Anidav posted:

When the ALP implodes from being Tory lite for too long, I hope Albo rises from the ashes and does something cool.

Fruity Gordo posted:

Citation needed bro.

hiddenmovement posted:

What if it's an intelligent, sensible dialectic between respectful parties that contributes to broader thread discussions and doesn't descend into childish ad hominem attacks?

quote:

One man was reported to police during the emotion-charged meeting, attended by a group of about 70 protesters.

The group turned up to voice their opposition to a mosque the Hazara Foundation of SA plans to build at Ryans Rd.

Deputy Mayor Brad Vermeer said one of the protesters approached him in the chamber and threatened him.

“This one guy walked over and started yelling at me but I just waved as if to say ‘goodbye’ and he stood right over me, looked at the council desk, saw my name and said ‘right, Vermeer, I’m coming for you,” Cr Vermeer said.

Salisbury Council’s Development Assessment Panel approved the mosque in December.

It has since been the subject of controversy, sparking a 300-signature petition against the development and a 2000-flyer letterbox drop by right-wing group the Patriots Defence League, urging residents to oppose the mosque.

cpaf posted:

The last 24 hours I've been thinking about reading that Sheridan article again, like a good book you never want to really end

Murodese posted:

Hello friends,

Help out a non-struggling researcher and add links to this sheet:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1uTzSqPb7leRpoCL0HatAB_yKQ26ynmeioziuuOMEtBc/edit?usp=sharing

I'm basically looking for sites/blogs/news sites/social media/literally fuckin anything that accepts comments and social submissions. If you find a page that has comments of any kind (at least 5, hopefully more like 25-50, no more than 100), paste a link in that document. I only really need one per site, but add whatever you want.

Bonus points for:
1) pages that contain comment pagination (if you look at a guardian comment section with >20 comments you'll see this - the comments are paged ie. comment page 1, 2, 3, etc)
2) pages that contain a "click to expand comments"-esque button or link, which either expands the comment sections to show everything or redirects you to a page that has a full list (guardian has this too, "click to see more comments"
3) some combination of the above

Also need:
- some pages without comments at all
- anything out-of-the-ordinary (use your judgement - page that requires you to fill out a captcha or something to view comments? sure)
- variety of poo poo, not just politics or anything. not even australian, necessarily

Follow the headers - your nick, then any comments about the structure of the sheet (standard blog comments, disqus, facebook comments, whatever). Person that provides the most/best I'll buy something nice for (a game, a carton, whatever). Unless that person has like 2 links, then gently caress you I guess. Prize at my discretion, bonuses for anyone that provides a wide variety of links.

Thanks!

Jonah Galtberg posted:

I haven't posted anything to it though?

edit: oh, I see now - someone's playing tricks

Graic Gabtar posted:

Are you going to stop asking loaded questions?

cpaf posted:

Dunno why people keep insisting he is some sort of fabricated gimmick account when he represents a very real and sizeable chunk of the Australian voting population as MCED said.

markgreyam posted:

If you think of ratbag's posts as a sort of training dummy for arguing points with actual people then they are much easier to consider. If you are discussing this sort of thing with a person in real life (for argument’s sake, I mean, who talks to people in real life) and you're going to go with the "take a cyanide suppository" approach, well, it should be clear that you not going to change many minds, and then just being surprised when that inexplicably doesn’t change his tune is just dumb.

Matthew Beet posted:

I'm the other 60%

Fruity Gordo posted:

Your vendetta is excruciatingly boring fyi

Graic Gabtar posted:

Yeah, would that be before or after I shove the cyanide up my arse?

Orkin Mang posted:

because blocking people is for precious little babies. it's what tearie little ultras do when someone disagrees with them.

hooman posted:

Sadistech: Mobility and aged care service provider to goons.

Graic Gabtar posted:

I would be completely unmoved by that as I added your IP to our watch list.

ewe2 posted:

I'll just link this Lateline transcript about data retention with Bruce Schneier, but it's worth a read.

What is also concerning is that HTTP/2 is almost complete: Firefox and Chrome will only support it with HTTPS but this creates the problem that data caches, which cut down on internet traffic and speeds up access can't work because the data is encrypted. This is a big problem for low-bandwidth connections (like 3/4 of the world) and smartphones, and currently the only suggestion is a really bad one: put an root certificate in the phone or computer that allows a cache to decrypt the connection and be able to send it on after re-encryption. That basically ruins the whole point of HTTPS, but noone's come up with an alternative yet that I've heard.

Pickled Tink posted:

Nice going there with your stigmatisation of mental illness. Person does X that I do not understand and has poor reasoning by my own exacting standards of logic, therefore they must be mentally ill (Because poor reasoning is incredibly rare, as we all know). The implication that gets hammered home by such reasoning is that mentally ill people are dangerous.

There are Australians who seriously believe that asylum seekers are illegal immigrants and should be shot to keep them away. That doesn't make them mentally ill. This thread is full of people who tell others to go kill themselves for disagreements ranging from large to petty, but if the people here are mentally ill it is definitely not the cause of that behaviour.

It is absolutely lazy to disregard this kind of thing as mental illness. It not help in the slightest, because you are not even considering the positions these people start out from and thereby not treating the problems (Disenfranchisement, persecution, etc) that cause radicalisation of these people.

Not only that, but you work further to stigmatise mental illness because you are synonymizing it with it "dangerous people who should be feared" thus preventing people with mental illnesses from seeking help from fear of the stigma. It is also a step towards bringing back the reasoning we managed to, at long last, ditch regarding the mentally ill: "Why should we help people who are dangerous? Why don't we just lock them up where they can't harm us?"

It is lazy thought I would expect from members of the liberal party, not alleged greens.

Fruity Gordo posted:

The vast majority of suicide bombers wouldn't be psychopaths, they'd be traumatised, brainwashed, marginalised young people. One of VICE's HBO episodes was about child suicide bombers in Afghanistan, for example, and these boys just flat out knew nothing, and some had even been told that they wouldn't actually die because ~reasons~. Obviously the situation for this kid is quite different, but the only people you could reliably classify as psychopathic as a general rule would be the Imams ordering these idiot kids and young people to do bombings and massacres. I don't think anyone would honestly believe that everyone involved in committing genocides is a psychopath. When a corporate culture is that toxic and dehumanising, people will act in disgusting ways because it's tolerated or encouraged. You don't need to have a mental illness or personality disorder to act crazy, you just need the right ingredients. The kid was obviously angry and traumatised, but I seriously doubt he had a profound personality disorder.

Pickled Tink posted:

For the record, this is my second draft. The first draft of this post read "RAAAAAAAARGH", only bigger and with more "ARGH".

QUACKTASTIC posted:

katlington posted:

Lotta tall poppy syndrome going on in here smh