Because I've banked with the ANZ for 46 years. So many things to do that organising another bank hasn't been at the top of my list.

Graham you would be a good candidate for Q&A to discuss matters of freedom of speech.

What about it ABC? (With Graham's permission of course)

It's enlightening to ponder and compare the difference between the freedom of expression accorded to an individual when contributing to a forum like OLO, and the relative difficulty of having a "letter to the editor" chosen for publication in a major newspaper.
In that case, one is completely at the mercy of editorial agenda of the said publication, not to mention the minuscule amount of space given over to public opinion in the average newspaper.

Jon J

Graham has taken far more flak for giving a platform to greenhouse scepticism than proponents of AGW – remember the Clive Hamilton episode? I guess one form of evidence for impartiality is if both sides accuse you of bias in favour of their opponents.

If you don’t like what an author says you can disagree freely in the forums. If you don’t like the balance of authors, suggest another – the range of (sometimes off-the-wall) articles from a wide range of perspectives suggests to me Graham tries hard to include a broad spectrum of opinion here. Isn’t that what keeps us coming back?

As to a bias in deletions, in many years of vigorous debate I’ve never had a comment deleted (so far as I remember) and have never recommended deletion of any comments for ideology or abuse (only spammers etc).

The key question here is whether anyone should try to choke off the funding of a website for hosting – not even advocating – a position they disagree with. This is a fundamental attack on free speech

more to the point alternative media outlets should have a weighting bias in favour of the minority view ipso facto , otherwise why bother

The hard fact is that sexuality in living organisms is not but a condition undefined in the interval between masculinity and femininity.

One, whose genetic make-up happens to be placed close to the middle of such interval in a society of humans, is given the name of gay (homophile or lesbian).

Biologists know that these names approximate a position in the sexuality range.

On a platform totally unrelated to sexuality lies the social construction called ‘marriage’; to some the cell of a sane society to others the germ of a rotten one.

When such platform is dismantled the sanity and the rot will disappear and so will this debacle, which has its roots in possessions (money) and privilege.

What is sad in this debacle is that the contenders sit on top of rigid poles equally spaced and erected vertically.

However OLO deserves to be kept going even if the editorial management has the bias clearly disclosed at the start or its activity.

A suggestion; Mr. Young, please updates your picture.