this is so so funny. Has the ABC announced yet that the latest mass murderer did it in the name of his god? With regular posters like Foxy and CJ to claim bias from Graham Y is the most silly I have heard for a long time. It's not April 1 is it? Just because Mr Rudd is spitting the dummy over being exposed over his gw scam does not mean everyone else is so blinkered.

runner, this was posted almost 8 hours ago.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/11/07/2736058.htm

You seem to be conflating so many issues ... what is your real problem?

GrahamY, you said "I do have a classical liberal philosophical point of view, and part of that point of view is that free expression is a good thing. So yes, I do have a bias. It is a bias that is a necessary prerequisite for a site like this to exist in the first place."

Do you mean your bias in favour of free expression or your bias in favour of classical liberalism? I seem to recall another thread where you suggested that OLO reflected your classical liberal views. I personally think that a wide range of political/ethical standpoints; from anarchism to secular humanism, would see a forum for the free exchange of ideas as a good thing. Indeed, it is only authoritarian doctrines (religious or ideological) that would suggest otherwise.

GY has spoken for himself, I think his case is a good one.
Suzeonline, you are a great gain for this site, I enjoy your contributions.
You highlight a freedom given [in my view] by this site.
Some appear to have issues such as those you mentioned.
Clearly they can be ignored or debated with, but not always will rational debate be achieved.
Now such as I often rush in and grab the bait, nearly did in the post above, one that seems to ignore GY post just to kick him for being who and what he is.

Specifically freedom of speech JohnJ. It isn't exclusive to classical liberalism, but that doesn't make classical liberalism irrelevent to my position.

Time for me to fess up,

Of course there is a bias, see my post "How much etc."
Is it a problem for me? Short answer No! I simply don't generally read the absurdly Liberal philosophical driven diatribes from the think tanks and that wanna be science journalist.

While GY may not have any motive in publishing them, the same can not be said for the actual authors but that's not really his problem.

I don't and never have thought of GY as some hell bent ideologue at least in his moderating etc. My take is he simply isn't, otherwise I would have picked up my puny intellect and moved on.

I saw the comment and wondered how wide spread it was and also wondered if some suggestions my ensue.

I have one really, to choose a wider range of topics. There is more to the debate about what is best for Australia than AGW, Freedom of speech (sic), asylum seekers, and political personalities and religion. Then again that's me. Either way, over all, GY does a good job with the resources at hand.