The Standard and Red Alert

December 26th, 2012 at 9:00 am by David Farrar

Mike Smith blogs at The Standard:

I thought back to when we started . I was in the room too; our aim was to set up a labour movement blog and offer a counter to Kiwiblog’s pro-National line; not to join Farrar in making the prospect of Labour government the principal target for attack.

A fascinating statement, somewhat at odds with the traditional line that The Standard had nothing to do with Labour, and is just a bunch of individuals. Mike was of course the Labour Party General Secretary at the time, so his revelation that he was part of the group which established The Standard is significant. I blogged some time ago that it was an initiative started by Helen Clark’s office, and this confirms it.

On the subject of left blogs, Grant Robertson blogs at Red Alert:

In terms of , watch out in the new year for a re-launch with a different approach and way of doing things. Exciting times ahead.

I guess that means fewer SMOGs. Will some MPs have their keys taken away from them?

Tags: ,

46 Responses to “The Standard and Red Alert”

  1. Graeme Edgeler (3,281 comments) says:

    1. Mike Smith clearly says “labour movement” blog (i.e. pro-union), not pro-Labour (with a big L).

    2. He just didn’t expect a labour movement blog to be anti-Labour.

    3. I didn’t think Mike ever worked in Helen Clark’s office. Which you would likely be aware of, given your work on the pledge card file.

    4. Do you really think Helen Clark’s office would set up a joint Labour/Green/Other “labour movement” blog? You appear to have a remarkably high appreciatiom for her tolerance for the public airing of differences of opinion.

    [DPF: 1 and 2 not disputed. 3 was never claimed but the inclusion of the top Labour organisational official at a meeting to create The Standard is hugely significant. I bet you no other blog was created at a meeting with a top party official in attendance - except Frog Blog and Red Alert etc. 4 yes I absolutely think HC office saw merit in a labour movement blog]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Paulus (2,602 comments) says:

    I have been banned on both – or at least if I say anything it does not get printed.
    But I use another name if warranted.
    Both are a pathetic laugh – Red Jerk is virtuallty a Curren controlled site now that Trev has gone elsewhere.
    Standard is full of 1950’s thoughts – real old time communist lefty lefts – not like Greenpeace NZ though – they are similar in thought but more subtle in their approach –
    Standard is Ok as you can see what the collective psycological thought chain is like – no longer appropriate to the modern times – oh for the 50’s Waterside strike again not the pathetic Auckland MUNZ.
    Greenpeace on the other hand are dangerous and Labour cannot get to grips with them (and cannot acceed to their demands at 2014 – so will have to give in to Greenpeace demands). They will say one thing and do the opposite when suits -great PR job though – all peace and light.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Keeping Stock (10,266 comments) says:

    Mike Smith also says this, deep into the comments section:

    And I’m an optimist with history. I’ve been involved in all of Labour’s five general election wins in the past nearly thirty years, and the fight to get from the fourth Labour government to the very different fifth. For different reasons, they were all difficult wins. But I’d rather be an activist than a pessimist. One thing I do know, is that the first place you lose elections is in your head.

    I’m also not starry-eyed. I sat in Labour’s caucus as a non-voting member for eight years, and from time to time I had my say. As for policy, this year was the year of the manifesto – its here. http://www.labour.org.nz/about-us Next year will be where the detail gets done. Plenty of work for all.

    So; a man who “sat in Labour’s caucus as a non-voting member for eight years” and who now authors posts at The Standard; it kind of cements the impression that Labour and The Standard are joined at the hip. Perhaps that’s why there is such discontent from The Standard’s commentariat; those who see just how inept the current Labour Party organisation is.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. nasska (11,169 comments) says:

    …”In terms of Red Alert, watch out in the new year for a re-launch with a different approach and way of doing things. “…..

    Translation: Our posts & comments will now be marinated in sulphuric acid as opposed to nitric acid.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. BlueGriffon (204 comments) says:

    I want to know why the Herald would let Matt McCarten do an un-named editorial piece. It was so obviously written by someone from the far left, don’t know why the Herald left the name off it. To state that Russel is the only MP that knows anything about economics really takes the take. All you lot blowing smoke our your rears whining about a 3c petrol tax hike are in for a shock when we get our new Minister of Finance and Printing Presses.

    Labour are rounding the troops to comment on the Herald/Stuff sites. You just need to google the names of those that leave their real names to see their links to Labour. Looks like the 2014 election campaign is starting early.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Grant (436 comments) says:

    Does all this mean that Mrs. Prentice hasn’t been entirely straight up with everybody when she says that TS isnt a labour blog?

    Well, who’d have ever guessed it.

    G

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Rob Salmond (246 comments) says:

    “I blogged some time ago that it was an initiative started by Helen Clark’s office, and this confirms it.”

    1. What Graeme E said.
    2. I think your earlier blog was more specific. You blogged that *I* started The Standard. Which was false.

    [DPF: Rob you are far too modest. I accept that you did not literally start the blog in terms of setting up the servers etc. But was it not your initiative to encourage the establishment of a blog along the lines of The Standard?]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. George Patton (348 comments) says:

    Don’t be gullible Graham. The Standard was HOSTED on Labour webservers.

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2008/01/the_standard_hosted_by_the_labour_party.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,869 comments) says:

    Good old Grant Robertson, eh.

    Beware the GUNNA mentality.

    Everything’s gunna be great, just watch!

    Then round the corner, ‘everythings’ gunna be great — oooooooh shiiiiiiiiiiit.

    Bugger it all. Just tell’em everything’s going to be great just a little bit late.

    I can’t wait to see these idiots in action.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. burt (8,201 comments) says:

    Ahhh, remember the good old days when you got banned from the standard if you said it was a Labour party blog. Seems the lefties can’t handle the truth being know – like that’s a new thing for lefties…. ha ha.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. barry (1,317 comments) says:

    Mike Smith obviously has a logic problem. Fancy thinking that …” our aim was to set up a labour movement blog and offer a counter to Kiwiblog’s pro-National line”….
    Such expectations require descipline and self control and common thinking…

    Nowhere in the world has the Left ever shown any of these attributes. They are forever trying to tear each others throat out. They never weems to be able to co-operate for long enough to look at the other side ofthe political coin – they are so busy thrying to elliminate the others within their own group who dont agree totally with them.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Manolo (13,517 comments) says:

    Both sewers, The sub-Standard and Red Alert, are worth avoiding.
    Their censorious bosses are modern-day Torquemadas.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Pete George (23,434 comments) says:

    Red Alert with need to not be controlled by paranouid MPs – or by any MPs. Moderation will only work if done by someone fairly neutral and is torerant of discussion and fair criticism. And there mus be a large number on the banned list, including many Labour Party members and supporters, that will have to be purged and started again. Otherwiser it will remain a pointless joke.

    The Standard has quite a lot of Green input, including authors. It also has regular supporters of Mana. But there’s no doubt it has strong Labour connections. Moderators and commenters there with clear Labour connections have been able to troll and harrass at will with the obvious intention of shutting down comment they deem anti-party (but that has had some interesting conflicts with the civil war over that last couple of months).

    The Labour leadership has a lot to do if they want make Red Alert a meaningingful forum. And they have even more to do to make up a lot of grass roots activists frequenting The Standard that are very unhappy with Shearer and the caucus.

    But I don’t like the chances of major changes. There are people deeply involved with both Red Alert and The Standard who are too intent on message domination. Unless the control freaks relinquish some of their authoritarianism both blogs will remain as potential unfulfilled.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Fisiani (1,025 comments) says:

    I have been banned from both sites for being far too clever.They cannot handle opposing ideas and simply invent reason to censor dissent.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Kimble (4,426 comments) says:

    I once asked for the causal link between Labour being in office and a change in employment (or something like that), they did not take it well. They had put up some chart, claimed “We Win! Enough said”, and their native commenters did not appreciate having to fire up their second brain cell to respond.

    You know the typical reaction; you hate the poor, you just want money for your fat cat mates*, and lots of things that was in direct infringement of their site commenting rules. No action. No care from the mods. And not a single one could muster up a genuine response; they couldnt say WHY the change occurred when Labour took power, only that it did.

    You will get the same sort of thing here (without the biased moderating), but at least there will be someone willing to try.

    *Isnt it an indictment on our education system that small-government libertarians are the ones most often accused of wanting to pervert the power of the STATE to benefit themselves?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Reid (16,227 comments) says:

    I have been banned from both sites for being far too clever.They cannot handle opposing ideas and simply invent reason to censor dissent.

    They’re experts in propaganda. Propaganda doesn’t work when dissent is permitted. You imagine someone in the home country looking up at one of the WWII propaganda posters and sniggering and making fun of it. Seriously damaging. That’s what modern political propaganda is also based on. Not as serious, but same rules. This is why dissent will not and cannot be tolerated.

    Leftists are authoritarian nutcases. The more leftist you are, the more authoritarian you are and the more you try to hide the fact that you’re authoritarian.

    This is why they do it but the how is where they betray their naivity and foolishness. They have no subtlety of thinking themselves, so they think others don’t have any, either. Therefore they don’t understand what conservatives do about human nature (which all propaganda seeks to connect with). This is that compulsion is not required if your argument is sound.

    You’d think by now lefties would have realised that most of those who read The Stranded can actually count to five and would know a bit more than what they hear on Sainsbury and 3News. But no, they haven’t and they don’t, apparently. So they continue to treat their audience, which is their propaganda channel’s raison d’etre so know thy audience – der…, as idiots who can’t think straight and who might be influenced by anything other than the most blatant simplistic propaganda.

    I suspect if Hulun had won a fourth then a fifth term and still been in power even now then she’d long ago have thrown DPF into the hole she no doubt secretly had installed in the Beehive and this current Stranded issue would never have arisen with her splendid idea operating in full flight precisely as designed. But since she did lose, fortunately DPF hasn’t been so consigned and the whole plan is falling apart, because without Hulun’s iron will and deft hand directing every single lefty puppet string, Swan Lake turns into a monstrosity of fat incompetents who can’t even prance, without falling over.

    Me, I’m just enjoying the show. It’s magnificent in the sense that each act is better than the last one and it’s always been a surprise, so far, just exactly what’s going to happen next. I just hope Hulun comes back to do a guest appearance at some stage and someone leaves a tape recorder on the table.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Steve (North Shore) (4,544 comments) says:

    They also don’t like you laughing at them Reid. Just make one flipant comment and end with “ha ha ha” and you’re a gonner.

    They take away your commenters passport, you can only say what they agree with (Linda, Mr Ed, Clear and Trev) But they are all doing a good job for National, long may it continue

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Steve (North Shore) (4,544 comments) says:

    Shit, the edit.
    The passport means you forfiet your sense of humour

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Manolo (13,517 comments) says:

    I just hope Hulun comes back to do ..

    I’d rather prefer nuclear war to the return of the loathsome spinster!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. thor42 (971 comments) says:

    A re-launch of Red Alert – yeah, right……
    Shite in a shiny container is still shite.

    It’ll be the same old “politics of envy” that Labour has used to bribe the ignorant ever since it was formed. Moan, moan, moan – tax the “rich pricks”, expand the welfare state, more and more taxes. Never a WORD about a Labour government “living within its means”.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Kleva Kiwi (285 comments) says:

    You know what they say…
    “You can’t polish a turd, but you can roll it in glitter”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. HC (153 comments) says:

    How “entertaining”, biased and poorly informed some comments here are. I follow a range of blog sites, and the Standard has been one of them. In all honesty, this suspicion and allegations that it is or has been run by Labour is unfounded. Some of the moderators are still pro Labour, and Lynn Prentice is still a Labour Party member. But the Standard has at least over recent months become a much more diversified site. Many commenters and increasingly also authors, favour the Greens, Mana, and some still are hopeful for Labour. Some even have time for NZ First and the Maori Party.

    There are some commenters that frequent this forum more than the Standard, like Fisiani, Pete George, burt, and so on, who have generally little time and sympathy for the labour movement, the left, the environmentally concerned, and whatever other interested, who often post on the Standard. So why do you make a fuss about having been challenged and even banned at certain times. Re Fisiani going on about “National Party talent” there a few days back, get a life, will you? You got feedback and never replied. You are to my knowledge not presently banned, and generally the Standard is fairly open and reasonable, and they allow some dissent, but also expect you guys to take back counter arguments (if you can take this).

    The background of TS is well explained, and Lprent has in the past done a good job on this.

    Red Alert is a totally different forum, for sure, that is the one the “caucus” of the Labour Party try to keep in tune with what they prefer.

    There has been a lot of debate on the Standard over this last year, and some are very disillusioned with David Shearer. Others still strongly support him, and Mike Smith is one of them. So the debate will go on. I see TS as a more democratic and open forum than many others, and that will be maintained, as the people running the tech side and the moderators will do all to keep their independence. Those idiots here, who still try to claim it is a Labour Party website and forum, you better get a real life. TS is open, democratic, evolving and truly the alternative to Kiwiblog and definitely more to to the lost whale, who have a clear right bias, and do not represent the interests and views of a large share of NZers.

    So get a life, be fair, reasonable, accept the competition and live with it.

    Thanks – HC

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. HC (153 comments) says:

    @Reid: You go on about “propaganda”. I see more “propaganda” being published now in the usual “mainstream media” than on the Standard. You really expose your position so clearly, you are certainly not unbiased, that is for sure.

    One has to look at the largely commercialised private media in NZ to see where the influence comes from. I remember the years of “honeymoon” John Key was given as the “fresh” face, the smart alec, entertaining and joke cracking chappy, raised by a widow in a sole parent Housing NZ or state home.

    What celebrity crap was the public served up before the 2008 election. Of course, Labour had three terms and got themselves out of steam and into a bit of trouble with some policies and issues (e.g. Peters).

    But what has come out of the hype for Key and the Nats now? What about all that glory from the first term, being the easy one, where they carried on with most policies that Labour had put into law before? Key has now had to defend an ACT MP who has holes in the brain, yet claims he is fit to be an associate minister for education. Key never knew of Dotcom before, also never heard his name at a GCSB meeting, yet later admitted, there was a presentation, where he was briefly mentioned. Key has English run an economy that now has unemployment at a 16 year high, he has an education minister, who was put into the job to sort it all out and put smaller class rooms, savings, charter schools, restructuring in CH-CH and much more on the agenda, but we saw nothing but flops and back tracking.

    We had privacy scandals no minister wants anything to do with. We have an economy still tanking, while Chinese gamblers are fast tracked into the casinos by China Southern Airlines, but strangely the minister for immigration has no knowledge of deals already done before.

    We have a highly overvalued NZ dollar, and the government and Joyce defend this, wanting to be purists, while ALL major trading partners changed their monetary policies.

    We have a government with a hands off approach on housing, while rents and real estate prices in Auckland and Christchurch are beyond of the reach of ordinary Kiwis earning average or lower wages or salaries. We have a stalling economy, just ticking along only due to the necessary Christchurch rebuild.

    NZ is abolishing public broadcasting and favouring deals with private and corporate media, which Joyce has close ties with. Brownlee stuffs up on real estate deals for new housing, being ruled illegal by the courts. Casinos get special deals to build a supposedly free convention centre in Auckland, for an extra so many pokies and tables for various gaming. Never mind the gambling and alcohol issues that are taking a toll in NZ, the government gets on with it, promoting it all, or at least letting it go on without harming or restricting the big business interests involved.

    Yes, health spending is up on elective surgery, but we have cuts in mental health and the likes, while reforms in welfare are supposed to usher sick and disabled into jobs that do not exist, without spending extra on desperately needed services to get people well enough to work even just part time.

    What a miraculous miracle has John Key delivered us, I see NO miracle, just more depression, misery, longer queues at food banks and city missions, and a truly screwed up country.

    At least the Standard discusses these and other issues, which seem to be off the table on this forum.

    Good luck and enjoy the new year 2013 Kiwibloggers and David Farrar, your bias has never been clearer.

    HC

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. infused (652 comments) says:

    Yes Fisiani. Saw you get banned. I notice very few ‘right wingers’ post there now. It’s because they are all banned. It’s the same story, the say abuse or some such shit like lprents bullshit about TheStandard being a machine (it’s not, it’s a fucking wordpress blog).

    They now have the blog free to circle jerk. If you watch, that’s all they do.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. HC (153 comments) says:

    infused: You are another “critique” with high frequency on TS! You cannot resist, I am sure, and sometimes your posts are actually welcome, to offer a chance for honest debate.

    I know that some on TS are short tempered, but that is some of the commenters (few of them). The moderators still let you post your views, and it is a bit shit cheap to turn up on this forum, to pretend all you guys get banned and not even allowed to comment on the Standard.

    Stop distracting and stop distorting from the truth. We know where you come from, your views are clearly stated, so when some commenters on TS do criticise what you say, do not be surprised then.

    Mostly it is all fact based and fair and reasonable what you get served.

    Hence I suggest you be a bit fairer to TS, and not throw crap around, which is not deserved.

    The moderators have for months been much more reasonable and liberal with different views from different posters than they may ever have been. It is very poor timing for you to rubbish the Standard, and their popularity will only grow if short sighted right wingers think they have the overhand, simply because they think they know best.

    2013 will likely bring very many surprises, to you and many in NZ. Good luck and enjoy blogging into 2013.

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

    The thing that I find most off putting over at The Standard is the pathological obsession the (I’m guessing) Labour clique there have with John Key. I do not understand why they would humiliate themselves by playing to the personality cult Key and his handlers have so carefully manufactured.

    The apparent inability of the Labour Party caucus to see beyond the dichotomy of the two party state has also been evident in the attempt to crush dissent within its own ranks; the over-reaction to the criticism of Shearer and the silencing of Colonial Viper will continue to be viewed as evidence of the intolerance senior Labour Party members have of those who would question their personal ambition.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. David Garrett (6,989 comments) says:

    Going back to DPF’s original post…will some kind person tell me what a SMOG is? Serious question…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. big bruv (13,674 comments) says:

    “I thought back to when we started the Standard. I was in the room too; our aim was to set up a labour movement blog and offer a counter to Kiwiblog’s pro-National line”

    Despite the denials from the left Smith is telling the truth. TS is the bastard child of that god awful Kiwiblogblog (who can remember that?)
    TS is simply Kiwiblogblog in another name, the authors are the same, those who post their hate filled rants are the same low life who commented in the days of Kiwiblogblog.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. big bruv (13,674 comments) says:

    DG,

    First of all I would like to wish you all the best for the new year.

    A SMOG (as I understand it) stands for “social media own goal”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. thedavincimode (6,617 comments) says:

    the labour movement

    Is this the most succinct description of the Standard?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. David Garrett (6,989 comments) says:

    Thanks BB…and the same to you sir…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Pete George (23,434 comments) says:

    tdm – the core activists at The Standard have certainly looked like having close union connections. They just don’t have the courage to be open about it. lprent keeps repeating some last century habit of using pseudonyms on web forums as an excuse for deceitful political activism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. thedavincimode (6,617 comments) says:

    PG

    That isn’t the kind of “movement” I was thinking of.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. SorryDavid (3 comments) says:

    Mike Smith here. Helen Clark had nothing at all to do with the start of the Standard, nor did anyone in her office. Nor was it authorised by the Labour Party – it was started by and still is run by a group of individuals with an interest in the labour movement. Graeme Edgeler is quite correct about the likely reaction from Helen.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    So there you go folks some activists like ‘HC’ and ‘SORRY DAVID’ say there is nothing to see here, move along.

    HC spent an awful amount of effort trying to sound balanced (it didn’t work – just saying’).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    HC said “The moderators have for months been much more reasonable and liberal with different views from different posters than they may ever have been”

    What a load of complete arse

    The first rule of lying is to base you story on a believable nugget and work outwards.

    Fail.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Pete George (23,434 comments) says:

    HC said:

    The moderators still let you post your views, and it is a bit shit cheap to turn up on this forum, to pretend all you guys get banned and not even allowed to comment on the Standard.

    HC, how do you know who here has been banned and who hasn’t? It’s a fact that some have been banned.

    The TS moderators protect some of the worst offenders there and ban those wose messages they don’t want to hear. I’ve seen several over the last few months trying to support David Shearer who have been banned. Mike Smith mustn’t be happy with that.

    Mostly it is all fact based and fair and reasonable what you get served.

    That’s laughable nonsense.

    Hence I suggest you be a bit fairer to TS, and not throw crap around, which is not deserved.

    Obviously some criticism is not deseved (as is some criticism of KB at TS). But some of it is well deserved. Once at TS I was banned for calling a long time TS pseudonym (Eddie) for obviously incorrect claims in a post.

    The moderators have for months been much more reasonable and liberal with different views from different posters than they may ever have been.

    Apart from that being wrong that also ignores other facts – that a number of people with reasonable views have been banned so all that is left is a complying crowd, and chief censor lprent hasn’t changed, he still brags about being ‘nasty’ to anyone who won’t succumb to his behaviour modification.

    It is very poor timing for you to rubbish the Standard, and their popularity will only grow if short sighted right wingers think they have the overhand, simply because they think they know best.

    Don’t suggest how they might increase it’s popularity at TS, that’s a banning offence. I was permanently banned for suggesting a better standard of behaviour would make a better and more effective blog.

    The only thing that’s changed at TS over the last few months is that there has been a lot more fighting amongst the regulars there as a part of Labour’s civil war. Some of the blog bitches have been obviously uneasy with being themselves attacked without the moderators providing their normal one sided protection.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Pete George (23,434 comments) says:

    Mike Smith here. Helen Clark had nothing at all to do with the start of the Standard, nor did anyone in her office. Nor was it authorised by the Labour Party – it was started by and still is run by a group of individuals with an interest in the labour movement.

    I’ve no reason to doubt that that could be factually correct.

    Mike, can you say that there has been no involvement from Labour offices other than Clark’s, or from unions?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Steve (North Shore) (4,544 comments) says:

    No posts on Red Blert for 3 daze.
    Dying a natural death I hope. Looks like Clare and Trev have divorced

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. HC (153 comments) says:

    expat and Pete George:

    First @ expat – you make some derisive comments but deliver nothing to prove your point. So move on and get a life, please.

    Pete George – I saw many of your comments on The Standard, always trying to rubbish the forum and certain commenters there, so why are you so surprised to have been banned? Some there simply consider you to be a true troll of sorts, so that is what the moderators do, when you go over the top, contributing little of substance and facts.

    Apart from that I am gratefull for David Farrar (hey, yet another “David”, but not from Labour of course, aye?!) to allow both of you and me to comment here. Surely some here have been banned also, and some are stung straight away by commenters, when they bring in a different line of thought.

    So play fair, please, blogs open up themselves as forums, and you get different minded commenters all the time. I know a fair few on TS, who have been able to comment there and disagree for years. I guess that opinion alone is not the reason for commenters there to be banned.

    And for the debate about Shearer, that is democracy at root level. I suppose that National Party supporters are rather willingly falling into lines, or are ushered to do so, to simply approve whosoever is “da Leader”.

    I prefer debate and forums making that available. Of course I expected some flak to defend TS here, but that is life.

    Have a nice evening and a happy new year, no matter what you think or feel.

    Maybe Dotcom has a new fireworks planned, for celebrating his “friendship” with Banksie, sort of???

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Rob Salmond (246 comments) says:

    DPF says: Rob you are far too modest. I accept that you did not literally start the blog in terms of setting up the servers etc. But was it not your initiative to encourage the establishment of a blog along the lines of The Standard?

    Rob says: No.

    [DPF: Do you know whose initiative it was? There is always one person who came up with the idea, or called the meeting etc?]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. OECD rank 22 kiwi (2,743 comments) says:

    The Standard hasn’t been sucessful as a blog. Its only use has been for journalists to demonstrate to the voting public how disunited the Labour Party is.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. expat (4,048 comments) says:

    There we are, Rob denies being a Labour stooge. And in other news today peace breaks out in the Middle East.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Pete George (23,434 comments) says:

    TC: I saw many of your comments on The Standard, always trying to rubbish the forum and certain commenters there, so why are you so surprised to have been banned?

    I wasn’t surprised to be banned, I knew it was inevitable. The only surprise was lprent using such a weak excuse.

    I wasn’t “always trying to rubbish the forum and certain commenters there”. In fact it was far closer to the opposite, where certain commenters continuously and repeatedly tried to rubbish me which was the cause of much of the thread disruption. And moderation allowed that to happen withour reprimand while sometimes targeting me.

    My main aim was to introduce different discussion topics to see what people more to the left thought – more often than not they labelled me an enemy of the left so should be harassed out of the blog. That’s particularly ironic now that the higher Labour Party is trying to do exactly the same thing to some of them because they won’t shut up and toe the line.

    Also ironic is that commenters at TS often say that to recover power Labour need to attract back ex-voters and attract non-voters. So I should be amongst that target, But instead of attracting much of the approach at TS is to repel anyone who is deemed enemy of a narrow far left ideology.

    At times I challenged blatant bullshit and got clobbered for it, those who promote putrid politicking but aren’t prepared to tolerate criticism are gutless party goons.

    TC, do you comment at TS? If so what pseudonym do you use there? There are valid reasons why people may use a pseudonym, but using different identities in different forums is a dishonest misuse of anonymity.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Pete George (23,434 comments) says:

    Sorry, HC, not TC.

    There are some commenters that frequent this forum more than the Standard, like Fisiani, Pete George, burt, and so on, who have generally little time and sympathy for the labour movement, the left, the environmentally concerned, and whatever other interested, who often post on the Standard.

    HC, I challenge you to back up any of those claims.

    That’s typical of assumptions made at TS that are based on no evidence, and either chose to ignore what I said or deliberately made false claims to try and attack me. I made it clear a number of times I have voted for both Labour and Greens. And I have sympathies for a number of leftish ideals.

    As I see it the biggest problem with the core of The Standard is that people there desperately want power back, but want everyone to accept and support their own narrow version of hard left ideology, and any variance from that is seen as ‘enemy’. This has been accentuated in the last few months with the growing split between Shearer and caucus and the core TS activists. Shearer is labeled right wing by some there.

    Labour has major problems with it’s leadership, but it has just as big problems with other parts of the party.

    Labour has to find a way of repairing significant internal damage caused by conflict between factions. That will only happen by encompassing a wide range of opnions. It will never happen if caucus or TS see their own narrow left (or centre left) as the only and all else as something to be fought against.

    Once Labour has found a way to work together amongst it’s own it has to realise it needs to attract an even wider voting constituency, and it won’t do that by spitting on anyone slightly different but deemed opposite and enemy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Rob Salmond (246 comments) says:

    [DPF: Do you know whose initiative it was? There is always one person who came up with the idea, or called the meeting etc?]

    Again, no.

    I was not in the room, it was not my idea, I do not know whose idea it was, etc etc. The first i knew of The Standard was when it went live and i saw the link on another blog. i wish it had been my idea, because The Standard is a very good addition to the NZ blogosphere. But it wasn’t.

    I do not know how much clearer I can be. You are 100% flat wrong, and have been for about five years now.

    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.