What a stupid thread for discussion, who cares who some far right crack pot nutter "nominates" as those he don't like or agree with.

Hi Foxy,

Don't feed the forum chook, Nursy has been on hols, down at the R.I.P Retirement Home for old farts, so the chooks haven't been getting their daily dose of 'Doz-Easy' tabs, they're been a bit cock-a-hoop with themselves lately.

I would like to nominate a bloke for the annual 'Turd Award' but I don't know his real name.

Hi Paul,

I'm trying to ofer an explanation to ttbn.
He's rejecting it.

I can't do any more.

I think that I will give up casting pearls before swine. This thread has attracted only OLO's leading oinkers.

ttbn,
Supposing, a few years back, Julia Gillard had come up with "the 'Anti-Australian of the Year ‘Boring Award’" and someone had posted her list of nominations on this board and asked you to make your choice, can you honestly say you wouldn't have rejected them all and nominated her?

Do you get it yet? It's not about understanding the difference between voting and nominating; it's about discerning which of them is the better response.

It may well be that in his article which you didn't even link to, nominations are already in. Clearly Paul Collits wants to set the agenda even though it's not an agenda that most Aussies would be willing to go along with. But on this board his nominations are no more valid than mine or Foxy's.

He's been discredited by his peers
Foxy,
Just like this Ridd fellow when he disclosed the doings of many in Academia !

Hi indyvidual,

This Ridd fellow was the climate deniers hero.
Whose case was supported by such luminaries as
Andrew Bolt and Rowan Dean and of course he
was helped in his funding by the IPA (Institute
of Public Affairs) et al. The High Court however
found that Ridd's conduct justified his
termination and the Institute of Marine Science
found flaws in his claims.