I've had feedback from GrahamY and he is happy for me to try a thread where personal discussions can be taken to for those of us who don't want to clutter up general forums.

I've called it the carpark to match with my earlier reference to taking it outside. Normal forum rules regarding flaming still apply but if two posters feel they need to communicate off topic then here is a place to do it.

To get the ball rolling.

OZGIRL,
If I've misunderstood where you were coming from or misrepresented you it was unintentional and I apologise.

I'll agree that Scouts comment was out of line. Scout and I have been through enough and I've valued her inputs enough over a long time that I choose not to let those incidents be a trigger for me to respond hashly. If you don't like the fact that I stick by established friends through the rough times as well as the good then thats life.

I'm also getting very tired of the amount of plain nastieness on the site, much of it seems to be more about a personal preference than a necessary or healthy part of debate. Sometimes it's very school yard like.

Scout is one of a small number of posters on this site who have earned my respect over a substantial period of time. There are others with very different posting styles and beliefs, Col, Kalweb, Fellow Human and at times BOAZ_David (even though I disagree with him on most subjects) and others who post less often. I don't always agree with them but thats not what it's about. There are other more recent posters who I am coming to respect, Celiva, TurnRightThenLeft, Snout and some who's names elude me at the moment.

Anyway, over to you to make up your mind if you are willing to accept that I see some things differently to you or if you would prefer to continue being upset with me.

R0bert

Robert..
I have been suspended for the last week and so not able to reply to

you..No thats cool Robert I do understand how you feel

and its forgotten..Seems the forum regulars have kind of taken leave

at present...

Where is everyone?

Hi RObert, sounds like a good idea how do we get it started?

OZGIRL, welcome back.

Deborah it's started. I'm not sure wether we should use a seperate thread for individual discussions or just have them on this one. I'm inclined to use the one thread and see how it goes.

The main idea is that if a conversation is mostly between 2 (or more) people this provides a place to have it without being off topic on the originating thread.

Options would be
- If a discuusion on a thread is off topic then you can ask the participants to take it out to the carpark (and maybe include a link to a message here in your post)
- If you want to say something to someone else on a thread which is off topic say it here and stick a short post in the thread with a link to the post here

Links can be found be doing a search on the posters history. The little human figure below each post brings up a list of recent posts.

No privacy to those discussions and normal rules about flaming etc apply so the main purpose to give an alternative to bogging down real threads with off topic personal discusions.

R0bert

ok thanks RObert will keep that in mind.

Robert hi...

I shall be leaving OLO after this post...thats a shame because I did enjoy your company and level headed commonsense posts however there is a level of bias toward certain posters(myself included) that make it very unpalaetable for me to stay...

I strongly believe in freedom of speech and that is not happening on this forum...reminds me of the dark ages.

You are a sweet and lovely guy Robert and I think you would be a fantastic dad..as a single parent myself..I completely empathise...

May the force be with you....and take care of yourself...

I dont think I fully appreciated the very nice guy you are...

Robert
Yes Cilvia is sensible. I have noticed reading the posts over the last couple of months.
Ozgirl, funny girl.You just stopped by to say your banned. Please dont leave your humour is much needed.
Robert I have a question is Scout still posting.? I heard Scout had left OLO.

What can you do if a person sets about to stop your use of OLO.?
You have threads- They follow you. You change topis- they follow you.
You point it out to staff. Nothing happens. I cant say many seem to know about take it out side or your car park .
I am sure others would use it if they did.
What can be done to let others know do you think?
I hope I have not brought you bad luck but it would be nice to be able to post somwhere without being attacked.
For your sake if it starts I will leave this thread For the mean time Robert and others dont you think that once its clear people are just out to make personal attacks and smear a target for what ever reason there should be some record kept on that person and they are warned.
How do you see the car park working for example if the two people dont agree or sort something out.
Say for eg one party just wants to get back to the subject at hand and the other just wants to be destructive. What can be done do you think about that.
Do you think other posters should step and and complain as well?

I know when I was trying to catch up on a couple of threads it was a very difficult to follow with the personal attacks and things going off post.
Do you have any more ideas how to keep posts on track so the thread is not destroyed.
Good work your doing here. Just wish more knew about it.

OZGIRL, I missed that last post of yours when you put it up. If you are still reading the posts thanks for your kind words and best wishes for the future.

benny, sadly Scout has left OLO. I won't touch on reasons here, Scout values her privacy.

In regard to your questions I liked an idea that Celiva made on the "Take it Outside" thread. A voting button that could be used to record a preference for a discussion elsewhere. If a few readers voted for that and site administrators agreed that the discussion was an ongoing off topic discussion then a warning could be posted to those involved. Continuing the discussion in the wrong place could then lead to deletions and or suspensions.

Options for discussions with posters who seem to be trying to pick fights include
- Ignore the off topic parts and only engage them in the relevant bits
- Ignore them completely
- Start a thread in the general discussions area and put a post in the original topic asking the other party to take it up there (with a hyperlink to your post in the new thread)
- Continue the discussion with them in the original thread

My experience (and what I can see in the site rules) suggests that the administrators try and maintain a very hands off approach, they generally only delete for serious breaches of site rules (extreme flaming, promoting violence etc). The posts I've seen prior to deletion have been ones where I've fully supported the deletion.

If they start deleting because a poster does not like something someone has said that is not clearly a breach of site rules they risk acting in a manner that does not look impartial. My laymans understanding is that the legal risks are increased for site administrators who have a strong hands on policy.
End of Pt 1
R0bert

Pt 2
Benny, my suggestion when dealing with the stalkers is to remember the large number of readers who don't post. Graham put up an article some time ago which suggested that posters are vastly outnumber by readers, if you have something worthwhile to say remember them. You will probably never convince those that strongly oppose you but there are others who are trying to learn and understand.

Also keep in mind that sometimes you will share common ground with people that you strongly disagree with on other threads. Don't take the fights to topics you agree on.

R0bert

Benny, there is to much that I don't know to want to dig back into that stuff.

I will say that I've given the cristain church a fairly hard time over my years on OLO (ex christains can be a bit like ex smokers)and I've never had any trouble with Graham. There are plenty of other posters who don't like the christain church or it's ideas of god and they seem to still be around as well.

I struggle to see a valid reason why the site would be desperate to put itself through all this because Graham or someone got upset about anything Wendy had to say about church leaders when they leave other posters alone who are often harder on the church than Wendy was. If they wanted to ban somebody for saying things against the church better to pick on someone who does not pay anything and leave Wendy alone and hope they get another $1,100 next year.

I'm left with the reality that I've been a poster here for a long time and have never seen evidence of foul play from Graham or others accociated with the site. Apart from claims about Wendy the only other complaint I've heard is of someone telling me that they were reprimanded via their private email address by one of the team from the site. I'm not privy to enough of the detail on that to comment further. In as much as I've been asked to comment I choose to give Graham and the OLO team the benefit of the doubt.

R0bert

Benny, I went and looked at the posts by "Farmers Against PALE". As far as I can tell there were two of them, one was deleted for Flaming and the other one had nothing obvious in it to suggest that it was one of the existing posters other than a shared dislike of PALE. It may have been, not sure how the site would tell if they provided a second distinct email address unless they admitted that they were an existing poster.

R0bert

Yessss Robert..*slap*... you certainly do *slap slap* give the Church a hard *slap* time :)

Now.. you DID say its the 'carpark'....right ?

Benny.. I didn't realize some folk had been banned like you explained.. I just sail along going about my business and don't notice these things.

Robert.. if you have any way of contacting Scout, please convey my best wishes, and if I've hurt her, throughout our various encounters I would regret it.

I also get the impression that some cheeky people are trying to use OLO for commercial purposes, but I won't mention which article.
Though Tony Kevin's book plug was pretty obvious :) He isn't the one I mean.

OZGIRL ! I hope you don't leave, I enjoy your posts immensely. Don't take stuff personally.

So, other than that, if anyones wants 'some of me' here is the place :) go sharpen those teeth and starttt a chompin.
Cheers

BD, I won't slap you - and I hope that you have some real pants on, I don't think that the carpark is ready for those bike pants you keep telling us about :o .

When it comes to bashing other peoples beliefs (or lack thereof) I have to conceed your mastery just on the basis of sheer persistance. Can I assume from your comment that you'd support my nomination (amongst others) if the site was in the habit of evicting posters for saying unflattering things about the christain church?

Did posts disappear from this thread during the day? I thought that there was another following yours this morning.

R0bert

Yes Robert. Looks like the street sweeper came in and cleaned up the carpark.

RObert, I only now noticed this thread, thank you for that- it's good to have Graham's support for this as well.

Yes, some of the posts on the church thread did disappear but the only reason for that was that they were completely off-topic.

I fully agree with Graham for deleting them. I even recall sending him a message to thank him for cleaning it up a bit.

There was nothing flaming said in those post against the church- I vaguely remember it was just an argument that moved from the 'Animal welfare' or 'Libbers are hypocrites' thread to the church thread and continued on there without any relevance at all to the topic.

Luckily we now have this Carpark thread for that!

PS I miss Scout on here as well, she was one of my favourite posters.

"Blind allegiance is pure folly."

I thoroughly agree with you. As for all the other comments you have made about me today - I fiercely protect my family, my home, my business, as I have no doubt you would too. My attitude to one organisation is known to all, and its for good reason. You have attacked me (and people you think are me) non stop because of your own "blind allegiance" I could tell you how I know who you are, but that would mean hurting your feelings (for real, not some silly post) and leaving you questioning who your 'buddies' really are. I am not the cold and bitter person you believe I am.

You do not know who I am..you think I am Ozgirl..yareckon..Tauras etc..Just as I dont really know who you are..

I dont have a blind allegiance with anyone but I do see the sneaky nasty jibes you make about pple in an underhand way that hurts them..

Pigfarmer personally I dont give a flying .......k about your fight with you know who..it is so complex and involved I simply dont have the strength or inclination to begin to get my head around it..I have plenty to keep myself busy.

But i take pple as they are, that I can tell you..face value, so far you havent shown me a face that I can respect.If you really are a nice person on the inside it might be a nice idea to let it shine.

I dont think its useful to threaten me with 'being able to hurt' me..theres not much you can say to me that I havent heard before believe me..such is my lot these days..but hey if it makes you feel better you go right ahead and reinforce your image alittle more.

I dont like to fight with you PF...its a real chore and I could do without it...but neither do i back down...dont assume because I like someone u dislike that i am automatically your enemy.

I am have many friends and they are all DIFFERENT.

So we can start again or not..its upto you.

I certainly made no threat to hurt you. I said I didnt want to hurt your feelings. I didnt want to publicly humiliate you either, although you have enjoyed trying to do it to me. If you just want to twist my words there is no point discussing it.

My sneaky nasty jibes? Come on - fairs fair. I think I'm pretty mild compared to what is dished out to me.

I dont mean sneaky nasty jibes to me..Im a bit more resilient than that...not to me ,you know who Im referring to.

I wouldnt have started a thread in oppostion to the "hypocrites' thread if you hadnt been so hostile to me when I was trying to talk about it to you ,ie: pack rape, de-nutting (if u like).You were generally contemptous of me , very dismissive, and Yabby tends to follow your lead Im sad to say..so when you do that you both appear too have a 'bully' mentality..this could be news to you, but thats how its perceived by me.

When you say you defend you home ,business..I defend my friends..I think we are both strong women

Yes we did both throw around a few barbs, thats for sure..

I enjoy vigorous debate, but I think if we learn to respect other pples right to have a valid opinion that should pretty well knock this thing on the head..whaddya reckon?

And the forum is not a place for you and......y to air your dirty laundry..manners ladies.Noone cares and it disrupts some really great and important topics.Like animal welfare.

Fair enough. It is not my intention to come across as a bully, I am aware that I can seem abrupt, but I have felt the need to be on the defensive.
If you wish to revisit the whole castration thing again on the other thread let me know. I really was trying to make a valid point about another side of farming. It is even an issue I have discussed with the RSPCA.

As for your 'friend', I dont see us resolving that one. While ... is no longer posting, and not taking shots at me, I will leave it alone. It really is the organisation I have a problem with, and dont appreciate having it force fed in posts. While thats not happening, i wont have anything to say about them.

We obviously have different understanding of the word friend too. Mine dont stab me in the back. My last word on the subject:)

Pigfarmer..Im glad that we are at least now on the path to some kind of truce and I hope it lasts..

As for the definition of friend I kind of take that to mean pple who actually know me, dont get me wrong it is clear what you imlpy here...
But since not one person on this forum knows zip about the other..I kind of take with a grain salt anything that may be said in the heat of battle as an offence to my person..

I have over various posts on various threads laid out a lot of background about myself..so anything that you say you may know or anyone else knows can only have come from that...so it would be my own fault for putting it out there...?

We are all human Pigfarmer, none of us are perfect, we all may say and do things at times that we are not proud of..but that doesnt mean they are inherently flawed and to be cast aside forever..I have a forgiving nature, maybe that could be seen as a weakness , but they should also know I am not stupid either.

So whatever you know it might be best left with you and I trust your powers of discetion to just leave it best alone.

I am not your enemy Id like you to know that ..but neither am I ....s keeper and what goes down between the two of you is not my concern.

You both need to let this go, ..its become crazy.. you need to look at each other as human beings who are not perfect ,have faults,and to realize that thats ok too.
Human beings are NOT perfect thats what makes them human, you 2 can work this out without destroying each other believe me....
Let the dust settle and the anger subside..we say and do some stupid stuff in the heat of battle..

Ignore the bad and praise the good..it works with my kids and I think thats good advice here..

Forgiveness is powerful and liberating, you are both only hurting yourselves.

Robert.
It is interesting watching Car Park thread. Perhaps there is now a chance of people being able to stay on topic. I hope so.
The only thing that is a worry is i feel that you PF are saying you will not allow others to put up their views.
You base this it seems on a personal dislike of somebody.
I have watched and kept a open mind up until now.
It has been hard to keep an open mind to be honest. I have watched you attack three seperate people as soon as you felt there represented shared views on the subject, which as you know was live animal exports.
Are you saying so long as those people do not express their opostion the live exports things are fine but you will personally attack them if the resume posting.?
It is a question not a attack on you.
I for one would be very concerned if i thought that was what you meant. Every person is entiled to post not just you.
I might add without personal attacks.
Anyway Robert it is to be hoped that is the end of it.

This is supposed to be a thread for people to work out their differences away from main discussion. Rachel and I are a good example of what can be achieved I hope.

It is not a place for voyeurs.

Robert.

When are you requesting the method to be introduced regarding disruptive posters?

Do you know if other forums have anything like you have suggested.?

Do you think it might be an idea to go into other threads and tell others what the car park is about and your idea?

Well leave it to you.

I think a few posters will grow if somethings put nto place.
As you said a lot of people just read the comments and dont post.

Pigfarmer and I have come to an understanding..

However Benny I didnt take that understanding to mean that I cant and wont have my own opinion on Live exports or any other topic..Noone dictates what I can say or wont say except maybe the Editor in charge of protocols in the interest of the forum.

There is no subtle 'gag' attached to this..We will both have opposing veiws many times over I would imagine..but respect is the underlying key issue here.

I think we can acheive much more in an enviroment of shared peace and respect than everyone being at war..we are all on the same side here after all..we all want whats best for our animals..in that we are all united.

That goes for all of us..

Well I think that any kind of voting button is a bad idea.

Lots of people once believed the world was flat, that did
not make it so. The system would be open to abuse. Those
devious posters who have multiple ids, would try to misuse
it, to silence other posters whom they cannot outreason.

Best to just let reasoned arguments prevail on OLO!

The carpark itself is a good idea. If you wanna have a scrap,
have it here.

Yabby, that is the whole idea of a voting button.

I assume people who want to talk off topic (or wanna have a scrap) will automatically be moving to the Carpark.
The voting button won't be needed if everybody would move away from the main discussion to the Carpark.

It needs to be used only when people refuse to do that and personal arguments or their off-topic talks become distractive to the original topic.

"The system would be open to abuse."
I think it would prevent some deletions and suspencions, actually.

"Best to just let reasoned arguments prevail on OLO!"
I agree, and this will happen when people can be made to take their personal discussions to the Carpark.

"The carpark itself is a good idea."
I agree.
It is actually such a good idea that I would like to see this carpark thread as a 'sticky' thread that would stay on top. Otherwise it will move down to the bottom and new people would not know about it.

I also have a suggestion I'd like to make to Graham- might see what others think of it first.

Instead of all the threads just going down the line of history in chronological order, so after a month it will disappear from the visible page (and you'd have to reset the page to Last 3 months to see it) I would like to suggest that as soon as a comment has been made on one of the threads, it automatically moves to the top.
That way, the most popular, last discussed and most recent comments will always stay on top.

Thank you RObert for this thread..it is a great idea and Celivias suggestion about making it a sticky thread is a good one, as is the suggestion that the most recently discussed topics stay on top so as not to slide right off the page.

Yes Yabby I agree , i could see the multiple ID poster abusing this system also..
The carpark is the best option.

Celiva, "That way, the most popular, last discussed and most recent comments will always stay on top" I've saved my link to the site as a sorted by last post list. http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/index-articles.asp?sort-by=post-date

When I open up OLO the posts are sorted with the most recent posts at the top.

I've not worked out if I can save settings for this page yet.

Yabby, in my comments on Celiva's suggestion I said that I'd like the decisions based on the voting button to still be subject to editorial review. Not only the multiple id thing could be an issue, a few voters who don't like another viewpoint could potentially abuse it as well. Hopefully if implemented it becomes a means to alert the site to the an off topic private disussion on a serious thread. Similar to the delete button, it does not result in a deletion, rather someone having a look to see if deletion is waranted. If abused it could become a pest for administrators but it would not be hard to spot the serial abusers fairly quickly.

Thanks all for your feedback. Keep it coming, I'm not sure how closely the site is following the discussion but we are learning enough to put a suggestion up soon with many of the questions answered.

Any thoughts on the alternative of private messages, I like the public approach more myself but can see strengths and weeknesses in both approaches.

R0bert

Benny , one more thing Id like to add..Pf is not an appointed moderator/censor on this forum..if she is Im not aware of it.

If that were the case , as you seem to be concerned about, if indeed you felt you were posting in an enviroment were you were intimidated in some way by one persons power over what you could and couldnt say then I would be deeply concerned for the integrity of the whole forum.The rules would then become a joke.

Forum rules apply to everyone and we all operate within the same guidelines....please be assured I would hope you would feel the same level of freedom that we all do.

Rachel06
If I respond to your very kind words I might be banned again. Yes Robert there were some posts taken down.
I am not allowed to post about what actually happend.
I wont cut out certain farmers from the web page because somebody does not like that person. I will treat every body the same. Its for all farmers and to improve animal welfare. .

Rachel06 has summed the situation up precisely. I support Roberts idea as I see anything at all to make a fairer system a advantage. Robert the fact you are trying is very much to your credit.

I am happy to let the other go providing I can talk about Animal Welfare.
I have been told I can not use the words "we", and "us".
That does make it difficult considering I work with others regarding Animal Welfare. I feel a bit like Robinson Cruso living in a world of just me.

I walk on egg shells.
I am still being attacked as its plain to see Robert if you care to look.
If I hit the delete button its ingorned.
Cilia points out that she requested a post above here deleted . So did I.
It was ignored.
yes Rachel06.
You hit the nail on the head. There is nothing I or you or Robert can do about it. I just hope Robert gets his idea off the ground and others like yourself will use this button if its brought in.
I certainly wont be game to.

Its good to know there are people around thinking of ways to keep threads on track about personal mischief supervised. I just hope they listen to you Robert
Rachel0 and Robert.
I can only say thanks. Its best for everybody and especially the animals if I just move on.
I may not be big on Churches but I am a huge fan of God and he knows the truth.
He will guide me to helping the animals so I will put my faith in him and a few good men like Robert and Rachel0 and Cilia

RObert said: "Celiva, "That way, the most popular, last discussed and most recent comments will always stay on top"
I've saved my link to the site as a sorted by last post list. When I open up OLO the posts are sorted with the most recent posts at the top."

Ah yes RObert, I see what you mean, but I think I haven't explained clearly enough; this was not what I meant.

It is true that the most recent threads are placed on top.
But what I mean is that, whenever a new post is added to a thread, even to threads that are all the way down at the bottom, this thread then should move to the very top again.
That way people can see that someone put a new comment there. We will then always have the most popular, the most discussed threads at the top.

For example, I am making a comment on the Car park thread right now. As soon as I post this comment, the thread should move to the very top.
It will only be pushed down towards the bottom again by the next poster who posts something new on a different thread even seconds or minutes after I posted my comment.

This would be far easier to navigate and people will always keep up-to-date with the last discussed topics.
It would also make it less necessary to opt for 'email alerts' which can really fill up my inbox when there have been many comments on different threads I subscribed to.

Benny siad: "Cilia points out that she requested a post above here deleted . So did I."

Just for the record, I have not requested a post above here to be deleted.
Slight misunderstanding and it doesn't really matter, but I just want to say that in this thread I haven't requested deletion.

I have done that on a very few occasions in the Animal Welfare thread, but not in other threads as far as I can remember.

Robert, I haven't been following this thread closely, but thought I should say a few things. First, thanks for taking it on yourself to get a discussion going about how the forum can be improved. I'll look forward to your summary of your discussion, as promised above.

Second, the only people able to moderate this forum are me, Susan Prior and Lachlan Kuhn. I do most of the moderation, Lachlan sometimes acts, but generally on technical things he might notice out of hours, and Susan almost never.

Third, if you send a "Delete comment" request you always get a response, except in the rare cases where someone might appear to be abusing that function. That doesn't mean that the comment will always be deleted. Most times they're not. I did delete some posts higher up on this thread as not factual and tending to lead to an argument about moderation. Ultimately, the moderator is always right and limited correspondence will be entered in to, and while we normally are fairly tolerant about criticism of us, we're not going to leave material up suggesting wrong-doing, especially when there hasn't been any.

Celivia
I do apoligise it was on the Animal Welfare thread or the take it outside thread I think. Also your idea on the above comment is really well thought out.
It would make things easier for everybody and possibly even Graham
You must sit up all night thinking of these great ideas.
Your a natural. Maybe Graham will give you a job.
I would like to say it can not be an easy job running these forums and puting up with everybody complaining.
I think it would be pretty easy to get the wrong message or your wirses crossed .
I think for everybodies sake that should be the last said about the matter that PF raises all the time.
I dont think it is fair to have the car park set up but still go onto the other threads and try to disrupt the topic at hand. Maybe that is something else you could consider asking to be made a rule Robert.
Poor Robert what ever did you do the deserve all this extra work.
I hate to tell you but I have decided that every time that person
attacks me I will bring it into the car park. That way the Animal Welfare thread can carry on uninterupted.
Selfish am I not but Thanks Robert. At least that way I hope Graham will see I am certainly not responding.
I told you Robert God would help me help the animals.
He sent you.

No need to apologise, Benny, it’s not important and I get my wires crossed so often it’s not funny! The mistakes I have made on OLO are nothing to be proud of, like the RSPCA QLD post (where I forgot to add QLD).

I don’t want to take credit for my last suggestion about last discussed threads moving to the top; I’ve actually seen it work on another forum and I thought it was perfect. I should have mentioned that it was not my own idea; it was not my intention to take credit for someone else’s idea. (The extra ‘take it to the carpark’ voting button idea was mine). There ya go- another thing I forget to mention!

Yes Benny, I also do give GY credit for dealing with all of us ‘complainers’ ;)

Oh I do have another suggestion (yes of my own ) ;)
If posters who flame or offend can be suspended for a few days and their posts deleted, then it may be possible for long-term, well-behaved posters (say after a certan amount of non-offensive and non-flaming posts) to earn an extra post a day or perhaps some extra words in their posts (perhaps 400 instead of 350). This could be a temporary privilege or longer lasting.
This way we would be able to see more posts or words by reasonable people on OLO and less by the offenders.
Just a thought

Well, I dont think the carpark in this format is going to work very well. It would be more aptly named the 'boxing ring'. Too many will sit back and watch the fight and when its over, and they are all 'punch drunk' they can come in and have a say on something that is none of their business. The only way around that is if they could control access to the thread and I cant see that happening.

Celivia - we are not in primary school. Should we give out gold stars to the good little posters that never ruffle any feathers? A system of "oh, I better not say that, I wont get an extra post" will hardly encourage open opinion.

Celiva Robert
Read all your ideas. Good ones. So people wont like them because they have no repect for others.
Keep up your great ideas and it is a credit that you think how you can make things run a little more fairly.
Good Work Robert on your car park thread.
Jolly good thinking. If there were more people in this world like you it would be a much nicer place.

*- I noticed Robert on the forum front it said last post five days ago. Yet these posts have been put up after that.
Thought you might like to check it out yourself.
That seems to happen on a few different threads. As you are putting in the hard work to draw people to the car park I thought someone should let you know .
Great site by the way.

Yes PF i agree about the 'gold stars ' comment...i imagine that this would influence the way we post..I do however believe this is a good idea to solve disputes between posters..it really not a problem for me that others come in for a look...its only natural curiosity after all.

I would hope this thread remains, because there is no other alternative for problem solving other than this..

Is it my imagination, but does it seem the Carpark thread has slipped to the bottom of the General Discussion Index very quickly?

Unless you click on pge 50 or more we wont find any of these threads we are crrently on..can we bring them back to the top somehow?

Taurus, the default display is in chronological order. If you click on "Last post" you will get the threads displayed in order of the most recent activity.

You can also filter using the subject classifications at the bottom.

Not sure what else we can do. Maybe a "bookmark" option?

Celivia - we are not in primary school. Should we give out gold stars to the good little posters that never ruffle any feathers? A system of "oh, I better not say that, I wont get an extra post" will hardly encourage open opinion.

PF yeah perhaps you are right, I hadn't even thought about the fact that it might restrict some people's open opinions. I just thought it would prevent people from being unnecessarily nasty which distracts from the real issue sometimes.
Anyway, an idea we can forget about because I agree that open opinion and free speech is important.

What about a Judge Judy thread Robert . Everybody could come in and give evidence. [ Without breaking any laws of course] You all have to stay in the car park if its a hung jury.

You could invent games to make it interesting like piggy in the middle and pin the tail on the donkey.
The only rule being nobody would be exempt from the judge and Jury.- nobody-.
What do you think ? Sounds like fun
Prizes could be anything from two, ten, free posts or being paying a fine to their most hated organisation.
he he h

Having said that Celivia your concept to deter nasty posters really needs to be worked on..

Maybe maybe if more than 2 pple from the one thread complain about the same poster, they automatically get a one month ban..this way it would be more fair than the current method.That way it is understood that the penalty will be severe and wont be tolerated by fellow posters..A neighborhood watch type of thing.
Comments?

I think the neighborhood watch idea has potential..

It means that posters will keep to post and resist the urge to attack someone unnecessarily....

If two or more pple feel that another poster is being badly treated they can 'lodge' a complaint and in doing so save another poster the
stress of ongoing attacks...if the person knows the attacker will be dealt with, will then not be tempted to defend themselves by launching counter attacks..
It also means that other posters will not feel compelled to protect said victim, this often sees thread descend into war because attackers and nasty posters go unchecked...

All nasty and viciuos attacks dont come under the deliberate flame banner..too sneaky for that.

Here is another suggestion. That every poster is treated eaqually.

played by the same rules as everybody else.

regardless or not if others might need them or feel they may need them to support them in any other way or topic.

failing that and as a last resort an outside monitor completly inderpendant.
These coments go up on the internet and there should be very strick guidlines in the interests of everybody.
People and organisations must be protected. Also anybody else that may be associated by way of board members that could emd up loosing a great deal of money and reputation simply because these forums were not montitered properly.
I think there should be a basic rule that posters can not defame organisations especially NFP.
After all that effects many peoples lives not just one.
That is something I suggest you put on top of your how to fix things list if you want to make this fairer for all concerned.

Graham Y...

Thanks for that tip..makes life a bit easier.

NedKelly
I have taken a part of our discussion from the Church Leader’s thread over to this thread because it’s more a personal thing than it is to do with the original topic.
I would just like to refer to something you said in that Church thread, namely:
“People will think you are fickle if you do that and they will just targett you as a push over. I am sure if you stand up for what you really beleive in others will come in to support you. Even if they dont. To thy own self be true.”

The reason I want to discuss it on here is because I do not believe that I am fickle and so I find this a little unfair. I AM true to myself.

If people believe that I am fickle for changing my mind about some things (like the Church leaders’ role), then everybody is fickle. I yet have to meet a person with an open mind who never changes his/her mind about something.
There is no way that anyone who knows me finds me a pushover.

Changing one’s opinon is just part of life, part of growing and part of sharing.
People change their opinions all the time- e.g. when they gain more information about an issue.

Imagine a world in where nobody ever changed their mind about anything. We all might as well be brain dead. Nobody would have to think after forming an initial opinion on something. Their thoughts about an issue would never change- they’d have the same old thoughts as a decade, two decades ago.

I prefer to have a flexible mind and am not ashamed of admitting some mistakes I make no matter who points them out to me or how aggressively they tell me that I am wrong. Some people don’t have good people skills but they can still be right.

I love learning from other people as equal persons in a discussion. Different people look at different aspects of an issue. That, I find interesting.

celivia

I was actually refering to the post on the car park on the 21st- just a few threads up.

Your idea was brilliant yet you changed your mind. Thats a pity because if some of yours and Roberts ideas were actually put into practise it would benefit all.

Yet you seemed to change your mind about it as soon as somebody said they didnt think it would work. An observation over a few different threads. Certainly not meant to offend. If you took it that way please know you have taken it the wrong way.
I notice Robert has not been into the car park for a while.
I do hope he is ready to put up all your ideas

Good on you Celivia! It takes a lot of courage to stand up sometimes. I know your critism of me has been harsh but maybe you may now understand that different people take different stands for their own reasons. We all express our selves differently and its unfortunate that the written word does not convey tone then a lot of what gets said here would not be so miscontrued.

Dont let anyone intimidate you. I have obviously misjudged you and lumped you in as part of a group. i am sorry.

I thought we werent supposed to read disputes between other posters, let alone comment on them..:)

But as it seems to be the norm here..I would just say that to change ones mind is a good thing..as Celivia says when we know better we do better..new facts and points of veiw come to light which adds to our knowledge base and so we come to see a different angle..

Im all for keeping an open mind and PF you are right..the tone of a post cant be conveyed thru this medium and a lot of misunderstandings can and do occur.

Go softly..

Glad to see my point was noted Taurus.

But .. how does that saying go?

Whats good for the goose .....

Celivia, nicely summed up on the changing your mind post.

All - there has been some interesting stuff put up during the last few days. I see what I'm trying to do here as facilitating an experiment. I want to learn what works and does not work about this idea.

My impressions so far are that
- it will only work for those of us who are here to learn as well as sharing and testing ideas.
- some people enjoy the conflict and the head to head arguments. The analogy I draw is the thrill some get from heckling a public speaker. It's not about changing anything or any bodies view point or about learning, rather about the fun of the fight. Public forums have always had that aspect and probably always will. Thats not necessarily bad just not my thing.
- I very much like Celiva's idea of a voting button to draw the moderators attention to an off topic discussion but would hate to see any kind of automatic result from it's use. To easy for a voting block to abuse that to shut down the lone voices. Those lone voices are important.
- I think there is scope for multiple carparks, it would probably also be helpful to have a private room to sort things out in. New threads are easy to create but at the meoment we don't have the option for private messaging. I've still not come to grips with the issues that private messaging raises.
- I don't see that what happens here should be considered private, thats something others disagree over.

To be continued
R0bert

Part 2

- The issue of protection for individuals or organisations is a difficult one for a discussion forum. Many of our discussions involve one or the other and to keep free speech I don't see how either can recieve any special protection beyond that afforded by defamation laws (and the sites flaming rules). Should we allow supporters of an organisation to post favourable comments about the organisation they represent and not allow those with a differeing view from posting their own views? Would any of us support an organisation we did not like using the site for publicity and not having the right of rebuttal?
- I have some concerns about discussions going on which refer to individuals not involved in that discussion. The same issue exists in any thread. Any workable suggestions? Being able to send a message to an individual might resolve that.

Recommendations,
- Use or start a carpark if you think it's necessary. Put a link in the original thread to tell the other party about it and discontinue your part of the off topic discussion on the original thread.
- Private rooms could also have a place. Is it possible to have a trial of private messaging?
- The voting button to recommend that a discussion be taken outside could help a lot.
- Keep putting suggestion up as to how we can make this work better.

R0bert

Taurus,
I think that everybody should be able to read any discussion they like, so feel free. It doesn't harm anyone if there's an audience :)

Ned Kelly,
“I was actually refering to the post on the car park on the 21st- just a few threads up.”
Oh, OK thanks for pointing that out. No it’s cool, I am not easily offended ;)
I hope you don’t take offense either- this is just a matter of looking at something differently and does not have to be personal.

“Your idea was brilliant yet you changed your mind.”
Thank you;)
I thought it was a good idea too, at first. Partly it still might have some value.
But that’s what I mean about just having a look from another perspective. I’ll explain.

PF pointed out that rewarding people with extra posts won’t encourage open opinion. I hadn’t thought of that- I thought it would encourage people to write more reasonably and less unnecessarily aggressive.
While I do recognise that deleting and suspending people also doesn’t encourage open opinion, it would be a shame if a ‘reward system’ would discourage people to express their opinions.

The thing is, I don’t really care whether my idea gets criticised or not- an idea that came out of thin air is not my live work that I have to defend till I drop. I can let it be what others want it to be- perhaps totally dump it, perhaps to just see it as a starting point of a discussion that might lead to a better idea, perhaps to change it, improve it or do with it what they like.

What we possibly all have in common is that we want to be able to discuss things freely but in a way as reasonably and civilly as we can manage.
So we try to find a way how to make discussions fairer.

Some people (like you) will find this idea ‘brilliant’ because they value civil discussion highly. They are sick of all the arguments and attacks.

To be continued

Other people (like PF) find this a crap idea is because they value free speech or open opinion more than they value civil discussion. They are probably sick of being gagged or inhibited.

Because I value both civil discussion and free speech I don’t really want to choose politeness over free speech because we already have a delete/suspension system on here that is (supposed to!) take care of flaming or defaming.
The fact that there are or have been some problems with that, means that this needs to be fixed.
It does not mean that a reward system is going to have an effect on the defaming- it’s more a ‘polite conversation’ incentive.

I believe that this carpark thread will make other threads look better without the arguments and off topic discussions once people know about this thread.
So ‘having to choose between two different values’ is the reason I’ve changed my mind on this particular idea.

“Yet you seemed to change your mind about it as soon as somebody said they didnt think it would work.”
Speaking generally, when I agree with someone or change my mind about something I do that ONLY because I have come to realise that another option might be better suited to whatever the purpose is than my own idea. I do not change my mind because other people overpower me. I am in full control of my own mind.
Only reasonable opinions, not people themselves, can make me want to change my mind.

That’s why I am not a ‘group person’. I listen to opinions and ideas no matter where they come from. I’d feel untrue to myself if I automatically disregarded the opinions of other people merely because they’re not in my group’. Or vice versa: that I should always agree with someone merely because ‘that person belongs to my group’. You’re probably right that some people might call that fickle, but the important thing for me is what *I* think.

PF,
Thank you, much appreciated!
If I’ve been harsh in my criticism of you I’m not even aware of that so I’m sorry if I have. I am ‘trying’ to be civil most of the time. When I have time I’ll go back over the animal threads to read back what I said- I can’t remember.

Anyway, although we disagree about live exports are, I do not deny that emotion plays big role in having formed this opinion for me.

Live exports and cruel slaughtering methods are a thing I could never agree with, so for me it’s time, on OLO anyway, to just agree to disagree on this one. The technical and farmer's opinions go over my head, I admit.

I also was woried about attacks on PALE or any business/organisation for that matter if these attacks can harm that organisation. I do know your reason (that you were not so much against PALE but you have the feeling that PALE is pushed down your throat).

Benny’s thread about PALE I thought, would mean that PALE discussions can take place there without having to interfere with other threads. That way only people who are either pro or anti live exports and are interested in discussing this can choose to go there.

RObert,
great posts and recommendations.
Especially the idea of multiple carparks, where the host of a thread sets up a parallel carpark thread is a good idea.
I still would like to see all the last discussed threads move to the top.

RObert already addresses this, but it is a fact of life that people or organisations who discuss things online are carrying the risk of being criticised. It's a very fine line between defaming, flaming and just criticism, I think.
Perhaps people have different ideas on what 'defaming' or 'flaming' involves. Would make a good discussion thread.

I am concerned about damage PALE as an organisation might suffer from being attacked online.
I guess the main reason why (animal) organisations generally do not engage in online forum discussions is to prevent possible defamation of their organisations.

Celivia, it looks like we have very similar views on much of this. I'm trying to stay out of specific debate regarding PALE. There has been to much talk of legal action by some for me to wish to get continue on that issue any further.

On the broader topic I don't tend to differentiate between NFP's and others. People seem to be able to do both good and bad in the name of causes and in the name of profit. An NFP attacking an industry should be open to criticism of it's own behaviours and claims (even if my sympathies tend to lie with the NFP).

If a group is trying to persuade me to change my views and decisions based on claims I want those who disagree with them to be able to challenge those claims and the evidence the claims are based on.

Cheers
R0bert

Those who have been following this thread and some others may have noticed that there have been a large number of posts deleted. These have also in some cases been accompanied by the suspension of the poster for attempting to use multiple identities to evade the posting rules.

OzGirl has been posting under a large number of names, and the other recent offenders appear to be related to PALE.

Those of you who are still in this discussion might like to think how we can stop people from trying to evade the rules using multiple identities. If you spot any of the offenders popping up again I'd appreciate a "heads up" too!

One idea I'd like to float is that we stop people anonymous posting and require posters to provide a real name which can be checked by the moderator against the electoral roll or telephone book. This would incur a cost, so perhaps you might also consider whether a small fee to cover this might be appropriate.

What about banning the use of yahoo, hotmail type email addresses. Or any of those free, hard to trace providers?

I am only assuming that that is an easy way around being detected here for using multiple ids.

Well I have to say I'm glad that some of that multiple id thinggy
ended, it was becoming a joke and snub of the forum rules,
so sensible discussion was becoming difficult on some threads.

Overseas some of the forums use cookies to keep track of who is
who. They can be deleted, but it makes it so much harder.
Posters can't just create a new id automatically, its verified
manually, after a check.

Graham, I support the use of a real name in your records (and enough identifying info to confirm the ID). I'd rather keep the name that goes up on posts less tracable, commenting on family law issues or on industries our employers are involved in can be severely inhibited otherwise.

What do you do about overseas posters? We seem to have a number of them and I assume that it would be difficult to confirm their identity from the phone book or electoral roles. We also have some posters who probably are to young for the electoral role and others may not be in the phone book. I'm trying to get a router working for VoIP and if I can get that going sucessfully I plan to ditch the fixed line and it's associated line rental.

One option might be to use a "secure" payment method such as Paypall but I don't know what facilities they provide to vendors to confirm identity. You then hit the issue of posters who don't use credit cards.

Can you monitor IP addresses used by posters and if you get several users on the same IP address trigger an alert to look more closely? Not proof against someone determined to avoid the rules but it might help. I don't know if keeping track of that breaches any privacy laws.

R0bert

As someone who knows from experience that having your identity displayed on a forum can cause huge problems, I would agree with robert. An identity on file, but post under a nickname.

As for checking against phone books etc, may end up with more problems than ever if that identity is 'stolen'.

What about a 24 hour waiting period before the account is activated?

Great ideas from all about the identity thing. I agree about the identity on file and not displayed. Safety of posters is important.

Perhaps people can email you a copy of their driver's licence and if this is not enough, perhaps also something official (like a gas bill) with their name and address on it to compare with the licence. Perhaps this is necessary when people are neither in the phone book nor on the electoral roll, such as some permanent residents or overseas posters.

A fee would also help repel multiple personalities.

I should think a fee and/or providing identity will largely reduce the incidence of anonymus postings.

I'm not convinced on the anonymity issue. I've always been uncomfortable with it. If I get up and speak at a public meeting, everyone knows who I am, or at least can probably find out by asking other people. Why should these forums be any different? Isn't part of the problem that people will say things here that they wouldn't if people knew who they were?

"I should think a fee and/or providing identity will largely reduce the incidence of anonymus postings."

Celivia, there can be problems with that too. Lets say you are
a famous politician, judge or whatever. You would like to say
what you really think, but cannot,because of your position.
Many would not even risk letting OLO administration know
their idendity, for fear of somehow being unmasked.

I'm still hoping that Graham can find a simple technology
solution, which lets OLO recognise which computer is
being used to post. I think that would solve 95%
of the problem. There is very likely some solution like
that out there in computer geekville, which us more
humble posters are simply not aware of.

Another thought to what I have said before. Perhaps this forum, and others like it, performs the sort of function that the confessional provides to Roman Catholics. If you are anonymous you feel freer to confess to things that you might otherwise keep to yourself.

Do we need a variety of forums? The public meeting type, and the confessional one?

Graham, funny that you should raise that point :) When I first
joined the net in 1995, there was only one access, MSN/Telstra at 5$
an hour. I was the only one around here for miles that joined,
I thought it had huge potential. My work at the time meant I had
to stick around, so that staff could have a break, so the net was
an ideal form of new entertainment.

At that time Aussies were rare on the net, nearly all Americans and
Canadians. There were some crazy programmes, like Freetel. I soon
became the resident psychologist on Freetel. Apart from my
talents as a psychologist :), it was also due to the very point
you mention: I was a very long away from their social circle,
ie. if they told their best friend, she might tell her other friend
etc. Yet people have stuff they want to talk about, its only
natural. There seemed to be two extremes :- people who either
were incredibly honest, or some complete fabrications, who invariably
contradicted themselves in the end, as say our bennie and others
did on here.

So lets say I was chief of CSIRO or whatever, or a politician who
has to say what people want to hear, to get elected, would I risk
my whole career by exposing my true idendity on OLO? Most
likely not. But all these people are humans too, wanting to say
what they really think. Sometimes, that truth coming out can in
fact be of true benefit to society, the pretencious stuff is only
there to conform and impress after all.

Thats why I am hoping that you will find a technology solution

"Isn't part of the problem that people will say things here that they wouldn't if people knew who they were? "

The other side to that Graham, is that some of the people reading that post are not registered. How many are there that just lurk on the forum but never post themselves? Posts on here get picked up pretty quickly by the search engines and you could have all sorts of anonymous readers.

There are a few 'crazies' out there. Wether you are prepared to post honestly or not, you cannot control the reaction by others to your words. Lets face it, the written word is so easily misinterpreted. I think the posters identity should be protected if they choose.

I was going to say something in the same line as PF.

The safety of posters is of uttermost importance.
Having to deal with some unwanted, multiple identities can be very annoying and frustrating but is not a safety issue.
It's not worth it to give up posters' safety to deal with an annoyance problem.

It would be fantastic if there would be a technology solution, like Yabby says.
I'd check out that possibility before anything else.

I'll "third" the comments from PF and Celiva regarding safety, the level of personal attack from posters makes me rather glad that I'm not easily tracked down by some.

Likewise I don't want some of our religious fundies tracking me down to share their concern for my soul.

I wish to be able to discuss government run organisations like CSA without appearing on some special internal hitlist next time I have to deal with them. They are bad enough as it is.

I use aspects of my own circumstances and experience to support some of my views on family law issues and if my real name was published then it becomes fairly easy to identify others also involved. That raises another legal and safety minefield.

I've not seen a pattern which suggests that those of us who use nick names are inherently less responsible than those who use full names and make great efforts to identify themselves. There have been some very ugly posts written under full names.

R0bert

Thats exactly correct Robert..the people who use mutiple ids are doing so because they feel theyve been forced to because they have been unfairly targeted by moderators..they are responsible and caring people.

I would like to apolagise to PF because I have a feeling I unfairly accused her of having me banned and we were only just becoming friends..so I do hope you receive that in the spirit in which it was meant..a lot of tensions build up with all the unrest of late.

I believe my reasons for being banned where for reasons not totally
unrelated to you, but vicariously because of my association with Wendy and indirecttly you in relation to that..Wish you well PF.

I wont be using this forum again and so I hope you dont all drop the ball now..as the animal welfare and farming issues are very important.

You are a good and caring farmer PF(Lee)..sorry about using your tag

I certainly think that the PFdot imposter, is a worrying development
on OLO. I note that this was not their only posting. I also note
the Celivia dot imposter email alert, although that has been
deleted. No doubt the original Celivia, is not very impressed.

I hope that something can be done, to change those possiblities.

To those of you who think that you got such a raw deal on OLO,
stop and think for a minute if the system is really so unfair,
or if its just actually you and your irrational and eccentric
behaviour, that is really the problem. Sheesh, we are meant
to have grown beyond behaving like a mob of schoolkids on here.

I've been banned on OLO. I have some questions about that, but
I played by the rules, accepted the judgement of the judiciary
concerned, there is plenty to do beyond OLO.

C'mon guys and girls concerned, grow up.

I dont know were anyone gets the idea that I have had any kind of special treatment. I have been suspended twice, get warnings and have posts removed that I believed did not breach any rules but get deleted so they dont trigger a bad response from someone else. The difference is, I accepted Graham's decision and his reasons for doing so.

one post on this thread only .

I feel perhaps pensioners could if Graham is willing be granted free forum posting. That way it is equal opportunity for every person to have a say.

Those details would of course only be available to Graham Y.

This forum creates a lot of work so why shouldnt everybody else pay something at least.

Also people should post in their own names.

Otherwise it is far too easy for people who are not prepared to put a name to their post come in and attack either people or especially NFP organisations.

It could also has some repercussions for the forum owners. If the worst ''should" happened and people had a case for defamation Graham Y is put to the bother of having to identify those people through his system for the courts.

What a legal nightmare for the forum owner providing a free service.

One would hope this would be a rare if never event however it can happen.

On the other hand it also must be considered if its a slander case that the organisation , or person have fair and reasonable recall to [persue justice through the legal system.

So in short- Paid Membership other than pensioners and real names is what would make it far more fair and probably lead to a better class of posters in general.

No people should not be allowed to post in nick names.

Definitely not.

"OzGirl has been posting under a large number of names, and the other recent offenders appear to be related to PALE."

Says it all dont you think?

I fully agree with you, Yabby. I am NOT impressed!

This behaviour is just not acceptable, OzGirl.
You wrote an offensive post in MY name- this is revolting behaviour.
Is that even legal?

I don't want this post removed, please, as this is the Carpark in where personal problems can be talked about.
I have made sure that I have not blamed the wrong person. It was OzGirl. PF is right!

Thank goodness that GrahamY deleted it promptly.

* ALL of the posts that were made in false nicknames should be deleted- no questions asked.
We do not need to know what someone who has been banned still has to say. They were banned for what they said in the first place.

* If all OLO participants are to pay a fee (perhaps just once-off) and a poster is suspended, s/he will have to re-pay that fee to re-join. Their mistake-their loss.

* Something has to be done ASAP to stop false nickname posts.

* I need a full apology from Ozgirl for having abused my name. She can write this apology to GY who can pass it on to me if he doesn't mind since I hope OG is still banned.

* This is a discussion forum, not a disgustion forum.
Most posters on OLO have respect for a forum that offers us the opportunity to enjoy online debate, discussion, and a bit of fun.
Debates can be very heated but we should not lose respect for OLO as a forum.
Why abuse something if it's given freely or at low cost?

* People should not forget that people who are posting are REAL people. They have feelings. We do not post in each others names to utter crap.

* I do not agree with having to post in one's real name- you will never know who might come after you.
Enough crazy and violent people in this world; some of them might be lurking here for a thrill.

To Be Continued

* Real name should be given to GY when registering with identification provided. Once GY has seen it, it could be deleted off his computer or destroyed for security reasons. Driver's license, official bills or bank statements with confirmation of address etc. should be shown to GY.

I am seriously thinking of taking a break from OLO discussions; it's creepy that this name-snatching possibility is there.
Any person with half a brain could do this to any poster they like.
This time PF and I were the lucky ones, who will be next?
'My' post seems to have been offensive and was deleted. They just could write ANYTHING they like- think about it! Sick!

If this happens again to anyone else, we should all be aware of it and look for the dot or comma or anything else that makes it possible to fool the system.
We don't want to see someone's good reputation being dragged through the mud.

O hello Ozgirl, I mean FakeGirl, I mean OK-foryou. I checked and there is no history of you- this is your only post so far.
So convenient to make up a new name again to protect one of your multiple personalities.
I only need 1 (ONE) name to post in.
In that one name, I sometimes argue, question, and if necessary apologise. I do not need 10 names to cover up for stupid things I have done in one of my other nicknames.
You do. How many nicknames have you had, OzGirl, and do you think this is a normal thing to do?
If you run out of names, I am sure I can help you make up some new ones- I have a few very good suggestions.

L@@k, I got this email alert that stated "Celivia." (I hadn't noticed the dot) had posted just after 6pm. I thought: That's strange- normally I don't get an email alert to say that I have posted myself.
Also, I was in my car on my way home at that time, so I couldn't have posted.

I went to the thread and no post(by me, at 6pm)was there.

I emailed GY to ask what happened- whether it was a technical error or did something get deleted.
He let me know that you, OzGirl, had posted and used a .(dot) after my name so that the system wouldn't recognise my name.
I asked him if it was offensive and he said that it was and that he deleted it.
continued

He left PF.'s post which was not offensive.
Why would he only delete the one you wrote in my name and not in PF name if both were not offensive?

I double checked with W and she said she knows you did use my name. She did not say that it was offensive.

What has been said by you in that post isn't really the point; for me the point is, that you decided to use my name to post whatever you wanted.
Normal people do not do that.

It's OBVIOUS, to me at least, that you are the one who posted in my and PF's name.
Do you think that PF and I are dumb and dumber?

At least, if you have done something wrong, be woman enough to admit it and apologise for it and you might be forgiven.
I would have no problem with that.

I would have no hard feelings if you acted normal, for once.

Come clean, act normal, and people might even start to like you.

Celivia, "I am seriously thinking of taking a break from OLO discussions" - please don't. You have added some great insights to many threads.

I've been saddened by some of what has been going on here. I'm hoping that the point is made and everybody will move on from here.

There are some things we can't protect ourselves against and others which present difficulties for the site - one of the recent posts left me wondering about people using a name which idenfifies them as being part of an organisation (the name of the organisation or something so close that the message gets through). The ID issue comes in there as well.

On the real name I had annoying calls earlier in the year from a debt collecting agency trying to collect money from somebody with the same first and last names as me (but a different middle name I found out later). The guy's last known address was about an hour drive from my place.

How far would those who want real names used need to go to provide positive ID? Would we have to put up a current address, birth date etc to ensure that comments were not attributed to the wrong person?

R0bert

Ask yourselves this question. Remembering back to the first time you posted here - would you have even bothered if they had required all that id, posts in your real name or even a fee? Was it that important to you then that you post here? I know my answer would have been no.

I have already been the victim of threatening emails (from posters we all know) harrassing phone calls and other things I would prefer not to mention. That resulted from someone else posting my details here without my consent so I have no doubt truth in identities will bring real problems.

I said I would only post here once.

However due to the nature of the above post I felt I should try to set the record straight.
GrahamY said I could post so long as I did not pick fights. I never have and I hope he wont see my trying to defend myself or the organization I work with as doing so.

I also am sick of Wendy not defending herself publicly.

I will probably get into trouble for this from Wendy but I can no longer keep quiet

Perhaps I should have done that from the start

This is Antje Struthmann posting not whom I think you are suggesting.

As for your pointing this in our direction I can say that nobody has contacted you from this organization either by phone or email for months since lawyers stepped in.

Considering the situation I am amazed that you have again tried to mislead the public.

As for your continued accusations I can only say you did request the letter from Animals Australia- "both the one you! wrote to them" and "their reply" put up on our web site.


If you had not sent it how else would I have had it? Come on now be honest for once.

It was a letter you! wrote to Animals Australia - right? And their reply! back to you right?

Then please everybody its about time you all looked at this fairly.

How would I have got it if you had not! sent it? Ah?

That established why then would you have sent it here?

Is it not true that you were very angry with what you considered to be a snub and an insult from Animals Australia

Wasnt that! why you sent it up in the first place?

Didnt you feel so angry with what you called their double standards.

You were down right furious that they didnt say yes! you are a good farmer and a good free range farmer deserves Animals Australias open public support.
That they didnt say- what can we do to help you.
countinued next post

That they didnt say-would you like to be featured in one of our magazines?

That they didnt say -could we come to your farm for an interview and take some pictures and write a story on you and your farm.

I happen to agree with you that you were treated badly by them.

I also scream from the roof top about these double standards. All good free range farmers should be supported by all Animal Welfare groups and the Government. Sadly they are not. Sadly our organization is the only one really pushing for this and also to have come up with good alternatives.

When it was explained to you that was not possible it was put up on our web page you were then told about OLO the forum.
That is! how you heard about Grahams OLO. I have the email here to prove it.

As I understood it by your request I put it up. You said you could not do it yourself because of the DPI and that they had already written to you complaining that your web site for your business looked a bit too like an animal libber.

Come on now tell the truth. Isnt that why you didnt want to post it yourself?
I put it to you that thats what you said.

If you had a link to your business I certainly did not notice it.

Likewise surely as well had you not wanted anybody to have it you should have not sent it. Why was it there in the first place when you sent it to the office?

As for your theory that the truth is not important well I think it is. Which is why everybody agrees all posters should have to supply their real names.
Your darn right people will track you down if you
say something that you need to be held accountable for.

If these OLO Forums are to taken seriously they should operate the same as any newspaper
continued next page

*Robert many people get phone calls and visits from collectors.
You dont need to be on a forum to get that. Your argument is weak against the argument of victims of mischief and gossip.

Real Names hurt nobody. This reminds me there was some question as to Scouts posts. Do you know if Scout is perhaps posting under another name. As you were close I was interested to hear what you thought about that?

Re Ozgirl
I would like to say it is another argument for real names and some payment.
You cant have the cake and eat it too.

Celivia We all agree on one thing You would be missed on OLO. However it is up to you what you do. We cant support your idea of allowing people to post in fake names. It leads to irresponsible posting and mischief making. Graham Y is right when he points out if you speak publicly there is a good chance of people knowing who you are. I think its only fair the do.

After having said that we all got to know Ozgirl as a bit of a dag with a naughty attitude but a big heart. If you read all her threads its based on caring for others.
More than what I can say for some.
You all know the others were using bodgies as well.
Again if you want to clear that up then real names and a fee will do the job.
If I were GrahamY I would close this thread an introduce real names and a fee.
Why should he or anybody spend hours with this childish rubbish for nothing. Its really insulting and an abuse of a free service which goes to another theory of mine.
People do not appreciate anything if its free. Make them pay something and they respect it.
Thats how we work with our adoption small animals as well.
It will work for Graham should he introduce it.
Graham you will find most will pay a fee after they lick their wounds
They might even respect it more.
Good Luck.

Antje,"You all know the others were using bodgies as well." - I've not seen any evidence of most of us using multiple aliases or trying to cheat the OLO rules.

I doubt that being forced to pay would increase the respect for the site, I suspect that for many they would demand more of the site as a paying user.

As was pointed out elsewhere many would not get started if it needed an upfront fee. I've done one donation and will do more in the future if I stay around so the fee thing is not a core objection personally. Some of us really want our privacy because of our circumstances.

I've not made a final decision but doubt that I would continue posting if doing so compromised my safety, I value these forums a lot but when you deal with the family law systems and CSA there are some risks just not worth taking.

R0bert

Antje, I think the real problem is that you are trying to use
this forum as a constant advertising medium for your Pale
venture.

I thought the idea of the forum was not as an advertising medium,
but as a place for people to rationally discuss ideas and
concepts about Australian political, economic and social
issues. For that they need free expression, sometimes
even from their employers.

If you keep your constant plugging of Pale off these boards,
then there would be no need for anyone to criticise it.
No need for threats of lawsuits either, to intimidate
others.

Why not come on here in good faith, have your 5s worth
of say like the rest of us? People can draw their
own conclusions, based on your ability to reason.

Yabby
It is not a venture.

Again I will tell you. Its a NFP organisation working in conjunction with RSPCA on our ban live exports Campaign.

Of course I am trying to educate the public about Animal Welfare.

Of course a public forum is a good place to do it.

I moved from outside Canberra to QLD to help run the RSPCA QLD and PALE Ban Live Export Campaign.

If you are bored or not interested you do not have to post on the subject.
I do not get any more posts than anybody else so why are you and your friend complaining

I still say real names are very important to stop malicious posts that would otherwise not exist.

I love all Animals Yabby and if I can improve even one of their lives why dont you let me to do my work.

I know you do not agree on the Live Export issue but fair go there is no need to try to destroy everything I personally believe in.

A venture does not have to be about money, it can be about anything.
Nobody is destroying what you believe in, I'm simply saying that
a public forum is not the place to actively promote any
organisation constantly, profit or not.

You might be against live exports, but thousands of farmers depend
on the trade to feed their families. The industry is finally
putting together a comprehensive website, to defend itself
against the many false allegations, made by various animal libber
groups. When its finally available to the public, do you want
me to promote that, as much as your promote your group? Thats
exacty how wars start on discussion forums.

If you want to promote your group, you are free to use the
advertising space, just like other advertisers.

Well, theres a fine example of why we should post under nicknames.

Antje, Are your fabricated versions of matters supported by your entire organisation and all associated with you? Or does posting in the name of an organisation only serve to possibly bring them discredit?

Why are you not posting under your own name if you feel so strongly about this?

I have now seen that this same theft of ids is happening all over the forum. Lucky they were not using real names.

This is a post by Antje on another thread for those that havent seen it.

"AQIS and DPI will be after Graham if you keep posting such rubbish. Not fair on him and another good reason for real names so peoples claims can be accountable.
When I told them this nonesense was on a political public forum under the code name Yabby they were unimpressed to say the least."

Just tell us again why you want real names on this forum Antje??

So you can 'dob' on people you dont agree with and cause them trouble? With attitudes like yours on the forum it would never be safe to use real names.

Yabby and PF?

I didnt ask for this name, I asked OLO if I could post again. "Me" Antje Struthmann.

This is what they sent me.


Your comment PF about AQIS and DPI and my so called dobbing- Are you seruious- The man put it all over a political forum. All over Googles.

Do you think members of the public wont be all over that?

I also speak quite regually to these Animal Welfare authorities as a normal part of my life.

Good Heavens what if it had been true?

Are you suggesting that you would have left it.

Are you saying that it is wrong to make sure the laws at abattoirs are followed.?

Really how interesting- and disturbing-and disappointing.

Under Australian Laws both State and Federal it is an offence not to use some sort of pre stunning- either Stun Gun [If Halal] or bolt if our own.

The Abattoir Yabby told everybody that"not so long ago' were slitting throats without prior stunning closed for the last time well over thirteen years ago. It closed the first time in 1986.

It doesnt even exsist anymore.

Yup people need to be made accountable for what they post and the truth starts with true identities.

All Yabbies posts on live exports are away with the faires too.

Yes I know they are on other sites Yabby however they have been shown up five times now on 60 minutes for goodness sake these people.


If you start out with a lie it only gets bigger as you build upon it.
You would understand that surley PF

Also please understand that I have a right to do with my life what I wish.
If I wish to work towards improving Animal Welfare thats my business.

Also I say to the both of you of course I am aware that people do kill animals in the bush.

RSPCA require far more people as well but they dont have the funds.

There is much to be done.

Really Robert this thread just seems more of the same to me- Attacking me now

Antje Struthmann

Try and justify it anyway you like Antje if it will make your own actions a little easier to live with.

Your words have done nothing the change the view from here.

Antje, as a bystander to the discussions between yourself, Yabby and PF you seem to be fairly well in there on the attacking front.

I'm not going to try and do the parent working out a "who started it" debate.

If you want bystanders to support the view that you are being attacked then stop commenting on Yabby and PF, stick to the animal welfare issues and see how it goes. You should all have some common ground, an interest in animal well being.

Yabby and PF disagree with you on aspects of that, accept that and look for the parts that there is scope to work with.

Seek understanding of the issues driving the farmers choices and work on strategies that consumers can you to make which help protect animal welfare
- How do I as a consumer know how much attention to pay to a free range label on farm products?
- What can we do to make slaughtering livestock in this country more economically attractive than shipping them across the world. Is there a change that I can make to my shopping habits that tips the balance in favour of local use?

If PALE's reputation is an issue then do your bit to ensure that you are not putting them up as a target, the issues can probably be discussed without mentioning PALE and hopefully it is the issues that matter.

I hope those suggestions help, I'd rather see us all move past this squabling and start to come up with some useful learnings.

R0bert

Actually Antje, the real problem was your jumping to conclusions.
"Not so long ago" is a matter of opinion. In cultural terms, for
societies to change, its nothing. I was in my 20s not so long ago.

You were free to ask me about time, I would have specified it.
The thing is, we Aussies are slowly changing, but so is the Middle
East. Just because they don't do everything just when we do it,
does not mean that change is not happening there.

The 60 minutes clips are old footage. Some of those are from
years ago, using old footage, even then. Thats why the industry
is now putting together a website, to update the public. It comes
after my request, because of what has happened on here.

I am the first to promote change in the meat industry in Australia,
to increase slaughter capacity here. But Australia is not
interested it seems. Not even in drought. Ok fine, West Aussie
farmers will continue to have to make a living. We'll have
to keep improving live exports, given no alternatives. The bright
side is that we are leaders in terms of bringing about change
in the Middle East, so animals from many places benefit.

I heard an interesting talk from a vet this morning, discussing
vet nurses. He said that some just can't do it, they fall into a
heap when an animal needs putting down. He suggested that they
needed to be like farmers, have a love of animals, but also a
certain detachment, to see things as they are. How very true.

Oh come on Yabby Dont Make it Worse for yourself.
:" Not So long Ago"
Like thirty years- Yeh sure. You gambled and lost.
You were living in the hope that the public wouldnt have a clue and by the look of it me either.
Well guess What You got Caught. Take it like a man.

Yabby You Naughty Little boy- And they took your recomendation on making a web site did they? Did you happen to tell them about this lttle slip up? oooops. Oh Yabby you are but amusing some times.

I know this is a game to you coming on the forum and giving what you call the city slicker girls a touch up.

I actually rather enjoy your capers and moves.

You Yabby have more moves than a swiss watch Yabby .

You are also helping to educate the public by keeping the Animal Welfare threads going.[ So Thanks]

Personally I find you a bit of fun wondering what the old Yabby will get up to next.

Your like an old fox enjoying the game of stirring the girls or greengrass on heartbeat.
I look forward to the new web site. I think thats fantasic.

When do you expect it to be ready?

I only ever jump in when you post something that misinforms the public and you know it.

You have said over and over again that you are the biggest suporter of opening more abattoirs and ' bringing In workers for double and tripple Shifts"

I have actually read some of your letters to newspapers pushing for plants to open and farmers to even be share holders.

I just wish you would post some of those up here because tell you what Yabby they are very Good.

Oh but Of course its all Changed in a year. Well if you can change the attiutudes of many in the middle east yabs you had best let John howard know.
Oh Yabby.

So stop the porkies
woops!

The technology is there to check on the locations of people posting on websites and, therefore, put a stop to false and fraudulent names.

I asked around and a friend told me that a couple of years ago he wrote some posts on a blogsite in USA and he had his posts deleted. He went back under a different name and then was banned completely- within minutes.
They had set up some kind of block. So there is software to track where a person is sending from.

Perhaps you can get some technical advice, Graham- it will solve all problems and there will not even be a need for compulsory fees or real names.

RObert, good suggestions about discussing the issue without mentioning PALE.

Celivia, you can block IPs but there are some technical issues with that - you can't be sure that the IP is unique to the person you are trying to block, and the same person may have a number of IPs - so it's not foolproof. Besides, my concern wasn't with being able to ban people, but whether people could be encouraged to behave properly.

Robert

I am posting as a person. I didnt ask to be put up as PALE- and there is nothing wrong with PALES reputation either as you brought that up.

I know the Ministers office are interested in some things put up by PALE and speaking out of School I know John Howard office has shown interest and requested more information.

What comes to my attention are your questions.

In answer to some of them I am putting out a web site listing all Free Range Farms and where to purchase products. It is a big job but here is a sample.
http://www.livexports.com/freerangefarmerssupportgroup/

I am waiting for people to start asking questions from the information I have already posted.


-How do You know how much attention to pay to a Free Range Label?-
Do you mean if you can trust that the information is correct-?

Or that you understand the difference between free Range and intensive Farming.?

As I cant write enough words here myself I will answer that question by putting up this again

http://www.hsi.org.au/news_library_events/press_releases/N394_humane_choice.htm

After you have read that Robert If you look here you will see the Humane Society supporting the project.

http://www.halakindmeats.com/

It is the only program with a good alternative to faze live animals exports.

Its working on all angles of Animal Welfare putting live animal importer together with Aussie Farmers directing those animals to Free Range Creek fed and following through to ensure a humane slaughter and accredited free range labelling.


Yabbys is right about the labour shortage and there are some good plans however support is vital.
The Good News is there are plenty of overseas investors interested to work together with Aussie Farmers at Grass Roots Level.

Nothing can Happen without funds and they will put them in if the Government are more user friendy.

I encourage you to look at the material and welcome your questions
You might also find this report interesting
http://www.livexports.com/davidwoodsreport.html

Please take a moment to look at this Robert. A great way to teach Children and Adults spending quality family time
http://www.themeatrix.com/

Antje Struthmann

I have a question for you anje ...

Explain creek fed for us. Interesting to hear how you would apply that to pig farming too.

btw, isnt it true that anyone of us can change our id to whatever we want, whenever we want? I recently changed mine, no big hassle antje. Delete your old one, start a new one. All legit.

Celivia

I am shocked at your suggestion. How very unfair of you.

I thought the issue was for people to learn to respect one another.

So you are now suggesting that PALEs not mentioned.

You are saying that like there is something wrong with it.

This is just to suit the agenda of a couple of people

If they are not interested they do not have to comment.


How about suggesting that. Surely it would make more sense and be some more fair and reasonable.

This is how you deal with an issue is it?

By victimising people and suggesting they are not be mentioned as if they had some sort of disease.

My God Free Speech Forum. I think not!

Correct me if I am wrong but wasnt I given the job of signing you up as a member ?

Were you not posting a while back at the unfair attacks yourself.

So you reward bad behavior . I dont.

I have never been so proud in my life as to be known to these people.

So proud I moved from Canberra to QLD to help RSPCA QLD and PALE work on their ban Live Export Campaign.

Well I think thats a lousy idea and insulting.

Possibly you had not intended it Celivia but you certainly have managed to offend me personally beyond words.

The whole project Is People Against live Exports working in conjunction with RSPCA QLD.

Perhaps you also feel the RSPCA QLD should change the web site and their whole campaign just to suit two people on this forum.

People Against Live Animal exports are just people.

People who share the same view on certain matters.

Thats like saying lets ban talking about religion of one faith because it might upset another.

I am very dissapointed in your suggestion and surprised.

I thought you were a fair person

People Against Live Exports (is that how we should address you when there is no personal name behind the posts)? Can you tell me how to address you- I am not sure.

What have I said that upset you so much? I have said nothing, really, that I haven’t said before.

A few posts back (on 23 October) I said:
“I am concerned about damage PALE as an organisation might suffer from being attacked online.
I guess the main reason why (animal) organisations generally do not engage in online forum discussions is to prevent possible defamation of their organisations.”

RObert said, “If PALE's reputation is an issue then do your bit to ensure that you are not putting them up as a target, the issues can probably be discussed without mentioning PALE and hopefully it is the issues that matter.”

In my previous post (28 October) I said:
“RObert, good suggestions about discussing the issue without mentioning PALE.”

This is what upset you so much? I really don’t understand.
It is no different than what I said on October 23st. PALE, unlike other animal organisations, put themselves up on a discussion forum. As a general policy they don’t engage in online forums- that is to protect themselves against damage like PALE has been experiencing.

continued

In other words, I am just saying that because PALE has come under attack since PALE has been put up on OLO, that it would be safer for PALE if live exports and intensive farming are being discussed just like other issues are being discussed- because that would be safer for PALE as an organisation.

I have not changed my mind about live exports and intensive farming. I still think these are cruel practices. I merely agreed with RObert that the issues matter and that it would be safer for PALE’s reputation to discuss the issues rather than the organisation.

If you think that this is an unfair thing to say, then I don’t understand- because I said this out of concern for PALE and not at all to criticise PALE.

Having said that, and since you are talking about my membership: even though I agree with what PALE stands for, I think I have already discussed some time ago that I no longer want to be a member and involve myself for personal reasons.

Graham
“Besides, my concern wasn't with being able to ban people, but whether people could be encouraged to behave properly.”
Fair enough- I’ll give it some more thought.

No porkies at all, just confusion as usual in the Gold Coast
girls club!

Fact is anyone who knows anything about the WA meat industry,
knows that Robbs closed in the 80s. ROFL, not exactly a secret,
simply common knowledge for informed people. Bennie, umm
the bloke who now lives on the gold coast, should have
known that :)

The thing is, you should have paid attention at school!
Plenty of Aboriginals will tell you that the white fella
came to Aus not so long ago. They are correct, as its
a comparative term, so should be seen in that context.

I used the term in the same context, without specifying
the exact year. I used it as the meat inspector who
used to work in meatworks used it.

No wonder you girls are always busy :) Had you asked
me a simple question about dates, I would have explained it.
But no, off we go, on a wild goose chase, ringing AQIS
and DPI. Batgirl and her trusty companion Robina, umm
Angina, as they ride off into the sunset to rescue animals
from those evil men. You really should change your
career to writing fairytales :)

The story about the website finally made the farming press
this week. They quote about another 3 weeks to load up
the data. Look back in the old posts, you'll see that
I mentioned to Celivia, about bringing about changes, so
that people like her had access to more balanced viewpoints.
Its not far away now.

Well PALE, I think your comments to Celivia were extremely rude. She has done nothing but politely express her own opinion and you have jumped all over her. I think an apology is in order.

You seem to believe that there are multitudes of people reading this thread. I seriously doubt it :) But lets say there are; are you doing PALE any favours with the kind of comments you post? Or would you be much better off expressing your personal opinions under a nickname and keeping animal welfare issues and personal issue seperate?

Why not start up a thread dedicated to asking PALE animal welfare questions? It would give you far more credibilty than trying to force your organisation on every thread you post on.

The purpose of this thread was to solve disputes between posters and it would seem that up until the PF and rachel06 post that was the case..

Now its just descended into a complete bitchfest..pardon me all but why are you on a political forum if all you are interseted in is catfights and hurling personal abuse at each other..?

I thought that lowlife Ozgirl was the only one who would reduce herself to that?Yet I see you all behaving like nothing more than a bunch of old biddies in a constant pre-menstraul state...
You are all aspiring to lowest common denominator and really girls I thought it was beneath you..Noone is posting anywhere else, your all claiming to be concerned over the multiple Id thing, which you ALL, guilty of doing yourselves, and those that make the loudest that protest that.. 'they do not'... are guiltiest of all....your reasons for being on here are suspect and pathetic.

This is a political forum..bigger fish to fry and much worthies issues to concern yourselves with..

Please move on and get a life.

Still waiting for protests..the longest and loudest and most involved protestations will say it all..even the short and sweetest qualify do.

Ozgirl from where I sit has been subject to a campaign of villification and spite.

I mean it has been very funny to sit back and watch all the self righteous crap.Some raved on more than others, and the biggest protestors it was noted have multiple ids and do not post under there real names as they say they do...could prove it so dont go there Id advise.

So the old saying 'pple who live in glass houses shouldnt throw stones' is very relevant here .

It is interesting to note how selfrighteous the pple who inhabit this forum have been..except for one surprising exception
and that one person knows whos who they are and I do believe the biggest hypocrite has promoted himself/herself as beyond reproach,a pillar of society, and dare I say it' christian'..and that is not a reference to management in any way..but a poster, yes.

Cilia
I did not know you had told Wendy you could not join pale because of your family situation.
Also PF and everybody I did not come back on this forum as PALE.
I asked Graham if I could post for myself to deal with something put to me about Kangaroos.

I was not happy about being given the tag you see at the bottom. Not because I am not proud of the alternative to live export work but because Wendy has other issues.
I do as a person expect to be able to express myself without PF or you Cilia telling me I should not mention any organization I so feel fit. It is that I took exception to and still do.

I did not answer your question about pigs PF after you called Mike he asked just to stick to live exports for peace sake. Wendy has not posted on this forum for a very long time yet you still keep having a go to destroy her organization.

Her work is the only alternative to live exports. Yes many others scream about it but wont even think about helping the farmers find better ways. How hypocritical is that. PF is correct there.

Yabby I welcome the web page and find it fantastic. By the way the last poll showed 97 percent of The last three Senate enquires recommended that it be closed immediately.
I wont be posting on OLO anymore because the Tag at the bottom that I did not ask for is creating further problems,
also because there are no people truly interested in Animal Welfare.

Cilia, Wendy asked me to tell you Ozgirl did write to you she was informed. Cilia I don’t like people with one foot in each camp. Wendy shared some emails with me from you opposite to your public post
Pf idea of questions is really good but sadly too late . its not possible as Wendy Was banned and she would be the one to answer questions.
You have all done a huge dis service to the animals

Mrs Antje Struthmann

Antje,
I have received nothing from OzGirl. If she did send something, I did not receive it.

Emails opposite my public post?
Thanks for letting me know that Wendy is sharing my emails with others (I will send no further emails).
I think that this is probably an email I wrote before I saw a different side to using PALE as a means to educate people on an open forum.
So it is possible that I am seeing things differently than I did when I wrote that email.
Even so- I did change my angle in favour of PALE (my point is “protection” of PALE) and not as a criticism of PALE.

I still think that you and Wendy are misunderstanding me.
In principle, I am not opposed to the idea of PALE sharing their knowledge on a forum. In principle this is a good idea.

The only reason why I said that PALE should discuss the issues rather than the organisation is because in hindsight, PALE is, in my opinion, now in more trouble than it has been before posting on OLO. Honestly, if you could turn the clock back to a time before you started discussing PALE on OLO, would you make the same decision with the knowledge of what happened to PALE on OLO?

No matter whose fault it is, the fact is that exposing an organisation for open discussion can make that organisation vulnerable to criticism.
If you do not mind that this happens, or if you think that PALE really thrive here on OLO, then there’s no problem.

continued

"Wendy shared some emails with me from you opposite to your public post"

Dont let in worry Celivia, I for one know how those 'shared' emails get elaborated upon :) I certainly havent taken their claim seriously.

No No No Cilia.

I meant I was aware you were encouraging her to ignore the others and stick to to alternative for live exports which is exclusive to pale working with HKM and AFIC.

You were the one person who kept encouraging her to stick to pale and ignore the other comments.

So it was a shock to me to see you say- Dont talk about PALE
I do express myself differently to you perhaps but I have not read your private emails and that is not what I meant.

The real problem here that I understand is nobody has bothered to read the PALE HKM project so they do not understand its a one of.

Nobody else is doing this. The others just tell everybody not to eat meat . Or they run around saying ban Live Exports" Which means to me Slaughter in Australia. As soon as you try to talk to that lot about assisting farmers to slaughter in Australia they Go crazy.

I certainly did not think by my asking Graham If I could post as Me Antje it would have stirred up all this trouble for Wendy Again.

It is unfair and I feel terrible. After all ask yourselves this. What is her crime.
She works hard to improve animal welfare.
This is done for no fee but pure love of animals.
I am proud to know such a person and I dont care what any nasty person wishes to try to claim. If anybody knows this person its me.

PF under The Circumstances I strongly urge you not to comment on Wendy or PALE.
If you choose to ignore that then its up to yourself.
Look back at all your posts and ask yourself this.
Dont you see a constant attack on her organisation and her as a person.
I do. Others yet to look at this will also.

OG absolutely did Cilia, they , the 2 of them, were never returned to her so they were received by you, she told me this.

"PF under The Circumstances I strongly urge you not to comment on Wendy or PALE."

Wendy & Antje, now what circumstances would they be?

I think its about time you started behaving yourselves. I have not made any personal attacks on either of you. You have convinced yourselves that I have in an attempt to justify your appalling behaviour. Sorry, its just not working.

There has been genuine discussion happening here that you have chosen to take personally when that was never the intention. If it pricked your conscience thats not my fault. Unfortunately all reasonable friendly discussion has been interupted by the same old PALE saga.

Fascinating thread. OLO's own "The Bold and the Beautiful".

While I don't think too many people would still be following this thread, let me just say - as someone who lives in the bush and supports neither live exports nor 'intensive farming' of animals - the PALE people aren't looking too good in this forum, and I'm not sure how positive an image they're presenting here. The farmers are winning the debate hands down :)

Re identities: I think people should own what they say, and therefore should post under their own names in purportedly serious and credible forums like OLO. If your opinions are such that you feel your public interests are likely to be compromised by expressing them openly, then perhaps it's an indication that you need to change either the opinion or the lifestyle that apparently inhibits its expression.

I post here under my real name. Cheers to all :)

This is the most poular thread on a political forum..can you believe it?

"Yet I see you all behaving like nothing more than a bunch of old biddies in a constant pre-menstraul state..."

ROFL Ozgirl, at least you have kept your sense of humour :)

PF.. starting up a thread dedicated to PALE is a good idea..as is the nickname idea..save a lot of irritation to all.

Very true WAYF. Anyone posting under a registered or business name should take care to keep their posts professional and not bring their personal comments into the discussion. If they do, it leaves their organisation open to justifiable critism.

Wayfarer, "This is the most poular thread on a political forum..can you believe it?" - and thats after having quite a few posts removed.

Seriously though the forum is about a lot more than politics, it touches on a very wide range of topics. So does politics so maybe there is little difference.

Some of what is coming up in amongst the posts here is some thinking about the use of forums. People are thinking about how they should be used, the benefits and risks of organisations using them, the goods and bads of nicknames rather than full names etc. I'm hoping that there is some benefit in that.

I think that there is a place for taking some discussions out of the main arena but am dissapointed that this thread seems to have got bogged down again in one dispute.

C.J.Morgan some of the reasons nicknames are usefull are not easily changed. I've summarised my reasons for prefering a nickname myself earlier so I'll not repeat them again.

Cheers
R0bert

Wayfarer (if that’s your latest ID)

Please do not use the word ‘ALL’ because I am not one of the people who posted in multiple IDs and I never have- and by using the word “all” you are accusing me of something that I have never done. I have only ever written under the name “Celivia”.
I do not need to make up different ID’s because I have never been banned.

Also, I have been involved in other threads apart from this one and the animal welfare ones. Look at my history and you will see that for yourself. So you are wrong about this as well.
RObert also posts on other issues- I have met him in other discussions. If you use the word “all” you should first check whether “all” applies to everyone; otherwise choose to use “many”, “most”, or “some”.

You have been spreading rumours on other threads about me having different ID’s. LIAR.
Prove it!
Who am I supposed to be? Well? Expose me. I bet you can't, because there is no clone of me.
Who do you think I am- OzGirl?

Apologise anyone? Line up! Tee-hee!

You have also made ridiculous assumptions about other people.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=174#3653
“PF... Ozzie is completely fine about an apolagy when shes in the wrong, especially when she knows you havent overreacted like another 'superior princess' on this forum..further to which I believe you are at least a straight up kind of person, unlike a lot on here..so that is to be respected..

She wont be back..nothing like a good witch hunt for something that nearly everyone else on this forum is doing, ie:multiple ids, yes even Celivia (I heard that from a very reliable source, also Scout is Robert..:))Perhaps people in glass houses shouldnt throw stones.”

Everyone on here has used more than one name..to have access to more posts and variuos other more unsavoury reasons."

BTW, Wayfarer
ID stealing is a different thing than just making up a nickname.

Wayfarer,
I honestly have no reason to lie about not having received OG’s email. I am not saying she didn’t send it. I don't know whether she did. There must be a logical explanation why I haven’t received it if she did send it.
The fact that her email was not returned to her does not prove that I received it.

Stop accusing me of things you make up and stop spreading lies about me.

And please don’t follow me around to other threads to ask me stupid questions in the heat of your witch hunt.

I know of another person who used to do that!

Déjà vu.

..Cilia..'the longest and loudest most involved protestations will say it all...'

Move on ...please.I think youve blown your horn long and loud over this one.

Cilia..

You didnt mind coming on here and crucifying OG in her absence I notice .
Recommended a lifetime ban in fact....how kind of you Cilia..such a kind and forgiving spirit, I really thought you were above that, but I see no you do have feet of clay..and how did that go again.'Tee hee.'?

cont..

Please calm down Cilia..

You are starting to look hysterical and unbalanced.

I think the point about using nicknames is well made here. No lies, insults, false claims can cause you any harm if you keep your identity private. And, no one else should be allowed to post your details either. I would like to see that written into the rules. People wouldnt feel the need to defend claims made against them so vehemently.

The more thought I give it, the more I believe that no one should even be allowed to post under a business name or organisation if their only intent is to promote that name. Isnt that against forum rules anyway? Something about commercial use?

There are other lessons to be learnt from all this, but that would be quite clear now so I wont go there.

Celivia - I understand completely why you are upset, but really, does any of it really matter? Just forget about those claims, most of us would have already :)

"...no one else should be allowed to post your details either. I would like to see that written into the rules. People wouldnt feel the need to defend claims made against them so vehemently."

PF
Good idea about revising and upgrading the forum rules.

I don't know whether this is technically possible on OLO; it is just an idea, but perhaps we can have avatars next to our name that can not be used by two different users as it is a representation of a user.

If there's a list of avatars to choose from, once an avatar has been selected from an avatar list by one user, it could disappear off the list so it won't be available to another user.
This would give extra ID protection.

"...I believe that no one should even be allowed to post under a business name or organisation if their only intent is to promote that name. Isnt that against forum rules anyway? Something about commercial use?"

I believe (unless I misread it, but I'm too lazy to double check) that according to the ruels posting is allowed under a business/organisation name when that organisation has become a member after paying a membership's fee.

Yes, PF, I have decided to let these false claims and lies go for now.
It did matter to me that my ID was used by someone else and that false accusations were being made against me.

All I asked for is a short apology for stealing my ID- and for the false accusations to stop- that's all. I thought it was not too much to ask for.

But...I will let it go now and ready move on ;)

Wayfarer, "I heard that from a very reliable source, also Scout is Robert"

I missed that - what a gem.

I guess that there is no conclusive way of proving otherwise but both of our post histories go back a long way - Scouts is http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/user.asp?id=21611&show=history
and mine is at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/user.asp?id=4980&show=history

I think Scout changed ID's at one point (one ID at a time) and was previously Ringtail http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/user.asp?id=1160&show=history - I could be wrong.

To the best of my knowledge Scout is a female living in Victoria and I'm a male living in Qld. My political biases tend to the right and Scouts to the left (terms Scout does not much like). We both seem to try to think outside our leanings and that has meant a lot to me over a long time.

We've had some disagreements at times and plenty of times we have agreed on issues. I very much admired Scouts courage as a poster and as a human being but I can't take credit for being her. I'll take the claim as a compliment but an undeserved one.

If that comment was anything other than a tongue in cheek post then you might want to give a little less weight to the reliability of your source. Next time they get returned from their alien abduction or from hiding from the guys in the stealth helicopters ask them how they came to that conclusion. Please post the answer, I look forward to enjoying the laugh.

Celiva, if it helps look at the funny side of this stuff. You are another poster whose contributions I have come to value (and I'm not you and your not me in case anybody is confused).

R0bert

Good Evening Robert.
I said I would not post anymore and then I saw the thread on pigs. Naturally being interested in nimal welfare it drew me back six months to that thread.
I see things are quite in here now which is good for you I guess.
I feel nothing much has changed and was wondering if you had come to any conclusions regarding the button sytem you made mention of.
Also I would just like to say that I am more than happy to just post in my own name. I feel Antje strthmann is good for me to comment on threads. I also feel that the tag put up is annoying PF. I did not request it and wondered what you thought about that?

Maybe it would not make any difference I really do not know.
Well please let me know if you have made any progress regarding some of your very good ideas.
Antje Struthman

Antje, I've not done much more with this recently - life has been rather hectic.

The button idea was Celivia's and I agree it is a very good one. What I'm wondering about is the overall view of the carpark (and Graham's views on it).

Has it helped or been a catalyst for trouble?
I notice some fairly solid personal attacks are still flowing out on the article based threads so the idea has not inspired all. It's been mentioned previously that some people enjoy that aspect of the site.

I am hoping that this thread has been a useful learning exercise for all involved including the site admin. I left wondering if there are better ways to address the issues. Some clearly favour the use of real names and others of us because of our circumstances would find that very difficult.

I've tried to avoid the battle over the use of the PALE name other than my original comments regarding holding it up as a target.

I think that was pretty much where Celivia was coming from as well, not an attack on PALE but a suggestion that putting it's name out in a debate like the ones which occur here increases the likelyhood that unpleasant things will be said by those who don't agree. Use an alias, debate the topic leaving organisational and personal names out and nobody suffers loss of reputation.

R0bert

Robert

I would just like to say thank you for your time in ptting the thread together and the thought behind it.

Like you I dont know that it achieved much other than bring you a headache.
Thats i guess is one of the mysterious in life. We srtart out doing something for the good of others or in my case animals and hopefully others and it does not work out that way. You then become outraged because you feel where did such good intentions go wrong.

I would not say your Car Park thread was a flop however because it kept it out of the other posts. At least for a while.

I cant say I really can ever agree with you about people not using their real names. I can see what you are saying but Robert at the end of the day I do not beleive people would be more reasonsibly.

I guess I am just old fashioned and basically honest because it wouldnt feel right somehow to be posting in another name.
I also feel if its a not for proffit organisation people should be able to tell others about that organisation if they choose to.

Yes you run a risk of people making up names and coming in and attacking that organisation but I really feel that is a sercurity issue rather than that particular persons issue.

The only reason I am saying what I said is for peace for everybody on the forum , including myself.
To be honest there are some other threads i would have loved to post on regarding other issues. I didnt go in them because i did not want to bring disruption into their topics if I was followed.
Anyway just wanted to say thanks for trying and sorry if i sounded like a pain too at times.
I still like the idea button,.
best wishes. I will run now before I bring you bad luck.
Thanks again
Antje

I know more than most, and I can say with almost 100% certainty that Scout is not Robert. I'm interested in the flaming happening on the article threads - would appreciate a heads up.

There have been a lot of ideas on this thread, and I'm mulling them over. You might be interested to look at the new Blogocracy website which News Corp is going to be running from tomorrow, using left-wing blogger Tim Dunlop. I understand that whether posts were moderated and how posters identified themselves were issues that were discussed with News. Interesting to see how it pans out.

“I also feel that the tag put up is annoying PF.”

That’s an interesting thing to say. I actually couldn’t be happier that you post under PALE for reasons that are obvious to all but you it would seem :)

While on the subject of posting under the name of an organization, does that allow multiple users to post under the name? I have seen an example here were there are two distinct writing styles posting under the one id. Would it allow banned users to access the forum in another way?

Again on that point, Antje, you spelt your own name wrong twice in your previous post.

Seeing this is the Carpark, and antje insists on accusing me of following her around threads – there are currently only two threads involving animal welfare, one in particular is focused on pigs, my area of expertise wouldn’t you agree? I have every right to post there without threats of "last warning" from another poster. Attempts at intimidating other posters, isn’t that against the rules? There are some great things happening to bring intensive pig farming into the limelight and maybe make some real change. Why wont you just let that discussion proceed. Getting word of that out there is way more important to me than your web links being flashed up on every post.

I am also tired of accusations that I am flaming you. This is just not true. I have only used the facts in my posts antje, or made reference to your own comments or those of others. I would appreciate it if you would stop flaming me.

Graham, start at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=5052#60430 (The public transport thread). I'm not singling out that particular post, it's just one of a number from an exchange between posters which seems to be mostly personal attacks rather than about the topic.

I've also wondered about the boundaries on some of my own work in the Bias and the Judicary thread.

BD's comments on other threads do seem relevant to the case he made about the ability of some minority groups to act impartially in judicial positions but I'm left wondering if there was a better way to make the point. Where is the boundary between personal attacks and identifying what seems to a significant contradiction in the other parties own position?

Have I let my own disgust at the views expressed get in the way of fair debate?

What are your thoughts on the idea of adding "Take it outside" nomination button?

R0bert

I've read that exchange Robert, and I know what you mean. Wish I'd known about it earlier. It turns the thread into something that new readers would not necessarily want to join. There's probably an element of jocularity in amongst the slanging, but you need to be in on the joke to appreciate that.

We've attempted in the past to get people together offline. That might cool things down a bit if it ever happened - Col Rouge and PK might find they actually like each other and are only vaguely related to their online personae!

Anyway, I'll go across to the other discussion and suggest that they cool it. Too many posts to delete them all!

I should have added that I'd be worried that a "Take it outside" button would encourage posters to think that the General Forum was for brawling, when really it's about conversations that aren't dictated by the content in OLO.

Graham, maybe we need a button that draws your attention to a discussion instead of recommending a course of action such as deletion.

I'm generally reluctant to hit the recommend deletion button unless the post is very extreme but sometimes wish to draw your attention to a discussion - you may have a different view on the exchange or wish to add a "settle down kids" type comment.

More material to ponder.

R0bert

Robert
I just wanted to say quickly the last warning comment at the end of that particluar post was in context to the whole message- [meant last warning before I go into Roberts thread and report a problem] [or complain to Graham or his staff.]
I am sure they have more to do.

PF Why dont you and I try to if not get along at least ignore each others posts.
I am thinking of the forum staff as well as myself and you.
Yes I make typing errors because I am very tired. I have other things to get done as well.Many other people make typing errors also.
I can only tell you one last time Wendy has not posted in a very very long time. Taryn has also stopped Benny as well.I know that is what you are suggesting.
. Nobody minds contructive comments of course.

I have no control over other organisations or people but I think you got a raw deal, and it was a missed oportunity for them as well.

please dont take that out on me

It is not one or even two but three Animal Welfare organisations now that have been upset.
enough is enough.
I sincerly wish you well in the future.
How about some peace for everybodys sake. Its almost Christmas so how about good will amongst all men month.

I thought your comments regarding pigs was fantasic and I hope perhaps Brian notices that. For all the animal welfare groups and organisations in the world the public would listen far more to a real farmers such as you.
In time i hope they will realise that.
I am sure they will. I cetainly am pushing for a face for Free Range. There are several others as well who like the idea. Children of course are the way to educate and look Mummy is farmer Browns Pork will work better in my mind than labels.

I really hope we can be adult enough to move on

Kind regards

Antje Struthmann

Antje

Firstly, isnt the idea of the carpark for two posters to discuss problems outside the thread. I dont believe it was meant as a place were we run to Robert and expect him to be mediator.

You are still accusing me of causing you trouble, defamation, etc etc which just isnt true. I have tried hard not to retaliate to some of your own comments just recently that were definately untrue. I admit, we had confrontations in the past, but since you have returned under your latest PALE id, I have bitten my tongue and responded no differently to other posters on these threads. I understand that you still have your guard up as do I.

Now, I have my views, that are very different to yours, I am not a supporter of PALE. For us to have peace, we have to able to respect those differences and not read more into a post than what is actually there. If I have a view on live exports, thats my opinion, not a shot at PALE. Same for you. You have problems with Animals Australia and Voiceless, I support them. (things have changed since "that email") I will respect your view on that even though we may get into a debate about it. Isnt that what the forum is all about? It is very easy when you are posting under PALE for comments to look like they against the organisation when the remark may have been intended for you personally.

I came into the car park for two reasons.

One I saw it was quite and I was thinking to myself it would be nice to let Robert know someone appreciated his thread.

The other reason was I wanted to know if anything had happend about the button.

I only mentioned to Robert
I was happy just to post in my name because you had made a complaint about people posting in the name of organisations.

As a result of that comment I wanted to let Robert Know if it meant peace for everybody I was happy with my name. In fact that is all I asked for.

There was nothing else I had to say.

You came in after me with this> telling me I could not talk to Robert and that he was not a mediator despite the fact he put the thread their with an invitation to make suggestions to him.

I responeded with what I thought may have been a friendly sensible reply.

This time you came in and basically accused me of being dishonest. You indicted you thought others were posting in my name which is untrue
That is an attack on my honesty

You go on to say I have problems with Animals Australia. That is simply not true.
Basically I support RSPCA main stream view and of course they are veg and vegan. I happen to believe it is best to stick to the legal body and authority to Animal welfare in Autralia which is the RSPCA.
You are free to choose as well.

As I said before its now not, one not two, but three Animal Welfare organisations that have said.

enough is enough.



These are facts

I tried to speak with Robert but you complained about that.

I reponded nicely to you .

Best wishes for your future and please for the sake of the forum staff just forget about me

Antje Struthmann

"I came into the car park for two reasons.

One I saw it was quite and I was thinking to myself it would be nice to let Robert know someone appreciated his thread.

The other reason was I wanted to know if anything had happend about the button."

Then why do you find it necessary to refer to me in all your posts? Is there some other reason behind that?

I support Voiceless by the way. You are not correct. I have no problems with them.

I also support RSPCA AA AL AACT PACAT and many others.

I do believe however that as Australia is a 96 meat eating country we must re open abattoirs if we ever want to stop Live Animal Exports.

That simply makes good sense. I for one am very pleased that 'things have changed since that email'

You had good people going to bat for you.

As far as I am concerned that is a huge step in the right direction if Free Range Farmers are to be openly supported.

I will also contiune with our own Free Range Farmers program and its great to know so many people are working towards the same end.

A face of a Free Range Farmer that all public will immediately recognise as the humane choice is what I am working towards.
That and of course more Free Range Farmers to handle the supply of the public demand.

I have no personal interest in anything other than seeing more Animal Welfare in Australia. I will stand by the RSPCA QLD and of course RSPCA in general.



Mrs Antje Struthmann

You are right Antje - enough is enough

Enough of your threats, false statements, inuedo and taking my comments out of context from the thread.

My comments are no different to anyone elses, you just like to pick them to pieces and treat me differently to any other poster. Its time to stop.

Robert
This is your forum. I have tried to express my ideas on improving posts. Posting in bodgey names I still feel is not a good idea.
Yours and Cilias idea of a button approach was a good one along with another few ones I see you have mentioned as well.
It is no secret I moved from the Snowy to help RSPCA QLD and work with the PALE project.
People Against Live Expoorts in conjunction with RSPCA QLD.
Of course people should be able to raise issues and ask questions.
That is what a forum is for. However I feel it is a bit rough people who hide behind a faulse names making outragous comments defaming either a person or a organisation.
The latst example if you have time to look in the piggy thread is PF calling PALE. That is the organisation! Or saying that organisation lied.
That is untrue. As it invloves myself personally as well it is certainly defaming my name!I beleive should be taken down.
I am not the person to go about pushing buttons all the time Robert So I am not going to do anything other than inform you.
Also I am no lawyer. I should think that the lawyers would take a close look at it however. There is nobody I can contact this weekend about it but that is my personal point of view only and i am making that clear.

In order for your own information I will tell you what I think has been a problem so far.

It seems that certain people put out a five page story in the Australian newspaper very much against the RSPCA.

From what I have seen because PALE works in conjunction with RSPCA QLD and supports RSPCA in general they are seen as the enermy.

That said I am just a person who is concerned for animal welfare. I am a member of the public who is also concerned at the vishious attack on good people who are the only ones supporting RSPCA QLD in their ban Live exports work.
Antje Struthmann

Well I wish that Graham installed a button to just download the
last 10 posts, rather then the whole lot every time. Would be
handy for people with only dialup, also those paying by the
mb for net access.

Antje, why don't you just come on here as Antje and stop
mentioning Pale or rspca in virtually every post. Surely
you can reason about animal welfare, without bringing
them up constantly. Don't you have views of your own?

If you discuss them, then they are open for debate, which
means open for criticism by all and sundry. Just like
any other organisation that is involved in political
debate. I've had plenty of Catholics howl in protest
about what I have said about their church. Well they
are in the political debate, so fair enough. Its no
different with the organisations that you try to
plug.

Thanks for the suggestion Robert. Often people use the "Recommend Delete" button not to ask me to remove something, but to bring it to my attention. Maybe we should change the "Recommend Delete" button so that people realise that it has more potential than its name suggests?

When did this become the Dob To Bob thread?

(sorry Robert, no disrespected intended)

Antje, your posts are just becoming offensive for no reason. Remember, you are posting under PALE, it doesnt do them much justice.

Point taken about the length of the thread Yabby. Perhaps we should run them on pages. 10 comments per page, or something like that. I'll have a talk to Lachlan about the programming. Even with broadband it takes a while to download, which is annoying.

Yabby

I agree with the idea of ten downloads. I am also on dial up.


Re your comment

I came into Roberts thread and brought this up before you.

Now I feel why should I?

There's hundreds of posters. Nobody else is complaining

Why should I do what you say? You say don’t mention RSPCA QLD or PALE

Why not? And why cant I be free as anybody else.

Please don’t worry about affecting the name RSPCA QLD and PALE.

I feel bullied to be honest.
Also I have actually enjoyed your banter and thought about some things you have suggested.
I will be honest Yabby I dont know what to think anymore.
I am wondering if this is not another planned attack against the RSPCA in general after the five page spread in the Australian and the Documentary last year on four corners.' I stress these are just my personal thoughts' I am actually really dismayed and trying to make sense of it all.

The strange out of the blue request for help. The false Allegations. Now against myself personally. The same person posting over and over again that PALE was not in conjunction with RSPCA and words to the effect - Wendy you do realise you are committing an offense and you do not have the authority to use that name. Many other equally outragous statements that caused trouble for PALE and RSPCA QLD and trouble for OLO management.

Lets face it Yabby Who was proved to be telling the truth about that?
Now its Antje dont use the tag PALE RSPCA QLD.

I think its in the interest of the public to know just how hard everybody is working for all the Animals and especially RSPCA QLD and PALE. Live exports being the number one issue in Animal Welfare in Australia with the public.
Isn’t it true that you really just want me gone because you have made a "personal choice' based on your own views.

I think leave my post details as is.
All things considered and treat each other with repect.

Antje Struthmann

Well Antje, the Catholics were horrified when they brought up
Mother Theresa and the Pope and I attacked both of them for various
reasons. People see things through different eyes and perspectives.

All I'm saying is if you plug any group, no matter how wonderful
you think they are, others will be free to attack those groups,
based on their own reasoning. So you can plug them if you insist,
but be aware of the consequences of doing that. You can howl
about it all you like, but thats what free and open debate is all
about.

Now I don't see what your group does as you do, I've said plenty
of that on various threads. I'll say it again if those issues
come up, giving my reasoning. Just don't be amazed if I do,
thats what I'm trying to get through to you. If you accept that
Pale will be attacked if its discussed, well fair enough,
thats just part of online debate, we all have to wear a few
on the proverbial chin now and then.

I'm sure RSPCA is attacked too. Most of what I've seen is from
other so called animal libber groups, all squabbling like the
various religious groups squabble with each other about which
version of their god is right. Perhaps squabbling is just
part of human nature.

Yabby

Well I am certainly seeing you with new eyes. Thank you for you most fair comments. Point taken too. I will as a result not mention organisations as often. I been trying to fight off another war. Nothing to do with the forum I am quick to add.

I didnt know animal welfare could get so nasty. To me everybody should be just working united for the one purpose.

Before I moved here I lived at the Snowy mountains and I have been involved in wild life since 84 and before that of course Germany, hence the name. I am not so old either by the way. I worked with National parks and Wildlife and was involved in many wild life groups internationally. Then I was offered a oportunity to help bring about new laws and accreditations for Roos and help with the live Animal exports.
I jumped at the opportunity.
I just thought you might like to know a little of whom you battle it out with on the threads. There has been unbelievable vicious pressure from extreme people. I have never been exposed to that before in my animal work. Guess my way of trying to help fight back has been to keep druming the name. Its sort of like saying. [We wont be bullied out of animal welfare.]

Believe it or not I enjoy your posts more than anybodies.
Its always interesting trying to keep up with you. You often make me laugh too although its probably not intended.
If the staff want to take off the tag I dont really mind Yabby. I didnt request it honestly. But I will always stand up for the group.
See you on the threads.
I might open a thread and just call it Antje answers questions about live exports

Antje

Robert once again Thank you for this thread.

Antje, this thread has been an interesting experiment so far. I think I'm learning and hope others are as well.

My thanks go to Graham for his patience with it, it may have added to his workload at times (unless it reduced it by concentrating some stuff in the one place).

If it gets those who do care about animal welfare but have differing views about aspects of it (eg how bad LE conditions really are) working together where they do agree and discussing the other bits in a more constructive manner then I'll be wrapped.

R0bert

Robert

Thank You


I hope so as well.

Yabby I have a message for you.

I was asked to tell you telstra have brought out a new gadget.

A friends sisters is travelling outback and just purchased one.

Its only $45.00. Apparently it hooks you straight up to broad band through telstra etc.

Its the size of a matchbox.

Its is less expensive to run through your phone than the other.

As soon as I get the name for it I will pass it on to you.

Antje

Antje, yup Telstra have brought out NextG for yuppies and their
laptops, but monthly fees and fees for heavier downloads are priced
accordingly. Clearly its the high value end of their market that
they are targeting first.

I'm told that in December they will actually bring out modems for
desktops, to plug into the NextG broadband network. Hopefully
pricing per month will be more reasonable then the present yuppie
price target for laptops. Most city people pay around 30$ a month
for broadband on their desktops. My point to Telstra has been that
its not my fault that their line out here is so pisspoor that
ADSL won't work. It would be cheaper for them and for me, if
they gave me access to the Telstra tower, which I can see from
my house, at a reasonable price, say 50$ a month. So we'll see
what the next installment is on that one.

I'm glad to see that Graham is thinking about the last 10 posts
button. It would be a win-win for all.

Yabby

Yes it would be good. Just so long as we could still view them if required.

I do want to make Robert too much work by coming in here all the time but I have been thinking.

Robert it really would not have been an issue with the Scout thingy if people posted in their real names. I understand you have already given your reasons for prefering a pretend name but I just wanted to point out its not a system that is fair to all.
As well as there should be one rule for everybody. Some have changed their post names without a word said. Others were suspended.
I think their should be some tolerance given to new posters and a warning and explanation first.

Yabby at least the yuppies are good for something I guess. They make it possible to introduce new equiptment and get slogged more than we will end up paying.

The particular ones I know can yolk up a bullock team break horses and still run farms. I guess it takes a bit of Yuppiness to get out there and talk with the world these days.

What I think they meant was if you pay a cafe internet provider to link to your match box going straight through to their broad band.

If you shop around you can get that for about thirty dollars a month.

Hope I have not got that message confused. It must drive you nuts being able to see the power lines and not just hook in.

I might go into your thread now and give Robert less work.

Antj

Robert
Well I guess you have your reasons but I did think I made fair comment about suspending one person who changed from using their real name to the organisation in good faith.

Mean while others have changed from using a faulse name to intitials.

If you are looking at ways to make this system fair I thought that was a very good example.

I will leave it with you

Antj, are you suggesting that someone else has been using two id's at the same time?

If so hit the delete button under one of the offending posts with a note to the site administrators about why you think that is the case.
I don't think changing ID's is an issue, using two at once is.

As I've pointed out earlier I'm not part of the site management so I don't understand why some comments directed at me are phrased as though it is expected that I can do more than any other poster about peoples behaviour.

R0bert

“Antj, are you suggesting that someone else has been using two id's at the same time?”

Yes, pale. Are you accusing someone? That would get the culprit banned wouldn’t it – just like when pale and wendy did it?

I don’t think it is very fair to Robert that posters try and involve him in their own mischief either. He is just a poster like the rest of us and doesn’t need the hassle or to feel that he needs to ‘take sides’. I believe he started this thread to gather suggestions not to set himself up as some sort of agony aunt.

Antje is obviously aiming at PF and Pig Farmer. There is no rule against using two IDs unless you are using them to subvert the rules of the forum, such as those on numbers of posts, or on suspensions. If Pig Farmer wanted to retire her Pig Farmer name and post under PF that's her prerogative. Just as it was OK for Wendy to change the name under which she posted.

In other words, you can't have two active IDs, but you can have two IDs.

I think that some posters are under the false impression that if
a poster starts a thread, its kind of "their" thread, they own
it or whatever, or have some responsibility towards it and those
posting there.

IMHO that is totally false. Its simply an idea for discussion,
anyone can participate and nobody has any kind of responsibility
towards "babysitting" that thread

PF and Yabby thanks for the comments. I neither have the power or interest to police others actions. If I spot an obvious breach of rules I'll hit the recommend deletion button. Occasionally I'll drop in a post trying to give an indepenent perspective if another poster seems to have really misinterpretted where someone is coming from or do a bit of searching if I think collating some bit's and pieces will help clear things up but that's about as far as it goes.

R0bert

That's correct in a general technical sense Yabby, but I think when you post you do start a thread you take a certain small pride in what you have created and want to take care of it. People who start threads don't have a right to moderate them, put I suspect that they are more likely to want to try to ensure that the discussion is orderly and are probably more likely to let me know if action needs to be taken on something.

I think of threads you create as being a little like adult children. You can't tell them what to say, but it's your fault they're there in the first place, so you take pride and blame in what they do, and you're likely to intervene in their lives more than those of any other adults of the same age as them, and there's an expectation that you will.

Robert
I did not intend to offend you. I just feel resonsible.
Yabby No that is not what I was refering to but thanks anyway. Grahamn Well call me stupid but I am not a computer wiz like you and I have not been on many forums. What I do not understand is this. You said Ok if you want to join as a member in the name or any NFP organanisation this is what to do.
First you must go in and de register under your name.
Then you go back in and re re register as whatever name you are changing to.
ok I get that. To be honest it was myself and Steven the web guy
did it.
Right then how come Comments came up under two different names at the same time?
Is it because you have to change it on each thread?
Is it because its an office and the computers are net worked? Do you have to change it on each computer? ie Taryn used to come into the downstarirs office, myself upstairs etc., is that it? Each computer should have been cancelled and rejoined? Surley if its changed on the forum your end it should just be changed. I really do not get it.
Anyway if a persons new I think there should be some tolerance especially just after they pay a membership fee.
Its not anybody was trying to hide who they were
So if Steven and I changed it our end why is it our fault.?
I really do not get it

Even though both Wendy and PALE posted over the same time period, I also believe that the ID mix-up of PALE and Wendy at that time was an honest mistake or error of some kind. There were only a couple of post that overlapped.

I find it quite confusing.
Since the ID "PALE" is an organisation and both Wendy and Antje fall under PALE, does that mean that both can post now and how is this being checked?

As a general rule, if different people belonging to a certain organisation are all allowed to post under that organisation's ID, then doesn't that mean that PALE can do the same, because how would you be able to check who is doing the posting anyway? - or am I seeing this wrong?

How long does a suspension for multiple ID use normally last?
Is this ground for suspending the offender indefinitely or is there a time limit attached?

Whether or not the pale/wendy thing was an 'honest mistake', the subsequent abuse of the rules with a string of false id's certainly wasn't. Anyway, whether it is breaking these rules or breaking laws, ignorance is never a defence.

Is there are a point to all this? Should wendy be allowed back? IMHO she has never left :)

Robert set this thread up to help find ways of improving the system which was lovely of him. Here am I pointing something out that happend and asking a question about the system.
This is not about Wendy. Its about me. I want to know and understand the system. Ok For eg When you changed your ID from pig Farmer to PF Did you do it on each thread? because I didnt. I did it with a web master. He said that is what he was told to do. I cant see anything that refers to net worked computers. I dont even know if that was the reason two names came up. I take it you only have one computer. I dont. Depending on who is in the office is how I know which desk I am working from. I have told you a million times Wendy is not posting and has not posted since that day. This is about me and its a question. I do not understand otherwise I would not have asked Robert. I thought he would know being on OLO for so long. Do you have to do it on each thread and each computer? Or do you have to do it on each thread you have ever made a post on. I am not even sure I would remember all the threads to be honest.
Please just try for once not to turn this into a war or something it isnt. I think it is a fair question and I need to understand what if anything I did wrong when I set hers up so I dont stuff up again. Here I am asking and pointing something out that is a problem for me and I would appreciate if somebody could answer it.
There are nine computers sometimes up to twenty people. If I move from machine to machine do I have to do it on each machine? Surley it should be registered at the other end somebody has changed their ID

GrahamY

I am not aiming at PF or anybody else. I am if you like aiming at myself. Like I said call me dumb if you like I dont care. If I decide to go in and change my ID I need to know the same thing will not happen. Since I was the one who set it up its a fair question.
If somebody isnt being upfront and honest the dont use their NFP organisations name or their real names. It would be stupid to suggest otherwise. The other thing really when you think about it is this. Lets say myself Antje Struthmann wants to go in and make a comment on gay marraiges for eg. Everybody already knows Antje is with people Against live Exports and Intensive Farming in conjunction with RSPCA QLD. 'Sure' but my thoughts on gay marraiges should not be taken as speaking on behalf of that organisation now should it?
There for I am suggesting to you with respect there are a few things in the system that need some more thought. Which is why I thought this thead was started in the first place. So should I or anybody else be denied also the oportunity to have a personal opinion.?
Surley it would make more sense for a person to be themselves if its a personal post and to post under an organisation if they are with that organisation and paid a membership. I stress I am not refering to pale just theforum rules in general. The way the forum laws stand now a person would have broken the rules if they posted about that gay marriage in their real name and outside outside an organisations name:?
If they used an organisations name to express their views on something so personal they would be none too popular now would they. So is it fair that anybody is denied the right to post a comment just because they work for a organisation who may or may not have paid a membership

I have only just come across this thread - and what do I find? Another war between People Against Live Exports and I/F, using the pseudonym Antje Struthman and PF (and one or two others) and the dreaded exchange of various emails again. I am a bit concerned that, having read some other written work of Antje Struthman's, that the written style here where she writes representing People Against Live Exports is markedly different; are we sure we have the same/right person? And again, I have to say that I don't think a thread like this is the place for advertising an organization - was it Yabby who said that the advertising boards are for that? I think all the stuff about legal action, and like threats are best kept for personal communications too. Robert, and GrahamY, thank you for your moderate input and helpful advice.
Nicky

Antje, no-one pays to use the forum. The only people who pay to use this site are our partners like Melbourne Uni, LGAQ, Oxfam etc. and they get ownership rights as members. You can see them on the drop-down list on the home page of OLO.

No-one is stopping you posting under your own name. Just register under a new email address as Antje Struthmann, or whatever you choose, and I'll suspend the PALE one.

Graham

Nobody mentioned money. Athough I have in the past said I think everybody should pay something. I asked you nicely if I had to change every single computer and or thread. I told you what happend before. It seems I am not going to get an answer so I wont bother to ask again.
I am certainly not touching anything again until I find out.

Thank you for the offer but thats what you said the last time.
Please just leave it. I certainly dont want to go through what others already have experienced.
Thank You Anyway Graham
Antje

Nicky as you said you have just come onto this thread.

So if its ok with you I will ask Graham a question about technical
issues. I dont see any reason for you to invlove yourself in my questions or for that matter anything else. You dont know the background.

Your clearly just targetting me because you think I am supportive of pale people.

If you are free to come on this forum and promote your ideas towards Animal Welfare I am just as free.

I know its hard 'Nicky' to except but others dont have to ask your consent to talk about things they want to do like you do. Not on this forum anyway.

As far as IDs I would be the only person on this forum to be in no doubt as to who you really are ' Nicky'

At least I use my real name.

I think if you have something to say on a public forum that you want people to consider you ow it to people to be upfront as to who you are.
Antje Struthmann.

"I think if you have something to say on a public forum that you want people to consider you ow it to people to be upfront as to who you are."

Nope Antje, you have it all wrong. Who anyone is does not matter an
iota.

What matters is intelligence. Either you have the ability to make
sound points, that stand up to reasoned arguments, or you don't.
We are all free to discuss those points, who is who does not
matter at all. What matters is the strength of your arguments,
based on your reasoning ability.

So forget all the people stuff, the bitchy stuff, the who stuff.
Focus on the points that you argue, all the rest simply does not
matter, thats just female bitchyness IMHO...

Well Yabby
You are entiled to your opinion and I am entiled to mine. You for example come on here and say some totally outragous things- Such as your recent post on the pig thread. Your now telling the public that no pulbic funds go into MLA, or livecourpe. It doesnt matter to you because you also post in a bodgey name.
Your incorrect about public funds being used in the industry yabby. Anyway I guess that not really for this thread so I will leave it. As for your other comment yup I agree but when somebody atacks me for no reason I tend to defend myself.
A pretty normal response Yabby. We all react the way in which we are approached. Also just quickly I agree with you about all NFP organisations being accountable publicly.
Nothing would make me happier.
Goodnight All.

"Your now telling the public that no pulbic funds go into MLA, or livecourpe. It doesnt matter to you because you also post in a bodgey name."

Nope Antje, thats not what I said, reread my post and do not
distort what I said. What I said was that I had examined the
last MLA budget and that public funds were provided for r&d
research, not for marketing or other efforts. That is correct.

You are free to obtain a copy of the MLA budget from MLA, which
confirms my point. Who I am is not an issue, my point of reason
is what the argument is all about. Show me where my point of
reason is wrong, based on the MLA budget. I could be the pope's
illegitimate child, why should anyone care? The arguments are not
about people, but about points of reason.

"Please just leave it. I certainly dont want to go through what others already have experienced"

Well I can speak from experience antje. Just delete the pale id first and start another id. Very simple. Hard to stuff that up.

IMO you are a bit of a hypocrite with the 'bodgey' name thing. You post under a different id yourself. Sure, here you add your name most of the time, but there is another thread that you post to that rarely has anjte attached to it.

You used to post under anjte - what happened to that id? It leaves me wondering if there is a reason you want to hide behind the pale one :)

Antje, I've never changed my OLO alias so anything I know about changing alias's is what I've seen others do.

My understanding of the detail.
- Your alias is a site thing, not an issue for local PC's, I'm not sure what happens if you are logged into the site from multiple PC's at the same time and change your name from one then send posts from the other before reoppening the site. THat may introduce a risk.
- As I'm typing this I have a message above this pane saying
"You are logged in as R0bert. Type your comments into the box below.". If you change your ID and want to send a message check that before posting the message.
- From memory Scout put up a footnote at the base of her earlier posts as Scout identifying herself by her former alias. That might be a useful technique.

On a general note I think it's well past time to move on from the squabling with Yabby and PF. As a bystander to that stuff you seem to be the one who keeps trying to pick the fights. Argue the point not the poster. One of the good things about the use of aliases is that often the only thing we know about a poster is their posts and their history of posting, it makes "playing the man" (or woman) much less usefull. How about an end to the focus on bans, suspensions, who might be breaking a rule etc and get back to discussion about the real issues. The site is not an end in itself for most of us but rather a tool to allow discussion and debate across a wide range of topics. We need rules and consequences to keep it going but endless focus on those is hardly benefiting anybody.

R0bert

Robert
We see it slightly differently. Since when was aking a question picking fights. I appreciate the fact you have now tried to give my question some thought.
As far as me picking fights- Here is how I see it.
I come in and ask you a question about a technical matter. I think I have found a way to improve the system, which is what you set this up for you said.I didnt do anything wrong in the first place and there has! been a injustice done here. TO ME! Dont you worry about that its ok who cares You dont understand either. I got the blame for the last stuff up because I did it with Steve the web master that day. If I got it wrong that day then its going to happen again. I have had two web people look at what happend and they have no! answers either so lets just say I want it on record I did nothing wrong.
You can see the only one who has been fair about my question was Celivia Everybody else has just tried to pick fights certainly not me.
I will change nothing because I dont trust the set up being bitten once already .
Sorry I asked what I felt a reasonable question. I dont care anymore. You are all so blinded with this anti pale thing you fail to see me as a person. I have put up with abuse on the forum over something that was not my fault in the first place. Then I have had to try to explain it to dozens of other people. Well I still cant explain it and it looks like nobody else can either.
At least Celivia was a bit decent and reasonable. You could all learn from her. Dont worry Robert I shall not raise any more technical problems. A sincere thanks to Celivia for considering what I was! trying to say.

Antje Struthmann.

People Against Live Exports, I have absolutely no idea about the technical issues about which you are complaining, and certainly you are free to "discuss" what you want to within the rules of the forum.
I merely commented that there is a very different writing style here from other material I have read by Antje Struthman, and about what I see as basically advertising content being less than appropriate. I do not see anyone other than you "picking fights" and engaging in personal attacks rather than reasoned debate either. It's a bit sad really. I wasn't expecting to agree with Yabby about anything much, but I do agree with his comments here. Lay off the personalities, and participate in some balanced discussion! I think you would find it much more rewarding.
Nicky

Nicky
At least a dozen people emailed me through the web site email address at the time this all happend to say how unfair they thought it was. I guess thats because they were around at the time and did see what happend. Several of them told me they had written to OLO management complaing at the attacks on pale which still contiune.
Correct me if I am wrong but given the fact you have already said you dont know what happend because you were not around didnt you! just come in here to pick a fight with me?
I think so.
You didnt even notice the pig farmer on the other thread until I pointed it out to you. You accused me of chasing everybody out of that thread when in fact nobody had posted there for months. Certainly not you. I simply pointed out the dates and you didnt like it. So now you! have come in here to try to pick a fight.
Not me.
You go on the say you see two different styles of posts. In other words accusing me of being a lyer.
You also by your not trying to pick a fight with me, oh no of course not.

Yabby you clearly have no idea of how it is in the big world if you say no public funds are spent. MLA middle East head emails Wendy and visa vera and they speak on the phone. You are two thousand percent inncorrect. The report by R Nicholson in 2002 showed each tax paer forking out around $650.00 PA. Its far more now. Who also do you think pays all the overseas staff Yabby. Thats funded 50 50 by the tax payer and Industry. Then there are all the interesting grants given out through National Regional Transport and of course often under the title RESEARCH . The AWB are up to their necks in live exports Yabby as well and we all know how honest the arrangments between them and the Government are.
Antje Struthmann

"Lay off the personalities, and participate in some balanced discussion! I think you would find it much more rewarding."

Absolutely Nicky. I am also very tired of every thread being turned into a soapbox for pale. It seems that anyone that does not toe the pale line is accused of attacking them. Antje you must be able to accept that others have differing opinions to yours.

As for the 2 different writing styles - I have brought that up before and I believe the pale id is being misused also. Maybe its a case of antje genuinely not knowing?

Another thing. There are plenty of farmers out ther comitting suicide through no fault of there own. I am also sure when the public donate money to animal welfare they are somehow deluded into thinking that money goes to the animals. Why should Animal Welfare organisations keep it all! Other than running costs it should all go to the animals it was dontated to. I recall when Wendy got onto the head Barrister for Red Cross after the farm hand Appeal. He said this>
I promise you Wendy Not one cent! of those funds are going to buy feed for stock- thats not what it was dontated for. No- Really -then next time they or anybody else show pictures of starving animals on TV and ring the hearts of the good public I want that made clear. Then I will start a trust fund saying. Every cent of this money is going to buy feed for the farmers stock. Lets see which one the public donate to shall we. Why should any Animal Welfare organisation NOT give it to the animals. Who cares how these pens are enlarged or who pays. I am sure the animals wont. They will just thank the good public. Considering as it was pointed out there are organisations with millions sitting in the bank a national advertsing [ TV adds at prime time spots to tell the public how it is should be number one cab off the rank.
Its the public donsted money and if its not going to be given to farmers to enlarge living conditions OR to a major TV drive then we really need another enquiry so the public knows where every cent is going.
I thought the whole idea of animal welfare groups was to improve living conditions for animals.
So what do you think these groups should do with the millions they raise. Let the animals continue to suffer because they just dont like farmers? Or spent it on improving conditions at least for the animals.?

They should be running campaigns to create awareness - just as Animals Australia and Voiceless are doing right now http://www.savebabe.com/pledge

Sitting around in the office complaining and thinking up ways to discredit these organisiations will achieve absolutely nothing.

"The report by R Nicholson in 2002 showed each tax paer forking out around $650.00 PA."

Umm Antje, even little old you can get your calculator out, push
the buttons and work out that that is nonsense lol.

Given 8 million taxpayers, that is 5 billion $!

THE MLA budget is around 140 million a year, around 28 %
of that is R&D grants, the rest of their income is grower
levies, processor levies, live export levies etc.

MLA is audited my Ernst and Young and frankly I have more
confidence in those audited figures, then in who said what
to Wendy on the phone :)

Antje, why must everything come back to an "anti PALE" stance?
I'm still working thru the live export issue trying to sort fact from fiction in the available information but my current leaning on that issue is against the live export trade.

I can understand the point's made by supporters of live exports and am interested in seeing what alternatives exist. I'm not as convinced as PALE about the issue but my bias is still more in that direction than the other way.

My comments about your on line behaviour are not anti PALE, they are about your approach to online discussion. Hiding behind the idea that any criticism of your online behaviour is anti PALE is a cop out.

Neither Yabby or PF seem to be advocates of animal cruelty, both seem to be trying to find a workable balance which caters for animal welfare and keeps farmers viable.

If you really want to make progress here stop the constant whining about how unfair you thing the site has been to you, stop the attempts to "tell on" PF for imagined misbehaviour on her part and focus on discussions that will help those of us not so close to the issue understand the pro's and cons of different aspects of animal welfare.

Likewise pretending that you were just asking a technical question when challenged about trying to pick fights ignores the numerous posts you've made which continue to snipe at Yabby and PF. School yard behaviour.

Ask techical questions if you need to but don't use pretend to do so to give an excuse for another long whine about OLO. If the site bugs you that much move on, otherwise get over it.

R0bert

Robert.
I "did ask" a technical question and "yes" there was a "moral" issue} behind it. You replied you were not interested and too busy.

Its there for all to see.

As you pointed out some people read the posts but dont reply. I can honestly say three emails arrived pointing out how you set this thread up to find ways of improving the system so it was more fair than showed no interest when I asked you about the technical problem. I experienced. Gee
GrahamY also pointed out just because you start a thread doesnt mean you can instruct people on what to post.
My technical problem was very much on topic of your thread. Your personal attack to me in response isnt. If the cap fits.

You say Yabby is Animal Welfare concerned. Shows how much you have read the posts. Yabby thinks its ok to stuff live animals in boots of cars both here and overseas and slit their throats with no pre stunning. Umm. You and I have different ideas about Animal welfare that for sure. I dont need pale to express my horror that you think thats fine.
PF You post this http://www.savebabe.com/pledge then have the nerve to complain when I post as well things like this
http://freerangefarmers.com/ and this
http://www.livexports.com/solution.html
Well if they and yourself can post about the vegetarian groups I am just as free to post about pro support free rangefarmers and re open abattoirs in Australia.
After all thats Yabbys excuse for live exports remember. - We dont have enough plants in WA to slaughter here. Lets send the poor buggers alive to another country where there are even less if any animal welfare codes of practice. Where they cant even treat each other with respect let alone animals. I am sure Robert you didnt see all the complaints about me posting as a pale supporter and putting up links while other do the same for the vegetarian people. "Quite sure.'
Oh and by the way Yabby.
I post here in my own time. I dont draw wages.

Antje Struthmann

One NEW link very relevant to the thread, is hardly comparable to the hammering you give your OWN website is it antje?

I cant speak for anyone else, but i just jump straight over any links you put up because I think we are all conditioned now to expect it to be just more of the same old pale stuff.

Animals Australia is one of the largest animal welfare groups in this country. It is well document here what your feelings are towards Glenyce. They are doing a great job at them moment with their free range campaign. You say you do everything for the animals? Then put aside you issues with GO and lend a hand or at least support the campaign. Have you signed the pledge?

skip my posts [thanks]

I dont have a 'personal thing' with Glenyce. - Yes offered to assist.
As a member of PALE I am banned.

They declaired war on RSPCA. PALE works inconjuction with an RSPCA Branch.
PALEs happy to work with everybody.! I think they have proved that to me at least with their MOU with AFIC and working realshonship with the legal body of Animal Welfare.

The problem is Animals Australia Animal Liberation Voiceless etc are appaulled by the push from pale to open more abattoirs to stop live exports. Umm Well if we dont slaughter here the they will keep going alive!

Its them who wont work with us NOT the other way around.

Dont you get it. Its a fund raiser. Glencye has made no secret she is trying to get rid of RSPCA and take control.

I would support that too if she was not trying to dictate to the 96 percent of Australians who eat meat.

Friends of PETA who have proven links with terrorists. No thanks I dont want that for myself,children or animals.

They Support Free range Farmers you say? huh? whats that?

They oppose abattoirs and cant endorse people eating meat.

Do you grow your animals for slaughter? Yes I thought so. So how does it help to say support free Range but run the only group out of the country that is working to reopen abattoirs Huh?

As you said your not growing your animals to make Babe films

Its been raised with the Federal Ministers claiming they are the 'peak body'.

Australians are not vegan veggies. They are mostly eat eaters . The public deserve to know the 'facts' 'before' forking out their millions. They also deserve to be represented by a balance other than 'just' veggies and vegan.

Bet the public doesnt know apart from RSPCA PALE are the only groups that are not veggies.

She would help animals to support pale to open plants to slaughter here.

Its only now the truths finally being told to public after years of putting up with her nonesense.



Antje Struthmann

cally, have a look at Nicky's history. Not a prolific poster but with a first post at "Nicky, Saturday, 2 April 2005 6:43:18 PM" not a newcomer either. Not that really matters, new and old are welcome to comment - you have the same posting rights with two posts to your credit as I have after several years and a large number of posts.

Why so angry at Nicky? Are you associated with an existing poster and taking her input personally?

This thread is an experiment to see if some of the personal discussions and conflicts which are off topic on article threads can be dealt with elsewhere. I suspect most prefer to keep their arguments in everybody elses faces so there is only a small number using it. Hopefully we are learning some things along the way.

Antje, that last post is more useful. You are providing some insights into why you don't like some of the other "animal welfare" groups. I did wonder if the organisations you are speaking about are NFP's and if so how your comments fit in with your views about protecting NFP's from potentially damaging comments. I've not checked back but my recollection is that you have previously expressed the view that NFP's should have some protection from on line comments which might harm them.

In regard to your comments about Yabby's views and my thinking he is interested in animal welfare - I've not noticed the post where he supports stuffing animals into car boots. I don't have to agree with everything another poster says to accept that they might be working towards some similar goals but with different emphasis and priorities. One of the great things about on line discussions is the opportunity to understand why those who choose a different approach do so. Often they have the same broad goals but are coming from a different place. That is both fun and educational.

R0bert

Hi PF - I'm with you about the ambiguous postings from People Against Live Exports. The Antje Struthman whose other written material I have read has been an eloquent defender of wildlife
Her writings also do not contain spelling and other errors, which deepens my concern about this. A polite enquiry to the Australian Wildlife Protection Council might point you/us in the right direction.
Like you, I agree that so many of the posts are links to stuff that People Against Live Exports are onvolved with. People Against Live Exports, if you believe that animal advocacy groups should disclose the source/s of their funding, perhaps you should lead the way and disclose the source of yours. You also make some sweeping generalizations about everyone in these groups being "veggie" - you have no possible way of knowing that and should therefore not make such unsubstantiated claims. More surprising still is your outlandish claim Glenys (note the spelling) has ambitions to destroy the RSPCA and "take control" - that is not something I have heard, seen or read, and is a product of your ongoing efforts to discredit every group but your own, for no better reason than they disagree with you on policy matters.

PF, is absolutely right in saying that AA's and Voiceless' camoaign is where such funding should be expended - to raise public awareness and jerk people out of their ignorance and apathy.Farmers of a "pioneering" (and compassionate spirit like PF cannot do it alone.

Yabby - it is irrelevant whether the animals in the Middle East seen being brutalized on Sixty Minutes were Australian or not (they were); the fact that such torture is routine in those countries is sufficient grounds for not sending any animals there at all.

PF, I have a friend who is interested in breeding free range "saddle-back pigs" - do you know anything about them (apart from what I heard on an ABC story yesterday; that they are rare). Are they miniatures? The story said they are black.
Are pigs the intelligent, inquistive, social creatures that I have read about?
Nicky

Nicky
You challenge my! Integrity?.
I dedicated my entire life to Animals!. Picking on peoples spelling. Not the wonderful work being done for animals. Shame!.
Shows your true nature and intellect. I am tired “simply”! tired and sure the animals wont mind.
Call me anytime I would be also happy to meet you. If you do not except this invitation “it will be on public record-“ remember that”

Why don’t we arrange a TV interview You v myself

I have it in writing from them that they can’t support re opening abattoirs or endorsing meat eating. Thats causing a major breakdown between farmers and main stream animal welfare organisations.
That’s not helping animals it’s hindering them. We HAVE to slaughter here.

I am a wild life lady who moved from South to help RSPCA QLD and pale with live exports.
Look back posted are PALEs funding months ago.

It seems to really upset you people pale works in conjunction with RSPCA QLD There’s most of the funding. I think the blind eye Program and the five page spread being anti RSPCA is enough proof of the anti RSPCA agenda .Not to mention the straight out statement that RSPCA should be replaced? .

As well we have five lawyers as members they put in their time and money. AFIC also. Wendy from her own pocket. That includes flowers to Animals Australia after the 60 minutes report. So there goes your theory we won’t work with them!

Nobody is paid a wage travelling expenses not one red cent.
We are not going to as Peter Singer wrote close PALE
And get our friends and family too sent all funding to Animals Australia. [Such Arrogance]

I am just as entitled to point out to the public “my policy’s Nicky”

. -You don’t think Animal welfare groups should offer to give their donations to farmers or to feed for animals in times of drought. Nor do you think it should be spend enlarging pens. So what do you think the public give their money for.?

Ban Live Exports- Slaughter in Australia
Antje Struthman

"It seems to really upset you people pale works in conjunction with RSPCA QLD"

You have that a little back the front. It upsets me that some of your posts put the RSPCA in a bad light and that things like calling for a royal commission into the RSPCA show little loyalty on the part of pale.

Honestly, if people thought their donations were going to rebuild farm infustructure I dont think they would be very quick to put their hands in their pockets. Anyway, enlarging pens defeats the whole purpose doesnt it? Hardly free range.

You are right about the meat eating thing antje. Unfortunately APL is quick to put that spin on any attempt by animal welfare groups to expose intensive cruelty. I do feel though that this latest campaign shows just how determined AA and Voiceless are in educating people about pig farming - meat eaters or not.

Robert
NO idea who Cally Is. Nor any member. If your really interested why dont you call RSPCA QLD and ask them about us. You have got it wrong Pale have been the victims of a vicious campaingn again the from vegeterian groups because they support farmers and want to open more abattoirs.
So you understand how pale has been treated here is just one example sent to our wonderful volunteers.>

Dear Sir, Madam

We have read the so called media release titled: Media Release sheep body parts.doc and we assume it emanated from this unknown group 'People Against Live Exports.'
We ALMOST threw it straight in the bin while we rolled around on the
floor laughing - but decided; better we give the author the benefit of some common sense.

May we suggest with all respect that the illiterate writer access
English and computer lessons as a matter of urgency? The spelling and grammar is just appalling as was the use of 'copy and paste' in this hilarious piece of pissy crap.

Please, do the world a favour: If it is this organisation who sent out this 'stuff' - dont! Stop sending this fictional, badly worded, meaningless, unfounded, baseless drivel out to media and save the organisation total embarrassment. You must be the laughing stock of the animal world because you are in the press and we have had a bloody good joke at the writer's expense.

Sadly, the need of the author to feed their ego with attention which has resulted in this piece of fantasy may have set back REAL animal welfare work by decades. There are some very intelligent, clever, people out in animal world, who have first hand knowledge of issues, understand the facts, and do not embellish (Big word I know-try looking it up in a dictionary!) or in the event of the lack of the truth - invent something. We in the press welcome their efforts. However, we do not welcome yours.

Yours sincerely

Youra Loonie

So Robert I am just defending RSPCA QLD Volunteers and policys to slaughter in Australia.

Antje Struthmann

I dont understand why you posted that antje.

It was unsigned wasnt it? Are you saying it was from one of the animal welfare groups?

I doubt any of would know of the 'media release' mentioned so cant comment. I would have just thrown it in the garbage were it belongs.

I agree the Voiceless ads will help. Personally I'm disappointed after seeing them on the Australian Story saying they were main stream they got themselves tied up with "vegetarians policies.

Dont get me wrong anything is better than nothing. The fair go for Farm Animals run Nation wide by RSPCA also helped.
Everybody saw on landline the pork farmers saying they could not afford to implement the new codes for pens for pigs.

Yes the pens should be bull dozed not made a tiny bit bigger. Unfortunately we can only work within the law and the codes of practice. There is no reason why new free range blood can not be introduced into Australia for Free Range re Pork.
People like yourself are like hens teeth. So much knowledge. A franchise arrangment with a experienced paid adviser such as yourself supported by Woolworths RSPCA AA other groups would be a huge help to not only animals but the public purchasing the products.

Yes the Australian Labour Party are responsible for so much. Shouldnt we tell the public in a language they understand? I hope the court case won yesterday will somehow allow staff to come in and service abattoirs etc.
I agreed with Nicky if RSPCA are misusing funds natioally there should be a Royal Commission.
Thats not being disloyal. Its being loyal to the animals and the Australian public. I have to be fair just because we are lucky enough to have a wonderful CEO in QLD doesnt mean I should not agree there is possibly room for improvment.
I know you will be angry with me for saying this but ask yourself how much notice these people took of you on the pig forum until I made an issue of it?
When Voiceless AA AL make someone like you an offer they cant refuse and have that persons face all over TV and Schools and on packs and pay Free Range Farmers a commission I will be a very happy lady.
Sadly I know- might fly before that happens

Ban Live Exports

Antje Struthmann

Hello everyone. The difference between the tone of the last two or three posts by People Against Live Exports is quite remarkable. I really don't understand why that part relating to a media release was posted either, but I do know a bit about what the story was about, I think. It is not relevant to this debate, anyway.

I really cannot see that there is anything to be gained by anyone if I were to meet with People Against Live Exports (even if I were silly enough to even think about it), and I cannot begin to imagine what a television interview would be about, much less think of a television network which would be remotely interested in such a notion. So thank you, I shall decline those generous offers (and that makes it public ... dear me!) .

PF, you have a wonderfully refreshing approach to what you do. I, like lost of other people, no doubt, hadn't thought that one step further; simply leaving animals in open paddocks to care for themselves, although described as free-range, overlooks the fact that we have "domesticated" these animals, and they do require additional care. Thank you for pointing that out. Also your approach to the notion of members of animal advocacy groups wanting to contribute to farmers' costs to remedy the evils they have created which include sow stalls, and battery cages. I agree, most would be horrified to think that money they have donated was to be used to help people who have made a handsome living out of animal suffering for years, then cry poor when they have to make good their cruel ways. As someone earlier pointed out, the costs would have been in setting up the intensive operations, not in dismantling them.

Programs in the schools is a good idea; children can be amazingly persuasive, and depending on the age, untainted about the influence of the cost factor. If everyone who reads this thread got one of AA's excellent infoirmation packages and used it wisely, it would make a world of difference.
Nicky

Antje, "NO idea who Cally Is. Nor any member. If your really interested why dont you call RSPCA QLD and ask them about us. You have got it wrong Pale have been the victims of a vicious campaingn again the from vegeterian groups because they support farmers and want to open more abattoirs."

I've not tried to find out who Cally is. I was interested in why the anger towards Nicky but that question was directed at Cally, I don't expect you to be able to answer it.

I'm not sure what you think I've got wrong in the other part I've quoted from your post. I'm not denying the possibility that PALE has had problems elsewhere. My observations have been about the behaviour I've seen on this site.

Keep up the posts about animal welfare and the issues you see in that field, that stuff is helpful even if primarily to give hints for our own research.

R0bert

Nicky.

I was addressing your 'deep concerns' regarding my ID. You want to contact the Australian Wildlife Protection Council '"you/ us/" to enquire about 'me'. A ""polite enquiry ""you say.

Well Nicky there is no need to contact Maryland Wilson but you go right ahead if you wish to waste your time while I get on with the task of helping animals!

I offered you to call me direct. I have always posted in my real name. Or call RSPCA QLD

Dont worry about the media not being interested. They approached me.

Now thats sorted what difference does it make who is working to help animals Nicky- I am sure the animals wont mind.

See thats the difference between us. Yabby was right about that if nothing else. Why should the publics money be used on such nonesense. "Me" I am educating the public about how 'some' Animal Welfare groups operate.

After twenty years of AA live exports has more than trippled.Intensive farms the same. So whats the problem with everybody working towards the one goal. Why so much agro?

I see you know something about 'that email' and the WA ship do you Nicky? mmm
The email was posted for Roberts sake 'and to educate the public' about the unethical and disgusting bullying that has gone on by extreme people.
Anybody wanting to help animals that have independant ideas not complying with extreme vegetarian especially opening abattoirs are attacked.
That was just one email to give people an idea of the viciousness.

There are more dozens more. It just gives the people some 'insight'.

The gentlman who stayed out all night gathering information and contacting media was Chinese. One journalist was so impressed by his efforts he wanted to do a frontpage article in the QLD Sun.[ despite his english and typo] The story was about another Cormo right here in Australian waters WA. Ming was bitterly disappointed when PACAT relayed they were intructed not to speak or work with PALE by Animals Australia.
Pity for the animals sake too.
Antje Struthmann defending the right to not be extreme.

Forgive me, People Against Live Exports, if I say that I find the claim that the media have approached you as "dubious", to say the least.
As far as the story of the email is concerned, my understanding is/was that it was not People Against Live Exports' story to tell, whatever was released had been provided in confidence to organizations including yours, and your organization released it prematurely, and lacking in proper foundation at the time. More facts needed to be ascertained rather than going off "half-cocked" with half the story.
Rather than spending your time "educating" people about (against) other animal advocacy groups, you would be better educating it about intensive farming - not only pigs, but battery hens, the way broiler chicks are raised and feedlots as well. Doing what you are is simply counter-productive; trying to discredit other groups because they have a different set of values from your own helps no-one, including the animals you claim to be so concerned about.
Just an observation...
Nicky

I dont care what you find 'dubious'.

You have done nothing but try to discreit me [ie Who is she really? My integrity, Knowledge.

The WA ship story 'had' to be confirmed of course! by a WA eye witness.
You dont think the media contacted anybody for a story? There you go again.
I am educating people about animal welfare in Australia Nicky.

I am showing the public where most of the enery goes- into picking fights.
If my names was whistle dixy posting on here it wouldnt matter.

There is no requirment for people to use their real names- worst luck.

If you were such a animal lover then you would be happy to see anybody and everybody posting about animal welfare.


What the Australian public need to know is we wont stop live exports until we get out there and work with! the farmers instead of against them.

Offer some real alternatives to live exports and intensive farming.

That means stop bagging people trying to get abattoirs reopended. It means more than that too.
It means get in there and do anything possible to lend a hand to make that possible.

It means activley promote establishing free range farms not just say you are while taking donations .

I am proud of my name Nicky.

Well if you care to contact me I am happy for you to have the media contact details.

It should be hoped nicky after you play Sherlock you would then be happy to assist animals rather than try to destroy my good name.

I want you to know Nicky you have really upset me personally with your continued swipes.

I think you owe me an apology. I didnt have to offer to speak with you or meet with you or for you to contact RSPCA QLD but! I did.


Your not helping the animals.

Also you didnt answer my question 'please'- regarding what you think NFP animal welfare organisations should do with public donations?

Antje Struthmann

Released - 16th November 2006

SENATOR ANDREW BARTLETT Queensland Democrat Senator

Live Export suspension Must Be A Catalyst for Change

Democrat Animal Welfare spokesperson, Senator Andrew Bartlett has called for a rethink of the live export trade in the wake of Israel’s suspension of live sheep imports from Australia due to health concerns.

“This is the latest in a long line of problems with Australia’s live export trade and it is way past time that this inhumane practice was ended,” Senator Bartlett said.

“It is another reminder why the federal government should stop propping up such a problematic and troubled industry and take steps to phase it out.

“If the government is concerned about the livelihood of farmers and jobs in Australia it should be doing more to expand the frozen carcass and processed meat trade.

“Economically it makes more sense to value add to a product and create jobs here rather than having ship load after ship load of animals rejected and trade suspended due to the poor health of livestock.

“Live exports are unnecessarily cruel to the animals shipped abroad and their poor treatment and substandard living conditions are well documented.

“The Minister’s version of events about this latest incident should also be taken with a grain of salt, given the long history of cover-ups, deceit and denials when it comes to the live exports trade.

“The trade must be phased out sooner rather than later. The government should focus on ensuring the viable alternatives are ready to pick up the slack,” Senator Bartlett concluded.
Media contact- Tracee mcPate
Reply to Senator Bartlett.
After twenty years of similar Media Releases as firstly President of Animal Liberation Qld than as a Senator perhaps if we explain to the public the Australian Labour Party are hugely responsible for live exports due to their unions.
Yes to supportive alternatives to live exports is the answer. Here is A alternative that was subbmitted to your Animal Welfare Senate Enquiry last year by AFIC Australian Federation of Islamic Councils RSPCA QLD pale.

Perhaps you did not see it.?


http://72.14.235.104/search?q=cache:MEz59CSzgzMJ:www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/rrat_ctte/animal_welfare05/submissions/sub72.pdf+halal+kind+meats&hl=en&gl=au&ct=clnk&cd=2

Antje Struthman

Senator Bartlett in fact is not, as is implied here, anything to do with the Australian Labor Party; he is the Deputy Leader of the Australian Democrats, and yes, I had received that media release.
What do I think NFP organizations should do with their accumulated funds? I think I did cover that earlier. They should be doing what Animals Australia, Animal Liberation, PACAT and Voiceless are doing so well at present, public exposure campaigns about intensive farming (and live exports). I do not belong to any organized group, and have no donations or funding to account for.
"Educating people" about what animal advocacy groups are about (i.e. portraying them as fighting amongst themselves) is an erroneous claim - it seems pretty clear that no-one else is fighting - everyone else is running good campaigns; it is simply that they have refused to fall into line with the abuse, demands and complaints of your organization. But reiterating that is probably an exercise in futility.
As for the media contact about the "Maysora" episode, I think it more likely that the media would have sought comment from those closer to the incident and from the peak body Animals Australia. This was, I think, the case, but you attempted to usurp the material for your own benefit.
As for "upsetting" you - for all our sakes, get over it. Put something a little bit constructive here that is worth discussing.
Nicky

Nicky
The WA Ship was the good work of Animals Angels and Dawn. The media needed to cover it 'with her'. For years Animals Australia has run different progects yes. However they have an 'absolute obligation' to the Australian public to disclose their strong vegetarian slant.Well hello how else do you stop live exports.
If we want to stop live exports then we must slaughter here.


You say Andrew is not like anything implied here- Whats that Nicky?
Senator Bartlett is a political person a vegan a strong supporter of PETA AA AL. He has been around a long time in the Animal Welfare Industry. This is not America

A senator should not allow his personal preferences or friendships get in the way. He might be vegan but most of the Australian public are not.

Its a fact they give their preferences to ALP so I am only asking why he does not explain the problem to the public in terms they clearly understand.
Labour are still the reason we cant bring in abattoir workers from overseas to service plants instead of sending these poor animals alive.
Hes a leader an spokes person for Animal Welfare. Tell the public Andrew why we have live exports. Lets educate the public as to why- here is why Nicky- ALP unions and the trade dollar!

Thats a good idea of Yabbies so why not support it. Saying great idea go for it doesnt get the job done.

Why dont you start a thread of your own .

Whatever it is you do for Animals Nicky I support you. I know you sincerly care. Please in return if you cant support my work do not spend your life trying to discreit me.
Thats not helping the animals.

Yabby PF together have got a wonderful idea. Why dont you put your efforts into helping them get AL AA to support for that instead of trying to discreit me.
You would think ALP would wake up this is a vote winner.
Nicky lets not argue. Lets work for animals
What do you say
http://consciousevolution.com/onshu/view_signatures.php
Antje

That sounds absolutely fine with me, People Against Live Exports. I am not entirely without sympathy for your position. I recognize that people will not stop eating animals in my lifetime, and do not try to persuade them otherwise beyond asking that they buy free-range. I am also sympathetic to the view that a frozen/chilled meat carcass trade can and should be substituted for sending animals alive to these hell holes. Have you seen a website called www.liveexportshame.com? I thought it was pretty good.
Nicky

Nicky
Yes I have seen it. Its linked to ours. To be honest I thought that was yours now. Or am I speaking out of turn. It was started by Dawn low. Fantasic amount of work and very knowledgable person. Maybe your not who I thought you were. I do wish OLO would make people use their real names[ If only for my curiosity] It would be good working at a less stressful pace between us Nicky. Yes I would welcome that. I would like to share with you if I may all our dreams and prayers for the future. There is a wonderful man Nicky and his name is Ikebal Patel. He is sensitive intellergent and he really cares about Animals. His daughter is already working with WSPA. Ikebal is standing for the elections next as AFIC president. If? he wins we can hope to see a lot more imput into finding alternatives to live exports and animal welfare in general. We are keeping eveything crossed and praying to both Gods to be honest. Apart from Animal Welfare Australia needs his sensible guidence.

You have a good knowledge of the codes and industry Nicky.
Far more so than I. The different advisory boards the records of happenings with the different ships are clearly in your head.
That type of knoweledge is priceless and if you dont mind my saying somebody should be paying you to run something. I believe we need to bring funds in from overseas because I cant see Australians coming up with it. I also know that the Halal requirements are going through the roof so would like to start there. They are very interested in the Halal vegtables and one day I am sure we can open that chain of fast food outlets produced through the vegetable farms.
People will always eat meat so if we start by slaughtering here and also promote the Alternative food products one day maybe we can at least make it kinder. You seem pretty familar with NCCAW yourself . Have you ever considered throwing your hat in?
Antje

Antje, thank you for the compliments. I don't know how one would go about putting a hand up for the NCCAW, unfortunately, or even where they actually meet. A lot of the information I have I got from finding www.liveexportshame.com not so long ago, you are right, it is very comprehensive. There's some really good information on how old these terrible ships are and what is wrong with them.
I've also been looking at Animals Australia's website, and they are asking people to sign the pig pledge as you know, and ask for free range products, and also they campaign for a carcass only trade, so they cannot be totally out of sympathy with your ideals either. I wonder if there hads just been a lot of misunderstanding, and if the situation may not be irreparable? Just a thought. Obviously although I am a vegetarian I recognize that the world will not become that way in my lifetime, much as I would like it to. So I admire immensely what PF is doing and am happy to say so.
Nicky

Nicky

The fact that you dont know much about the advisory board is what I mean. Nobody does thats my whole point. If we are ever going to change things, we must invlove main stream public. "Few do" know so dont feel silly or anything. The codes of practise[or lack of them] should be on every cornflake box and bottle of milk.

The same when is a Senate Enquiry- 'All the public should be informed' and members of groups asked to lodge something. These poly's are very aware of public concerns and it goes back to their votes. They dont worry too much when they only get input from group leaders. They say to themselves oh thats that animal lot again.

Start informing the public more about these enquiries and encourage them write as well and you might see a change in attitude from Senators. I can send you more info on NACCA if you contact me through the web email.
http://www.livexports.com/

It would be best to exchange posts on animal welfare on my new thread. Except for the fact that you can post four times here and only twice there or in the babe thread. Why is that. Does anybody know please?.

When I first started this work Nicky a CEO of RSPCA said- until groups work united together and support us nothing will change.[true] Yes aa say on their web convert to slaughtering here but refuse to play a part in making that happen.

Lets see what happens with PF and if there are offers to strong support. PF has already expressed interest in animal welfare and assisting people to set up as Free Range farmers in pork.

You dont get a bigger pluss than that. Yabby is right. Not much sense in telling people to demand it when there iS none. We need to get off our backsides and help PF to help others produce it. Thats THE most important thing that can happend.
Lets see if they are "really willing" to help establish Free Range Pork. If they let PF walk away they are crazy.
Antje

Hi all
I agree wholeheartedly with the email Christmas cards, but what if we each made a hard copy of cards for just our local supermarkets and delivered them in person to the managers/meat section managers? The few discussions I've had with these people indicate that they really do NOT know what the difference between/relationships with anti-cruelty legislation and Codes of Practice. I've been told that they "support local suppliers and would never support one who does not comply with the CoP". So I have had to pin thrm down to explain it all - but sadly in most cases they still didn't want to know. Has anyone seen the Australian Pork Limited Animal Activist Watch website? It is truly tragic. It says things like Australian animal activists train with terrorist grouns and alludes to Al Quaeda. Perhaps what is happening has them worried.
Antje, it also has an article about a live export protest in Tasmania, and how several people were arrested, but "escaped" penalties. I remember reading about that one. That particular voyage (the subject of the protest) was one which was up there at the top of the mortality figures for the six month reporting period as well (I read about those).
Now Israel has suspended the trade in sheep from Australia and more than 500 calves have died, on another ship and in Israeli feedlots. The story and photographic evidence is just awful (I found it at www.liveexportshame.com).
Yabby, it is so good that you are contributing on the "welfare" side of things, and your ideas are great. Thanks for the effort.
Regards to all
Nicky

Everybody Hello. Pf if you want to post on the alternatives to Live Exports about Free Range Pork Farms feel free. You can post up to 4 times on that thread but only 2 on the babe one. It comes under the same umbrella because its to Free Range Farms we are supporting.

No Nicky I didnt see the link you speak of but USA are a big driver of Live Exports. George Bush being such a good Church person is bound to try to discredit people with a sense of common decency.

We in Australia are simply playing into enemy hands by Animals Australia being so publicly linked to PETA. This is just the beginning. Its only a matter of time before the public are lied to and brain washed into not listening to ANY Animal Welfare organisation. PALE has been warning about that for four years but they wont listen.
Now they have dragged Voiceless into being branded the same.
If we- All concerned Animal Welfare Groups and members of the public work collectivly together to introduce more Free Range Farms and especially work with overseas contacts currently taking animals alive then we will be doing something positive to redivert Live Exports.
We have got to actually get in and work to solve the problem instead of whinging and telling the Government to fix it.

They are not going to so so why keep harping. Work with Aussie farmers and overseas contacts to get the alternatives in place. Thats what will fix it makes more sense. Same with Free Range Pork Farms.
Fix the problem. Thats the real answer. PF can we start a Free Range co-op through yourself and friends?

Hi all
I don't know that the US has much to do with driving live exports from Australia really. Possibly the closest link would be the generally fascist nature of the material on the APL websitr.
PETA did in fact run a great campaign in the Middle East, showing material in the various countries, and pointing out the torturous journey, and the treatment exported animals have faced before they have even left Australia. There's some detail at www.liveexportshame.com and if you go to the Newsflashes from "Export News Tasmania" some of the media stories are there from the newspapers in the Middle East.
Both PETA and AA are campaigning for a frozen carcass trade, from what I can see on the websites. PETA, although it does not condone slaughtering and eating animals, said that it was taking the pragmatic approach, recognizing that it was going to happen. AA strenuously denies that it is against farming, and I think has always adopted a "moderate" view when looked at in the same context as other animal advocacy organizations that I've had a look at.
Let's not get into the divisiveness again; let's keep the end goal/s in focus - freeing the pigs and ending live exports.
Nicky

Nicky
Nicky
you have to understand the meat industry and trade to see the American influence. Trust me without them driving it we would get it banned. We should be using the animal sites instead of Roberts car park.
oK well after many years I believe everything has increased. So if we want to stop intensive we start more free range and market it properly.
if we want to stop live exports we find alternatives.
I dont hear any ideas or imput from AL or AA.- sorry.

I am waiting to see if they are prepaired to work on fixing the problems.

Somebody has to get off their bums and just do more free range pork and build more abattoirs etc.
Wishing isnt doing.
Mean while all these trades are increasing.

They are against people eating meat Nicky its as simple as that.

Look at PF. Would you not think it would be sensible to work with PF and create many more Fre range Pork Farmeres?

Of course its the answer.
Anyway you guys just keep raising funds to pay yourselves in a job while others look for alternatives.
Talk about putting heads in the sand.

If we fix the problem instead of complaing it might help.

It can be done but only if everybody helps towards establishing more abattoirs to divert live exports and more free range farmers to grow pork
Gor goodness sake Nicky running around telling people to buy free range pork - when there isnt any is silly
Makes more sense to help PF create many more.
So what alternatives do they have after twenty five pluss years?
None.

Give me some input to getting overseas live importers into Australia please.
I understand the farmers frustration

Nicky
Do you know what. You have just surprised me. Its really clear now the problem after all this time. None of the animal welfare animals rights people understand the world meat trade. Nicky in order to change it you must first know the industry and understand what makes it tick. Who has interests in which plants. Subs for overseas and Australia farmers. The difference. The real problem is your all only half informed and unwilling to work with people who are on side with better knowledge of the meat trade.
Well i give up.
I really thought you may have been one of the few more cluey ones.
Its not possibly Nicky.
You are well informed on which ship and which code where.
However like the rest of them have no idea how it all plays out in the real world
I have emails from AA AL and voiceless all saying they can be invloved with helping to estabish new plants in Australia because they can not endorse people eating meat. Well hello Australians eat meat.

I am sick of this. We worked hard to form a MOU with AFIC[ who do! understand. They liked what they heard and some of our ideas. With the greatest of respect Yabby I think they might know a little more about meat live exports to the middle east than you.
Nicky Yabby is right about putting up or shutting up
You lot dont want the guidence and advise of AFIC the x Fedral leader of 35 years of AMIEU, lawyers who owned! plants. Mark RSPCA CEO QLD and many others including good overseas contacts. None of these people are stupid.
Nicky you dont want the help of people who understand how to play the game for want of a better word.
You have not got a clue about the meat trade but you dont want to be told or helped either.
Good luck
pity for the animals isnt it.
Higher moral ground indeed.
I am sort of with Yabby on this one based on attitude.

It's very sad to see that we are back to insults and rudeness because our opinions differ. I do not believe that we should be paying overseas interests/workers to come here so that Australia "might" do the right thing. The Australian government is the culpable entity here, not AA,AL,Voiceless or PETA. They have a different approach, and no matter how much you try to discredit them, it won't change anything. Get over it.

According to the coversations I've had with meatworkers, the Federal government continues to throw money at the live export trade, as abattoirs and local jobs have shut down. The attack needs to be directed at the government which failed to provide any compensatory funding for those regions (the only regions which have ever been compensated over the shutdown of local industries have been where the gold mine is where those miners were trapped somewhere in the North of Tasmania. The other was John Howard's relative's textile company near Maitland in NSW).

Before the Howard government was elected in 1996, the previous government had wage subsidy and retraining programs which this government won't fund, preferring instead to indulge the cultural cringe and pander to those countries who demand live animals for the spurious reasons they claim. You need to get on to Kevin Andrews, the Workplace Relations Minister, and remind him of the Labor government's OLMA (Office of Labour Market Adjustment) programs, which diverted people into industries they wanted to "grow" (back then it was things like hospitality) - there is no reason why it cannot be meat processing.

I'm sure AFIC has more than enough money of its own to fund its own enterprises if it wants to go down that path, but they should be hitting up Kevin Andrews for training and wage subsidies to do so. This government needs be told that taxpayers will not continue to fund this evil industry.

Those are the REAL alternatives, not trying to bribe untrustworthy foreign entities to come here and capitalize on any breaks they can get, and then take the profits back to where they came from.

Nicky
The bottom line is the industry has grown. We also run a group to inform public and badger Government.
However thats not going to fix it. Nothing will change unless you deal with the people taking animals alive Nicky.
Hit where it hurts and cut off the demand for live animals.
2and 2 make 4.
Now you can go on with your codes of [practices and your Andrews new bill [which by the way we supported in case you didnt notice] but until you put some real dollars in Australia to open plants sweet fA will change.
These are the facts Nicky. You talk about insults after your comments regarding the great work and efforts of AFIC to improve conditions for animals.
By the way Nicky AFIC are a not for P organisation. They dont personally run around buying plants. However they have bent over backwards to put forth some 'real' solutions to live exports of which you just poo hood by the so called peak vegatairn PETA extreme friendly groups.
You are like so many others who have become a culture of followers of AA AL.
You have clearly a good brain Nicky except you dont understand you must! understand the meat trade to stop live exports. That and you must have the funds. Big Funds. Yes your right the National Party has stuffed the country up big time.
Andrew Animals Australia have no interest in assisting to open plants again in Australia and have said so on many ocashions to this office.
You want to stop live exports?
Good.
Then stop bagging pale who are the only ones working with people involved with taking animals alive to divert to slaughtering here.
The fact! is Nicky AA AL have had years to stop it but its almost out of control.
I think somebody has been pulling your political leg along with many other Australians. Either help us get plants re openeded providing an alternatrive or see it get even worse.
Your choice.

But what exactly is it that you expect Andrew Bartlett and AA and AL and PETA for that matter to do? Put it in practical terms rather than non-specific criticism. What EXACTLY is it that you want? No-one is criticizing AFIC or anyone else, except you (for the record, I thought Andrew's bill was a little narrow in scope), with your ongoing complaints about vegetarians. PETA and AA both campaign openly on their websites for a frozen meat trade.
If you can detail exactly what it is you expect from these people, you might have a fighting chance for some credibility. It's very easy to make the "right noises" as AFIC does in the submission document I read - that costs nothing (although I find it hard to believe that they would use the term "chooks"). Perhaps one of your AFIC friends might join us on this or the other thread and elaborate a bit more about their expectations. The submission document does not contain any concrete, measurable proposals; pages about F&M disease and what animals in the US are fed - which at this time are totally irrelevant to Australia really say nothing.
Try to focus more on the "hows" - the REAL "hows" (rather than a loosely based series of statements) than the "whys", and for heavens sake, get over the philosophical differences. The only person bothered by them is you. Everyone else IS campaigning for a meat trade. I've given you the best information you're likely to get on how to lift employment in the meat processing sector, but you don't want to see it because you didn't come up with it.
Nicky

Nicky.
What I would like to see is for them for a start to stop rolling around shopping centers half naked with pretend blood on them outside the meat conferences.

The reason I would like them stop stop is because it gets every farmer 'off side' with all Animal Welfare groups. Of course they are free to continue doing that if they wish but as you asked me I am telling you.
It also has two effects on the public.
It makes turns the public off listening to any animal welfare groups branding them as a bunch of nuts.

PETA may say they support the meat trade on their web Nicky but they do not! They do not support abattoirs. That is a fact. They dont even think people should have a dog as a pet.
Andrew What do I expect. I expect him to keep his personal preferences out of politics

Then I would have thought he had plenty of time to explain to the general public about the ALP and their huge! part in creating live exports in the first place.

Just simple talk informing them of the facts would have been handy over the years. Oh but I forget his party give their preferences to labour dont they.

AA What did I want them to do?

Work in the help pick people from overseas[ live importers of animals and introduce them to local farmers with a view to coming to an alternative arrangments. I guess thats a bit hard when you have got most farmers off side, but still.

Attend some of the many meeting I know for a fact they were invited to meeting with overeas Muslim Government officials and others. They declined Nicky saying they could never get involved with promoting abattoirs because of the fact they were a vegatairan group.

I wont post in the car park about animalwelfare anymore. If you wish to discuss this further please go into the alternatives to live exports. Its not fair on Robert.

The fact remains that both AA and PETA DO actively campaign for a frozen meat trade despite the ethos of their organizations. They take the pragmatic view that it is significantly the lesser evil. That is a rather odd set of expectations.

Andrew Bartlett also actively campaigns in the Senate for a frozen meat trade, and has done so in the face of considerable rudeness from his parliamentary "colleagues" over many years. I have seen nothing in Hansard that reflects any personal preferences (I assume you are alleging that he allows his support for AA over your group to influence his political statements).

Expecting AA to get involved in importing meat workers from overseas is the most unreasonable of all. AA does not pretend to have any expertise in immigration matters, or in human resources practice such as recruitment and selection, and that's just a part of why such an expectation is so bizarre.

As far as "getting the farmers offside", with the exception of those like PF, I don;t think any of us gives a damn about that. We are talking of people who, rather than buy feed for their "stock", openly state that they will have them starve to death in paddocks if they can't get them on ships fast enough. Try that on a dog or a cat.

And there are also the unspeakable intensive pig and battery hen farmers. All groups are free to express their antipathy for these people in whatever way they choose. I do not always agree with some of the tactics, but I absolutely reapect their right to freedom of expression.

Finally, didn't HSI get a grant from Voiceless for their "certification" program? I suspect that what you are really after is someone to fund all this stuff you are proposing.
Nicky

Nicky
I have made it clear now three times I do not want to use Roberts Car Park To discuss animal welfare on a ongoing basis.
I will not be posting here anymore unless there is a problem of sorts the thread was set up for.
please consider not everyone is interested in this subject
I cant not be more clear. I have tried to be polite.
Your free to hail any group you like. I am fee also to express my concern at the fact your attitude towards farmers along with those you support is not helping. No we are not after funds from vioceless Nicky. I cant see any great difference in tasi after the funds given there. Its actually worse Nicky. Thats because your not addressing the problem . What we wanted was meetings between farmers and live importers that we were arranging. We would have liked the other groups to be prepaired to play a part in that. That means meeting people at air ports in the different states escourting them to the different farms to meet farmers at grass roots levels. This of course has already been rejected time and time again. Its very hard for us to know eacb state , local farmers and be in ten places at once.
There does not seem to be any point in arguing with you Nicky so I will just leave it.