For those following this thread, now is an appropriate time to illuminate a problematic aspect of the interface of the twitterverse, the world of OnLineOpinion (OLO, for new viewers of what is fast becoming Australia's principal journal of record), and the real world of Australian government and governance.

This tweet by twitter userID 'LaLegale' (Legal Practitioner) is made by someone who clearly, as I do, wishes to maintain their online anonymity, and that probably for good reason: http://twitter.com/#!/LaLegale/status/132317386719236097

Here is my response, as twitter userID 'ForrestGumpp' ([people call me] Forrest Gumpp) on Twitter, to the question posed in her tweet as to the next step in getting Allan Asher reinstated: http://twitter.com/#!/ForrestGumpp/status/132338439969443840

Clearly, quite apart from the limitations to discussion imposed by the 140 characters of a tweet, there comes to be increasing difficulty in maintaining one's anonymity if one posts, incognito or not, on other sites, as, for example in emailing a journalist or a politician in respect of something upon which one has posted on OLO, or posting a comment to an online newspaper. Literary style alone can be a dead giveaway in that respect.

What is needed is a person of real credibility and no need of anonymity to carry the essential content as to the wrongfulness surrounding the forcing of Allan Asher's resignation from such online presentations as Asher's youtube video, and my posts here on OLO to, ideally, the Acting PM and, perhaps, the Governor-General.

The ideal go-between could well be Sir David Smith KCVO, AO. Sir David is a registered OLO user, occasionally posting under the userID 'DIS'. I'll grant that for an Acting PM a visit from Sir David at this time of year might be thought akin to one of the Grim Reaper himself, but the last thing anyone desirous of having this wound to Australia's body politic redressed is for those capable of fixing it to be able to say "I was unaware of this discussion" and let the window of opportunity close.

Could someone in Canberra approach Sir David on this?

10 days to 11/11/11

Oh gosh, a TYPO in my previous post!

Its not 10 days to 11/11/11. Its only SIX days. (Not counting today, which is half gone already.)

And the omission of the word 'needs' between 'redressed' and 'is' in the second-last paragraph.

It would be a real shame if people thought there was more time than there really was to avert something perhaps, as maybe recently darkly hinted at by the Green Senator Brown, apocalyptic.

`

11/11/11 is, of course, as not only Sir David Smith would be aware, the 36th anniversary of the 'big D', the Dismissal. Sir David has in past years had a fairly heavy speaking engagement schedule at around this date, so any approach to him to take advantage of this window of opportunity for a bloodless repair of a serious wrong done our national polity, should he be able/willing to assist, had probably better be made earlier rather than later.

I don't know what the prospects of success might be of the Acting PM facilitating a reinstatement, but I can hardly see the best Treasurer of the G20 group being carpeted by his Leader upon her return for removing this little embarrassment for her while she was away, away at a G20 conference, no less. Wouldn't look good internationally, I'm sure, for him to be 'canned' like that. So why wouldn't Mr Swan give it a go, and call upon the Governor-General to ask Allan Asher to reconsider his resignation?

`

SIX days to 11/11/11

Belly,

I saw this tweet transit my Twitter timeline, and couldn't resist posting a link to it for you, as you have made past mention of the fact that you don't have a Twitter account. It mentions your mate Bill. I know you like a little humour with your morning coffee, for you have told me so, as I was reminded only last night while I was poking about in my user history, looking for lots of things not to do.

http://twitter.com/#!/TommyTudehope/status/132322614143238144

Thanks for letting me blog on your topic (on topic of course). I'm finding it difficult to get to the answering of the titular question: there has been just so much stuff lying around in Hansard that exonerates the Ombudsman that I reckon should have been picked up on by the media, but wasn't. Laurie Oakes must be feeling quite vindicated, if that is the word, to see just about everything in his predictions made in the Andrew Olle Media Lecture illustrated in real life within days of it being delivered. If he's watching, that is. I have tried to give him a 'heads up' in respect to this matter, to which my tweet history bears witness, should he have even needed one.

So far, I haven't been able to see that SH-Y has done anything much, except be a Senator. There was nothing covert about the Ombudsman's approaching her as to his funding concerns, as can now be seen from the Hansard of his 23 September testimony. SH-Y's questions before the Estimates Committee seemed related only to what the Ombudsman had put before her, so so far I can't see that she has done anything wrong.

I'm curious as to how you formed your view so early on. Was it from the early media coverage alone, or from internal Party discussions or views to which you had access? I'm not asking you to breach any confidences, but it would be interesting to know.

`

Five days to 11/11/11

I can hardly imagine there would be many viewers of this thread these days, despite the attempt at throwing a spanner into the works of, as Laurie Oakes describes it, the news cyclone. Just in case there are, however, I'll try to provide a little summary and commentary on the progress of the tweetsquall related to this matter of public interest, the improper forcing of the Ombudsman's resignation.

Twitter has been for email what eBay has been for postal services. A Web1 tool given a new function by a Web2 development, the pair now 'en echelon', as it were, with 'sort of blogging' (monologues on otherwise dead forum threads), like what we occasionally have here on OLO.

The thing is, the email notification feature of Twitter allows one to keep one's finger upon the pulse-beat of an issue, and never miss a tweet of importance in the stream of information ever flowing past in the tweetstream that is one's Twitter timeline. Here are links to two tweets of importance to the non-Twitter-enabled viewership (the illtwitterate?):

http://twitter.com/ForrestGumpp/status/132917295688318976?iid=am-45140289413205734044653398&nid=6+status_timestamp&uid=29143498 It was re-tweeted by Allan Asher to 587 followers, the email tells me. It makes reference to the "real privilege issue", which sort of implies that somewhere there must be an 'unreal' privilege issue. Godwin's Law prevents me from amplifying here on OLO as to what I suspect that might be, but I sense it to be of the nature of a smokescreen, or maybe a red herring.

http://thttp://twitter.com/allanasher/status/133121041965924352?iid=am-156194753213205735045273725&nid=4+status_timestamp&uid=29143498 Senator Humphries was Chair of the Senate LCAR Committee at the time the privilege issue related to Allan Asher arose.

Bitte
En claire, en echelon, the info flows
To us, to all who really need to know
Twitter

And,for Belly, to go with the morning coffee, brevity being the soul of wit, a re-tweet of mine:

http://twitter.com/#!/trickyidnego/status/130103065545162753 Zagat was recently sold for US$151 million.

Interfacing the twitterverse.

`

Four days to 11/11/11

Forrest sorry I've not been finding much to add but have been keenly interested in what you have been posting.

R0bert

For some reason the second link in my previous post did not copy correctly. Here is the correct link, having been checked in 'post preview' first, like what I should have done in the first case:

http://twitter.com/allanasher/status/133121041965924352?iid=am-156194753213205735045273725&nid=4+status_timestamp&uid=29143498

For those who can't stand life in the clickstream mystified by all this, all the link was was to a tweet by Allan Asher in which he advised "I plan to speak with Senator Humphries as soon as I can make an appointment."

That promises to be at least one bridge between the world of pseudonymous opinionation/political commentary and the real world of governance. Let's hope there could be more such bridges in regard to this issue of public importance.

Come to think of it, Sir David Smith has contributed articles to OLO. I wonder whether it would be OK for GrahamY to send Sir David an email letting him know his (Sir David's) name has been being taken in vain on this thread? GrahamY should be in a good mood this morning because the article 'Scientific heresy' http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=12844 that he wishes he had written himself has scored the trifecta, topping 'Today's most popular','This week's most popular', and 'This week's most discussed' displays. For the record: http://twitpic.com/7bkum5

It seems only fair that OLO should advise an article author of the posting of comments on the Forum relevant to an article that that author may have already written, or be about to publish, what with a well known anniversary coming up and all that. How about it, GrahamY?

Speaking of anniversaries, 11 November is the 71st anniversary of the Royal Navy Fleet Air Arm night raid on the Italian naval base at Taranto in WW2. The Italian fleet was left in some disorder after it. Some think that raid convinced the Imperial Japanese Navy, looking on, of the success prospects of an air attack on Pearl Harbour.

`

Four days to 11/11/11