So Ginx, now I'm not allowed to defend myself and I'm not allowed to have views, even though this site is the result of my blood sweat and tears and is so open and tolerant that it allows people to criticise me, like you and Severin are doing?

I am the author of the article. Severin decided to question my reporting and use of particular terminology. I responded.

She has since gone off on an irrelevant excursion on whether the asylum seekers are illegal immigrants or not. Wasn't my point. My point was that those who want tougher treatment of asylum seekers see them not as refugees but as immigrants. It is the noun, not the adjective, that carries the weight.

I think Horus' posts demonstrate another thing that I was pointing out. You use that sort of a high-handed approach and other people will dig in. He even puts illegal in caps.

It doesn't worry me that people like you and Severin use these sort of tactics. They bring their own reward, and it is not the one you want. I was just pointing that out.

And if you think that answering your criticism equals being "dressed down" then I guess that is how you must be feeling at the moment. Take a second to think how the people you "dress down" must also feel.

Horus,

Thank you for your measured, practical posts, you hit the nail squarely on the head. The problem is that some here have much shorter memories that the electorate.

General Comment,

The elephant in the room as far as the electorate is concerned is over-enthusiastic population growth through immigration and the broad range of problems that are known to result from that. The political parties and particularly the Greens are desperately hoping that no-one breaks out of the corral to talk about population because that would really blow the lid on things.

If Tony Abbott is game enough and he probably is, he could wipe the floor with both Labor and the Greens by making a reduction in Rudd's (and Gillard's) record immigration numbers. - Not a vague promise of 'maybe we will look at it sometime in the future' (the Greens), or possibly we could move some of the present population somewhere else to make room for more migrants in the big cities. What is needed is a simple, practical statement by Abbott that the numbers are unsustainable now and some reeling back is necessary.

That the overpopulation elephant is dangerous is easily seen from the devastating fall from grace by Kevin Rudd immediately following his boast of a 'Big Australia'. Julia Gillard is awake to the danger. That is why her statement about population was such an urgent priority. However with nothing concrete from Julia since, voters are thinking that Julia's promise was a convenient diversion, all talk and business as usual.

One thing I should have added but it escaped during cropping was that although I do agree with Horus' sentiments, there is also little doubt that labels like 'illegal' will detract from otherwise reasonable arguments.

<< And you have not yet taken into consideration the 170 people that have drowned trying to get here since Labor put out the welcome mat. >>

Good point Banjo.

<< So the sooner the boats are stopped the better. With all the half truths and stuffing around that is not likely to happen under labor. >>

That’s about the size of it. Good on Gillard for reversing Rudd’s terrible folly. But it really is not enough.

----
<< Apparently Ludwig's someone who'll switch his vote on the basis of which leader appears 'tougher' on asylum seekers. >>

CJ, I will be most unlikely to vote for either of them because they are both hooked into the continuous growth paradigm and very high immigration and population growth, which is a whole lot more important than the asylum seeker issue.

But yes, I am adaptable in my level of support, depending on what the two leaders say and what policies they put out. How about you? Are you totally fixed in your opinions of our PM and her counterpart? I would hope not.

"So Ginx, now I'm not allowed to defend myself and I'm not allowed to have views, even though this site is the result of my blood sweat and tears and is so open and tolerant that it allows people to criticise me, like you and Severin are doing?"

Where did I suggest you were not entitled to a view webmaster?
I would like to know.

IF-your website was as open and tolerant as you suggest, then you yourself would not be so offended by views that disagree with yours! IF-your website were so open and tolerant-there would be no need to mention that you 'allow' the views of myself and Severin.
___________________

"I think Horus' posts demonstrate another thing that I was pointing out. You use that sort of a high-handed approach and other people will dig in. He even puts illegal in caps."

THIS is unbiased comment by a website owner!? Praise for one criticism of the other?

"It doesn't worry me that people like you and Severin use these sort of tactics.."

'People like' me and Severin? Use these 'tactics'?
___________________________

"Take a second to think how the people you "dress down" must also feel."

Well I didn't expect them to spit the dummy, that's for sure!!
____________________________________________________

Cont'd (if I'm able to!)

2)

IF you were completely unbiased in your views on the subject of asylum seekers-this extraordinary exchange would never have occurred.

Far from 'not being allowed to have an opinion', you have used your ownership of this site as a weapon to ...dress down!.....those who expressed THEIR opinion of what you wrote.

EVERY writer has been/is subject to both negative and positive criticism, by posters on OLO. If your site is open and tolerant, then why are you attacking the poster/s who did the same with you?

Eg:-'High-handed/tactics/people like you..'

You belie your own 'charter'.

There is a large and increasingly strident criticism of any compassion being shown to asylum seekers by posters on OLO. Why is that?

Why do you think Graham, that some of your posters are quite succinct in their remarks?

It isn't rocket science!

Do you think the following line is just coincidence or is it born out of endorsement by you?:-

"Horus,

Thank you for your measured, practical posts,....."

What kind of equality have you shown to your member