and out them. We know who Eddie was and we know who Eddie is now. Stop being a beige twit who likes to break bread with all those other beige numpties in Wellington and stand up.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Johnboy (15,903 comments) says:

    “I thought Lynne was a chick”

    I thought Lynn/Lynette was a shemale.

    I mean you would, wouldn’t you? Him/her being a Labour party stooge and all. Well you would, wouldn’t you?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Kimble (4,428 comments) says:

    BB, breaking bread while standing is a good way to get crumbs on the floor.

    DPF, I implore you to ignore Bills advice and break bread at a table or at a bench. If you must stand then for the love of god, put down a tarp.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Inventory2 (10,270 comments) says:

    Barnsley Bill said “We know who Eddie was and we know who Eddie is now. Stop being a beige twit who likes to break bread with all those other beige numpties in Wellington and stand up.”

    Quite so BB – we know that “Eddie” had a gender reassignment, but that he/she occasionally reverts to type. We know that “Eddie” is closely connected to Labour’s inner circle with whichever gender provides the copy. One half of “Eddie” ran Labour’s campaign in Mt Albert last year. The other half of “Eddie” recently gave advice to the party as to how to “move on” from its electoral defeat. So let’s not pretend that “Eddie” is some left-wing loose unit. Anything that “Eddie” blogs at The Standard is highly politically motivated.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Pete George (23,437 comments) says:

    Did “Eddie” impersonate d4j here:
    http://www.thestandard.org.nz/david-farrar-a-known-hypocrite-and-a-bit-of-an-idiot/#comment-194354

    lprent’s response to not moderating or dealing with an identity hijack (in fact supporting it) and a highly abusive post was:
    “I have little sympathy for d4j because one of his trademarks here was to hijack other peoples identities.”

    So was lprent always aware of who posted under D4J? Or became aware?

    If “Eddie” was posing as D4J, and if “Eddie” represents the Labour Party, it raises serious questions about their anonymous practices.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Brian Marshall (201 comments) says:

    Lets face it David. Kiwiblog is NZ’s #1 blog for a reason, and it ain’t crap posts.

    And who gets invited on to Radio Pravda on Afternoons with Jim Moira?? (Which I like more when you’re on and switch off when Bomber is) Well it isn’t the substandard is it???

    Keep up the good work and don’t decend into feckless petty posts. When you fight with idiots, they just drag you down to their level.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. redqueen (553 comments) says:

    Well written, sir. It’s nice to see that level-headed thinking can put scummy behaviour back into the sewer that is leftist thinking. What’s funny is that they will see this as ‘reactionary’, compared with their own egregious behaviour. Such a pity.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    ” “Remember if you wrestles with pigs in mud, you just get dirty and the pigs enjoy it”. having said that, I will break my own advice and respond on this occasion.”

    Well I dunno why you did that. Those cretins over there have got nothing except for what they get from others. They’re floundering and they’re blustering and they’re dying, and they’ll die quicker if we ignore them.

    There’s not a leftist blog that is not heavily censored, at the same time as they profess to welcome opposing views. They hate that opinions they stifle on their own blogs have an outlet on Kiwiblog. It drives them completely nuts. (or given that they’re leftists, nuttier than they are anyway)

    The subject post and all the other posts attacking Kiwiblog are just the usual frantic cowardly gutless slimy attempts to blacken Kiwiblog and David Farrar for providing a place where anti-left views can be freely expressed. They’ll keep doing it because they have no reasoned or logical answer to honest and heartfelt criticism. Criticism that points out the obvious flaws in the ideology they would impose upon us, to the exclusion of every other ideology.

    They have no answer, so they must blacken and slander and malign and destroy. All they ever have. All the strategy they ever have when confronted with truth. They are politically prehistoric cowards and zealots who are driven into a frenzy at seeing their ideas mocked and exposed for the fatuous timeworn dogma they really are.

    The writers at the Standard deserve nothing but contempt and the best thing you can do to hasten their impending demise is to ignore them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Stuart Mackey (337 comments) says:

    Redbaiter (8984) Says:
    February 26th, 2010 at 12:18 am
    ******************************

    You know Red, and this goes for everyone else here who does not post under their own name or cannot be readily identified, given one of the main points of this post was anonymous posting and people not being accountable for their words, why do so many here post anonymously?

    Its not that I disagree with the expressed view’s on ‘The Standard’, they are spot on, but why say anything, when you don’t post under your own name, in a thread about anonymous posting! Why are you guys so keen to serve ‘The Standard’ ammunition on a plate?

    My name is on public display, why so few others?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Pete George (23,437 comments) says:

    That’s just Red being Red, accusing “them” of many of the things he does himself. Being anonymous for so long hasn’t given him much traction.

    I posted a followup question to Lynn on The Standard – “Do you know who posted as D4J?”.
    I saw that I had been put on moderation – and a few minutes later the post disappeared. His site, his rules.

    However he had closed that topic with “Now is this anonymous smearing or an honest opinion?”.

    At the very least he willingly allowed anonymous smearing in the following posts. And the perception could be that he may have been dishonest about it. Do perceptions matter?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Inventory2 (10,270 comments) says:

    Of course perceptions matter Pete! Just ask Phil Heatley :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Luc Hansen (4,573 comments) says:

    Everyone says they know who Eddie is, whoever he is. So tell me do, whisper it, who’s Eddie?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. Redbaiter (13,197 comments) says:

    The issue of anonymity is a red herring. The writer of the Herald Editorial does not provide his name, yet this fact is never the cause of significant ire.

    However, there is a difference between mere commenting, and running a blog that is virtually a mouthpiece for partisan political hate. The issue is the moral fibre of the Standard’s editors. Everything else, even when Mr. Farrar raises it, is a side issue. Mr. Farrar’s point is that with the Standard’s constant hate driven editorials alleging dishonesty and fraud, those making the allegations should, by any common measure of human decency, be due some accountability. Common decency and the left tho generally mix like oil and water.

    I repeat, this issue is basically just another manifestation of the left’s obsession with control, and their desperate frustration with the fact that although they can stifle debate on their own blog, they cannot do so elsewhere.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. RRM (9,786 comments) says:

    “[ ] is virtually a mouthpiece for partisan political hate.”

    “…constant hate driven [comments posts] alleging dishonesty and fraud, those making the allegations should, by any common measure of human decency, be due some accountability.”

    “[ ] desperate frustration with the fact that although they can stifle debate on their own blog, they cannot do so elsewhere.”

    YET AGAIN, epic LOLs at Redbaiter as Pot: “Oh kettle, how black thou art…”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Pete George (23,437 comments) says:

    I agree with what you are saying RRM, but Red makes a valid point – blogs operate on two levels – the blog author/s and the commenters. Certainly commenters can flavour a blog, but the integrity of the blog lies mainly with the author/s.

    Lynn goes to great lengths to try and separate individual author comments and practices from “The Standard” (while at the same time giving a blanket “sewer” label to KB). In any case, perception rules – and like it or not, as for TVNZ or The Herald, one person’s contribution can reflect on the publication, at a columnist or author level a lot, at a commenter or letter to the editor level much less.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. Put it away (2,878 comments) says:

    That admin with the girls name really is a stuck record. I don’t think he can go 5 minutes without calling someone a troll or pointing out his sanctified “about” page.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. expat (4,049 comments) says:

    Look pal, I have implied a number of times that I have sophisticated pattern recognition software (written by yours truly, geeneeus) that can identify trolls 99 times out of 100 so if you wish to avoid being banned I suggest you refer to the About page here > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comic_Book_Guy

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. expat (4,049 comments) says:

    .

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. Sonny Blount (1,777 comments) says:

    Everyone says they know who Eddie is, whoever he is. So tell me do, whisper it, who’s Eddie?

    It used to be Jenny Michie, now its Connor Roberts.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. expat (4,049 comments) says:

    Eddie

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. ropata (117 comments) says:

    The Standard has died! What’s happening it has been off line for 3 days?!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.