The politicisation of NZ's covid response

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › The politicisation of NZ's covid response

1 | ... | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | ... | 55

BDFL - Memuneh
78935 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#2891949 25-Mar-2022 11:26

networkn:

quickymart:

(This could also fit into the National thread):

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/128155701/nationals-luxon-unwittingly-meets-antivaccine-mandate-protester

Come on. He was quite clearly at the protest (apparently his dance was quite famous), but Luxon or Bishop "didn't know"? Spare me.

Are we all allowed to make these types of unproven accusations and draw these types of conclusions about whatever party or politician we don't favour?

Obviously, it's pretty easy to avoid meeting anyone 'undesirable' when you stay hidden away from anyone you might disagree with.

It is pretty easy to background check people before you go out meeting them.

My technology disclosure

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18538 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2892004 25-Mar-2022 11:34

networkn:

Are we all allowed to make these types of unproven accusations and draw these types of conclusions about whatever party or politician we don't favour?

Obviously, it's pretty easy to avoid meeting anyone 'undesirable' when you stay hidden away from anyone you might disagree with.

You constantly snipe at this government and its leaders. While some of your criticisms are at least based on actual issues, a lot of it is just petty barbs. Fair enough. I do the same to score points and so do others. But then don't try to claim the moral high ground.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

networkn

Networkn
32146 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2892007 25-Mar-2022 11:41

Rikkitic:

networkn:

Are we all allowed to make these types of unproven accusations and draw these types of conclusions about whatever party or politician we don't favour?

Obviously, it's pretty easy to avoid meeting anyone 'undesirable' when you stay hidden away from anyone you might disagree with.

You constantly snipe at this government and its leaders. While some of your criticisms are at least based on actual issues, a lot of it is just petty barbs. Fair enough. I do the same to score points and so do others. But then don't try to claim the moral high ground.

I think there is a decent difference between those and this, and if you can't see it, I then I am not sure what to tell you. This is just your usual knee jerk reaction of being rude to anyone who dares criticize the Government.

I do my best not to 'infer' things about people. I may occasionally get that wrong, but I am pretty careful with it.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
78935 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#2892009 25-Mar-2022 11:46

networkn:

Rikkitic:

You constantly snipe at this government and its leaders. While some of your criticisms are at least based on actual issues, a lot of it is just petty barbs. Fair enough. I do the same to score points and so do others. But then don't try to claim the moral high ground.

I think there is a decent difference between those and this, and if you can't see it, I then I am not sure what to tell you. This is just your usual knee jerk reaction of being rude to anyone who dares criticize the Government.

I do my best not to 'infer' things about people. I may occasionally get that wrong, but I am pretty careful with it.

Sure, we can apply Hanlon's razor here ("never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.") but "leaders" should have anyone they mingle with screened. The alternative is to be cast as supporting their views.

My technology disclosure

networkn

Networkn
32146 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2892015 25-Mar-2022 11:54

freitasm:

Sure, we can apply Hanlon's razor here ("never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.") but "leaders" should have anyone they mingle with screened. The alternative is to be cast as supporting their views.

I think another reasonable conclusion to draw which calls people neither stupid nor cast as 'supporting views', is that it's entirely reasonable to meet with people who have opposing views, even views you strongly disagree with, because hearing people out gives you a wider view of a situation and doesn't mean you become part of a vacuum. You can also go to a business to see what they are doing with their business, what they see as their challenges with a view to developing policy to help businesses grow, without supporting the personal views of the person who runs said business.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
78935 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#2892022 25-Mar-2022 12:08

networkn:

freitasm:

Sure, we can apply Hanlon's razor here ("never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.") but "leaders" should have anyone they mingle with screened. The alternative is to be cast as supporting their views.

I think another reasonable conclusion to draw which calls people neither stupid nor cast as 'supporting views', is that it's entirely reasonable to meet with people who have opposing views, even views you strongly disagree with, because hearing people out gives you a wider view of a situation and doesn't mean you become part of a vacuum. You can also go to a business to see what they are doing with their business, what they see as their challenges with a view to developing policy to help businesses grow, without supporting the personal views of the person who runs said business.

That's a reasonable explanation. I still support the view that every encounter should be screened to avoid a report like "National Party leader Christopher Luxon has unwittingly met an anti-vaccine, anti-mandate business owner heavily involved in the Parliament occupation"

So even if he was there to hear an opposing view it looks like he was not supplied with any background intelligence. Very poor in all aspects, for a leader. Completely unprepared.

My technology disclosure

quickymart

13660 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#2892035 25-Mar-2022 12:47

Even more difficult for Luxon (IMO) when he agreed with the PM and openly denounced the protesters, saying they shouldn't be there. Then to go and meet with one afterwards, looks pretty poor.

networkn

Networkn
32146 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2892036 25-Mar-2022 12:53

freitasm:

That's a reasonable explanation. I still support the view that every encounter should be screened to avoid a report like "National Party leader Christopher Luxon has unwittingly met an anti-vaccine, anti-mandate business owner heavily involved in the Parliament occupation"

So even if he was there to hear an opposing view it looks like he was not supplied with any background intelligence. Very poor in all aspects, for a leader. Completely unprepared.

But again, even if he knew and met with them, for a legitimate purpose, so what? I think we should be above making assumptions of the worst in people. Of course, political mudslinging isn't new, but we don't encourage better in others by setting an example and doing it ourselves.

It's mischief (at best) to report in this manner.

At the end of the day, he probably should have known, but his explanation was pretty reasonable. He says I didn't know, but I wasn't there for that, and that should have been the end of it.

You can vet everyone you meet, and not meet with anyone who someone might be able to maliciously twist into something it isn't, but then you are going to be meeting with a pretty select group and risk a vacuum..

networkn

Networkn
32146 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2892037 25-Mar-2022 12:55

quickymart:

Even more difficult for Luxon (IMO) when he agreed with the PM and openly denounced the protesters, saying they shouldn't be there. Then to go and meet with one afterwards, looks pretty poor.

To you, who is clearly looking for a reason to show him in the worst light.

The reason for his visit is what is important, and his explanation for that is laid out and has nothing to do with Antivaxx or Anti-Mandate.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18538 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2892101 25-Mar-2022 13:33

networkn:

quickymart:

Even more difficult for Luxon (IMO) when he agreed with the PM and openly denounced the protesters, saying they shouldn't be there. Then to go and meet with one afterwards, looks pretty poor.

To you, who is clearly looking for a reason to show him in the worst light.

The reason for his visit is what is important, and his explanation for that is laid out and has nothing to do with Antivaxx or Anti-Mandate.

What you are saying here is absolutely true. It is also absolutely the same thing you and others here do when jabbing at the PM and the government. If you are going to start crying 'unfair', at least be fair about it.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

quickymart

13660 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#2892112 25-Mar-2022 14:03

networkn:

quickymart:

Even more difficult for Luxon (IMO) when he agreed with the PM and openly denounced the protesters, saying they shouldn't be there. Then to go and meet with one afterwards, looks pretty poor.

To you, who is clearly looking for a reason to show him in the worst light.

The reason for his visit is what is important, and his explanation for that is laid out and has nothing to do with Antivaxx or Anti-Mandate.

Oh well, let's see if it makes any difference at the next opinion polls. It probably won't do much, but I can't imagine too many National voters being impressed by this.

networkn

Networkn
32146 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2892135 25-Mar-2022 15:39

Rikkitic:

What you are saying here is absolutely true. It is also absolutely the same thing you and others here do when jabbing at the PM and the government. If you are going to start crying 'unfair', at least be fair about it.

I can't speak for others, but I can speak for myself, if you can provide me an example where I have inferred someone is doing something dishonest, or slimey or underhanded without a shred of actual evidence, rather than criticizing something which is held as fact, such as the failure to plant the billion trees and where are the 100K houses, then we can discuss those examples, but as I have said, I am careful not to infer things in this same manner. I am not beyond a mistake, but it's something I am aware of as I dislike people doing it. I mean there are plenty of examples of things the Government does that could be viewed as shady or dishonest, but unless it's a well-established pattern, and I am fairly careful about how I characterise it.

I am also pretty sick of the way you characterize my criticism of the Government in general. If you continue in this manner, then it seems only fair that I do the same back. So I can start finding unflattering animal behaviours to equate your support of the Government and I can start using terms which are insulting to characterize an overly coloured view of the PM's leadership qualities, and her in general.

I'd rather have a discussion without any of that.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18538 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2892153 25-Mar-2022 16:53

Have I thrown ‘unflattering animal behaviours’ at you? Maybe if you say so, but I am honestly dumfounded by that.

I don’t think I have accused you of ‘inferring someone is doing something dishonest, or slimy or underhanded without a shred of actual evidence’, but I am happy to stand corrected if you have an example. In any case, I don’t usually question your factual criticisms, such as the billion trees and the housing failure. As far as I can tell, you usually do get these kinds of things right. I have even stated on this forum that the government has failed to live up to its promises, and I am very disappointed by that. I’m sure I haven’t attacked you on those issues because I don’t disagree with you there.

As far as I can recall, the things I have responded to are mainly sarcasms and snide asides like those about making announcements to make announcements

It is possible to sneer at someone without actually accusing them of something. Innuendo, emphasis and tone can imply a great deal. It is not so much what you say, but sometimes the way you say it. It is almost always possible to phrase something in a manner that makes the subject look bad, just as it is possible to say the same thing in a way that makes someone look good. I am not accusing you of dishonesty, just employing the same tactic anyone else would in this circumstance.

Let's declare a truce. I will try to leave you alone for awhile.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Technofreak

6515 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2892245 25-Mar-2022 21:49

quickymart:

(This could also fit into the National thread):

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/128155701/nationals-luxon-unwittingly-meets-antivaccine-mandate-protester

Come on. He was quite clearly at the protest (apparently his dance was quite famous), but Luxon or Bishop "didn't know"? Spare me.

I struggle to understand why this even made the headlines. Luxon and Bishop were there to visit a major employer that happens to also be involved in critical infrastructure, not to discuss mandate protests or the owners involvement in those protests. If they'd been there to discuss the protests I could see how it might just possibly be news other wise it's just a headline looking for a story.

I'm sure as time goes on politicians of all hues will end up meeting with people who were involved in the protests. I bet very few of these meetings, most likely none, will make the news.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
78935 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#2892249 25-Mar-2022 21:57

The way I see it whoever listens to these people might even come to think their views and opinions are something mainstream. If no one had pointed out, what could be Luxon's idea of this person? What if he comes out thinking this person represents the view of all organisations in this line of business? What if he made some promises while chatting?

My technology disclosure

1 | ... | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | ... | 55