We've had a few discussions on the forum over the years about whether anonymity leads to more abuse or not. This article suggests we already should know the answer, because the South Koreans have the evidence: http://techcrunch.com/2012/07/29/surprisingly-good-evidence-that-real-name-policies-fail-to-improve-comments/.

OLO certainly has become a more polite space over the last years, but obviously it has nothing to do with anonymity, because we haven't changed our policy on that. It does appear to have something to do with eliminating some of the more abusive posters, C J Morgan being the most notable example, and our shaming policy where the spot where a deleted comment is replaced with a note saying that the comment has been deleted and giving a reason why.

But I'm still not persuaded that anonymity isn't a contributing issue to abuse on the net. It certainly seems from my online qual that people will say things online that they would never offline and that the lack of an offline reputation is part of that.

I did not realise that you 'eliminated' CJ Morgan, I thought he just died of cancer or something.

I will be much more wary of what I say in the future.

It's funny you say, because just the other I realised Facebook (FB) is like the missing link between online life, and real life. Once in awhile someone on FB will have a brain fart and blow whatever uncontrolled stream of subconsciousness all over someone's page damning the consequences. This is why FB began allowing you to delete what you post, some time back.

Anonymity definitely gives people a form of Dutch courage as they think, 'Hang on, I don't know you', and off they go. You'll find with discussion online, people will resort to using certain language/sarcasm/frustration MUCH quicker than they might having the same discussion at some gathering.

Great Topic Graham,

We have a Cyber bullying campaign http://www.voterland.org/watch_campaign.php?f1=70&random=1207411776 that asks if you support being Cyber smart and supported or enforce a mandatory ID and bully pays and to date most oppose mandatory ID as an invasion of privacy. This shows that many Australians are simply cowards without the courage to put their names to what they say. No wonder abuse and crime are so rampant and the destruction of businesses by hackers is seen as a bit of a joke. It is not hard to see why the swagman jumped into the billabong.

Good morning Graham:

...Anonymity is comfortable to most online posters I am sure. There are obvious benefits in anonymity for the poster. You mentioned in the previous discussion on the subject though, of a concern for liability of yourself in your role with OLO. Maybe this concern of yours needs to be addressed specifically here.

Cheers Dan...

I firmly believe that anonymity encourages abuse of a kind that few people would indulge in if they could be held accountable.
But there's another aspect to this.
It seems to me that if we wish to publicly express an opinion, and presumable seek to persuade others to agree with us, then we should accept personal responsibility for what we are asserting.
That is, in part, why I have always signed posts here and on other internet sites where I engage, either as a contributor or as a commentor.
Yes, I also benefit by promoting my blog, I freely admit that, but I've always put a link back to me even when I had nothing to promote, because I do think that this is an important principle.
If we aren't willing to be associated with our words, then we shouldn't make them public.
Anthony
http://www.observationpoint.com.au

its a red herring..
NO ONE is annon..online

its just a myth..[like the phone tracking thing we see on tv..now we know who is calling without answering the phone]]..securities agencies read our key's as we type..there is no annonoumouse..on line[in the bigger picture]..so no insult in not on a file somewhere..but if we knew we wouldnt post anything..but heck..posting freely..occasionally needs an alias*

even the agencies watching us know this
but if its written online...its in ya record*
[dont say you wernt told..there are no secrets..online

[nor in real life.;facial scanning /even retna scaming to get a licence in act/..retna scan isnt secure..[but then bigger issues get suppresed..like the banking scam..or insurance bird flue scams..one day the 144,000 may leave..but wont we just do the same?

end the lies..this year..practive the love of other charity
love god by trying to love al other[but for fact bless you wernt tempted

but then what next[see wikiseed/wikigeld thread]
full price buy back[plus costs]..a trible[not beurocratic] world govt via a mens and a womans council..underwrites ..and pays to fix/educate heal..

i feel our id choice..adds to our prophile
reveals too much...when we really dont even know the sex[just the word'.

Thanks for the thread Graham, in regard to C J Morgan, yes he died of cancer?
But while I regarded him well he was unable to understand SOME TIMES, others views.
Not up to date with what took place on that other site he started,once Forrest was not welcome I never went there.
This matter is not the same for every one.
And face book is no measure of what is right.
We have seen some truly bad results,even here from unwise naming one self.
Last time we had this debate I gave GY my full details,and had the honor to meet him by doing it.
I feel some will always try to insult from behind a tree.
I claim that I speak here as I do in any confrontation.
Not true however! two days ago a local told me his bill for a crematorium had a 25% levee! for carbon tax.
Aged and silly it would have done no good to tell him he was wrong!
Allan Belly Bell.

Well my comment about the Greens being whores to the Labor Party was deleted too but I was not banished from OLO.Sometimes anonymity allows a certain truth to emerge.

I used no specific label on an individual but painted a graphic picture of two parties who have betrayed a large % of our population.

These are times Graham,when the graphic truth needs to be expressed.

Yes, arjay, it was graphic.
And offensive and idiotic.
Anthony
http://www.observationpoint.com.au

Which comments in particular Anthonyve did you not like?

I certainly agree that anonymity encourages
people to post more openly on the web and
this probably does bring out the "dark side"
in some people. We've all read torrents of
abuse in the past ranging from all sorts of things
from the mild to the downright nasty -
that have been used to try to
undermine what others have written. But that's
to be expected on public forums. We've all suffered
from dummy spits when the right buttons are pushed
especially when dealing with emotive issues such as
politics or religion, et cetera.

As for C.J. Morgan. He wrote under his own name.
I personally found him to be one of the
most polite contributors to OLO. His death was a great
loss not only to his family but to many of us who counted
him as a friend - even though we never met. May he rest in
peace.

Arjay,
Calling a group of well intentioned people, a whore is what i was referring to.
Anthony
http://www.observationpoint.com.au

Arjay,

It was also incorrect, it is the other way round, Labor has bent over to accommodate the Greens not the other way around.

I will not be able to bypass the opportunity to take a shot at several posts here.
And admit to this, threads such as this should be measured before posting.
My ID is not secret, Forrest found me via the ham radio link.
But we, me too, get a bit macho we dump our name, to take a challenge/prove we are not afraid to do so.
But I constantly, warn about self protection online.
So its different for everyone.
No one rule can be set.
History is full of great people writing great books under names not their own.
Note however this, two posters took the opportunity to slam some one and just ,maybe taunt others with unrelated to subject posts.
Evidence for just a few others views do not matter and any one who differs is wrong.
Show me a link to party politics in this thread and I will with draw my claim.

Graham, I have no doubt that anonymity is a contributing factor to abuse, but I wonder to what extent.

Probably not a major one.

Don’t most people on OLO, who go under a pseudonym, desire to inform their friends and family of their presence on this forum?

How many people actually keep it entirely to themselves?

Surely no one… or very few indeed.

And therein lies the safeguard, as people would generally want to be seen to be reasonably level-headed and non-abusive to their friends.

There are exceptions but I think that this would generally apply pretty well.

White writing under one’s real name does add legitimacy and credence to your views, it is risky. There are nutters out there who might want to make life difficult for you. I found this when I was an avid letter writer to my local paper in the years before I joined OLO.

On OLO, one CJ Morgan went to the trouble of finding my true identity and appeared to be planning to make trouble for me, until I reminded him in no uncertain manner of the legal ramifications.

But OLO does seem like a nicer place these days, and I feel a little less concerned about that sort of thing.

I hope some read the link, as it was suggesting that anonymity didn't necessarily change posting styles. While I have thought that it would, it appears I may be wrong.

Dear Graham,

It is an interesting link (and thread), and anonymity must
surely play some part in people's posting styles
one would think. However, I'm sure that a person's
temperament and personality must also factor in there,
as well as their background and life experience -
their values, education, and so on.

I've seen some here who have tried to hide behind being identified.
The perception that because a real identity is known (and associations) that should protect the poster from criticism. Threats of legal action were not uncommon.

I'd find it hard to judge if anonymity encourages abuse, I suspect that overall not but for a small number of people possibly so. I've seen some vicious posters with pseudo-names and some posting under easily identifiable names.

I suspect that the consequences for standing by posted views in public would vary significantly from person to person. I don't want a potential manager being able to do a simple search and decide that they'd rather give the job to another candidate who's views align more closely with their own. I don't think I can legally discuss my own experiences in family law issues in a public space under a real name as that would then identify third parties.

I will happily express the same views in a private setting but in that situation I've got a far better idea who is listening, the trust factor is far higher. On line I've got no idea who is reading, what use some would be willing to make of what's said.

R0bert

Anthonyve refers to the Greens as," A group of well intentioned people." I disagree strongly.I've met both Jo Nova and Dr David Evans.They used to be part of this well intentioned Green Movement.

David Evans said by 1995 the science of CO2 causing AGW no longer supported the theory.Dr Evans wrote the computer models for our Govt to express this flawed theory.

The Greens suppport the UN Agenda 21 in which they want all property to belong to the state and to bring in "Global Governance." with a communist bent for the masses and absolute power for a few elites.

I've seen and heard Bob Brown on a number of occasions support this UN concept of one World Govt which Christopher Monckton and many others have warned us about.

Did the Greens ask us if we wanted George Bush's "New World Order" that we have no democratic say in? The Greens have been treacherous liars who in my view are in the pockets of big finance.The CO2 tax is all about making money for the few and establishing another derivative called the ETS to destroy production.

Notice how quiet the Greens are on the issue of fracking,clean water and food security.These are the big issues not CO2 a harmless,odourless gas that is the basis of all life on this planet.

We are not really anonymous no matter what pseudonym we use,since all out intelligence agencies can trace every email.

I read the link on Friday, GrahamY and was surprised at the conclusions from the experiments – they do seem counterintuitive.

There's probably a big difference between posting anonymity and poster 'untrackability' – I have no problem with moderated postings with the confidence of knowing 'authorities 'could track down a person in real life if circumstances warranted it. The British diver Tom Daley's recent experience with an abusive Twit being an example.

Putting abuse to one side… Anonymity certainly doesn't discourage public idiocy in some, though I suspect that for those same individuals it doesn't encourage it either – there being no need to.

Foregoing some imbeciles that respond maliciously by rote to any impeachment of their thought process, a realistic statement on the capacity of your current interlocutor’s ability to convey facts and projections is sometimes called for. One man’s Ad Hominem is another man’s orchestration of a fact. The prohibition of any view, be it holistic or personality focused is detrimental to free expression.

Forum admin should consider the closed club syndrome. Our instincts see posters form quasi interpersonal relationships bonding them into a “pecking clutch” and they then as a corium determine the tone and the limitations of the forums subject matter. I was a foundation poster on Darwin and later watched it decline to just two factions, the direct opposites, it took years but they ran everybody out of town because they just regurgitated the same diatribe, so the thinkers left.

Yin does not exist without yang but OLO is composed of “just” yin and yang. Pauline Hanson would have no chance with this mob. Forums that cater to political and social issues as addressed on OLO cannot suppress the interpersonal observations without suppressing expression. The ones who survive best in this climate of forum tribalism are the passive aggressive acolytes. How do you combat one who solely relies on a regurgitation of non facts coupled with an innate inability to address publish statistics pertinent to the subject? You question their capacity to reason, you consider factual dyslexia via indoctrination, you consider the worth of the utterances they convey. Then you point out your personal observation that they are idiots, you don’t carry it as theme, but you are sometimes drawn to mentioning it in passing.

Good whinge eh Graham. As I have intimated if you want a cordial and compliant forum try a gardening themed page, otherwise give latitude to the sometimes sledgehammer manner in which a vote of no confidence in what one says or thinks is delivered. Bring back CJ Morgan.

Sonofglion is one of a very few, why claim a tribalism exists here.
In my view it does not.
I know one poster here,you have never seen me talking to him here.
No problems between us ex workmates, but with different thoughts.
It is what we write how we say it, that gets us judged, not a click.
I understood Grahams post, and think, strongly, only few take the opportunity to be rude because we do not know them, very few.
I recommend a search, find the car park, number one, the oldest is best, but both tell of near war here.
While such threads may find more who dislike them, I think the taking it out side bit has promise.
I think the greens are a very real danger, but the uninformed, needlessly rude descriptions here need rebutting.
Some, once again, find them selves on the outer because of posts like those.

Proof on whether anonymity encourages abuse

Well, it definitely encourages one to get a lot hotter than normal. PC is largely responsible for the occasional strong word as it prevents people from airing their true feelings.

I can't help wondering how much anonymity has to
do with people's posting styles. It may be a
contributing factor to abuse - but it may also be due to
the tendency on some people's parts to think that
their way is the right way and that people who disagree
with them are simply wrong /and or bad.

As I've pointed out in the past - the art of
reasoned, intelligent argument is a skill not easily
acquired. Sound reasoning will conquer unreasonable
generalisations every time.

For instance if arguing
over politics don't say, "All conservatives are stupid,"
this makes you appear to be arguing on an emotional
level - not a mature intelligent one. A more efective
approach would be a subtle hint that some conservatives
may not be making intelligent decisions in their line of
work in Opposition. This response may be unlikely
in the heat of the moment but it has more chance of
winning you points in the discussion. The same would
apply if you were to say, "All unions are corrupt."
Not a very fair statement either.

After all - no likes, or supports an abusive, illogical or weak
debater. Perhaps it would be better if we all read what we wrote
before posting or better still - give our posts more thought
before sending.

Lexi your post is quite true.
But I think we are over cooking this subject.
GY put a point with a link.
We got the staggers a bit and went sideways.
But just maybe we are looking for something no longer seen here.
Reading things from say 4 years ago maybe.
And I would target a few, very few now, and put myself in the same sin bin.
But robust debate is not abuse.
Here I go again, PC demands I do not do this, but free speech calls for it.
A few always any site, are doing the best they can, see? turned coward! they know no better.
Gets hard, very much so, when they call us fools!
Often snipe at any one, little narky things,single paragraph posts aimed at? who knows.
A control thing lives in the average one of us, we pull back, even in our most heated moments, some lack that skill.
Over all we are not doing too bad some of my harshest critics have my respect.
And while I get heated and yes rude, I know, with certainty, I am often wrong, better ways exist to fix things than my thoughts.
But that difference that divides us is the fuel that drives us.
CJ Morgan was a mate, he did take his views to extremes sometimes warning me if I did not stop talking anti green I would be sent to Coventry.
I miss his contributions

Well, I for one have no problem with anyone knowing who I am, even where I live.

It is no secret that my passion is IR, but I find it frustrating at times when I get accused of not knowing what I am talking about, especially when I have been an employer for in excess of thirty years.

During my thirty plus years, I have witnessed a deterioration in the relationships between workers and bosses, mainly due to governments policies of trying to make one size fits all IR policies, mainly from labor governments.

It's funny how so many are anti work choices, yet, our country boomed during this period of very flexible IR policy.

For me the most irritating part about OLO is that so many posters are perceived experts, yet they have lived their entire working lives, as workers, relying on someone else to take risks.

Then there has been the growing setiment amoung many of, 'it's my given right to expect a good job, with good pay and conditions, that suit me', giving little to no regard to the well being of the workplace.

As for anonymity, my opinions would be no different if I were to meet face to face.

As for fellow posters, I have respect for all, and feel I'll of no one, although I am finding OLO a tad boring of late.

Dear Belly,

I don't have a problem with robust discussions and
as I've stated in the past a healthy, vital society
is not one in which we all agree. My views are not set
in concrete - and I've had many re-thinks on quite a
few issues since becoming a contributor to OLO.
Each of us goes through transitions and transformations.
The important thing is that we acknowledge them and
learn from them. I certainly don't have all the answers.
I'm still on my own road to discovery. However, I've met
some amazing people on this forum and this is what keeps
me posting here.

Belly>>Sonofglion is one of a very few, why claim a tribalism exists here. In my view it does not.<<

>>Some, once again, find them selves on the outer because of posts like those<<

Can't have it both ways Belly my china, in one breath you claim no tribalism while decribing me as seperate from the whole, relegating me to “one of a very few”. Then in the next statement you play passive aggressive by suggesting that posters that don't suit you "find themselves on the outer." Make up your mind chief.....Just kidding, you have the right to say whatever you want Belly.

Getting back on task, what about the human trait of being more honest and direct at a distance. For example, I suspect that most people would be more comfortable delivering bad news, or a negative assessment, over the phone rather than face to face. It is about seeing the body language and facial expressions now coupled with the verbiage that makes most of us feel further discomforted. Unless we are sociopaths we feel a compunction to soften the message when we are face to face having to deal with the distress and response in three dimensions.

Although I do have empathy, I do not feel this way. If you are literate a spade is a spade excepting in the case of youth or inexperience where tutelage rather than sledgehammer factual enforcement is the best tool.

Given this I would venture that an open forum would elicit a more direct un garnished response than face to face dialogue. Whether it is abuse or a negative assessment the blade delivered from a distance is sharper.

Dear rehctub,

For what it's worth -I've understood where
you're coming from in your posts as an employer.
And although I may not agree with everything you
post, I certainly understand your position and
respect your experience.

PS
Unless the place gets too chummy, then directness gives way to interpersonal commitments and nothing is challenged vigorously.

Given that GrahamY has mentioned CJMorgan (Seajaye, as I in part, in the past, used to refer to him by title, rather than OLO userID or name), I too will raise his OLO ghost.

Bugsy, in the second post to this thread, in response to GrahamY, says:

"I did not realise that you 'eliminated' CJ Morgan,
I thought he just died of cancer or something."

In the eighth post to the thread, Belly, on Friday, 3 August 2012 at 4:48:54 PM, asks, seemingly by way of seeking confirmation of Seajaye's demise:

"..., yes he died of cancer?"

By the 12th post, Lexi, on Friday, 3 August 2012 at 8:12:25 PM appears to have accepted Seajaye's demise as fact in saying:

"... His death was a great loss not only
to his family but to many of us who counted
him as a friend - even though we never met.
May he rest in peace."

I sometimes wonder whether people actually read what is posted in some of these discussion threads. Does Lexi know of Seajaye's passing from some independent source outside this thread, or do we see before us a case of Chinese whispers in action?

Remembering Seajaye, I must correct Belly's misunderstanding that I was not made welcome at Seajaye's website 'Cyberia'. This post may clarify things: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4109#102227 A link to a Twitpic of a screenshot of my computer shows what one had to do to even show up at the gate, let alone be admitted, to Cyberia. See: http://twitpic.com/37730o

I felt my online anonymity may have been compromised had I tried to go further into Cyberia, given Seajaye's oft stated views disparaging posting under pseudonyms. Literary style, in my opinion, is always a dead giveaway, no matter what pseudonym or soquepuppetrie to which one may take resort. One poster, Shintaro, I think found to be a sock puppet by GrahamY, took resort to the Haiku format to perhaps prevent the emergence of literary style.

An interesting topic.

Dear Forrest G.,

The following link may clarify things for you:

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4712

Try page 11 to 16.

I find the practice of denigrating someone who has died and can't defend themselves abhorrent, unless of course they actually committed a heinous crime.
CJ never upset me on this forum I don't think, and I actually liked many of his posts. If Lexi felt the same way, then I am sure he was ok!
Rest in peace CJ.

I really don't believe that anonymity encourages any more abuse than if they used their real name on this forum.
The abuse comes out in all abusers eventually, whether they use their real name or not. You can see it in their style of writing.

It's as well that this forum is so strict on actual swearing and personal abuse, otherwise it wouldn't be so popular.

Dear Suse,

Thank You.

Any time Lexi :)

I meant to add that I am glad that we can post under anonymity on this forum.

There are many aggressive and mentally unbalanced individuals out there in cyberspace who would love to know how to find writers of posts they don't like....

I know the history of CJM, Forrest the question mark was a question was it cancer or something else.
Never went to that site, after finding you unacceptable never wanted to.
A point, if we stood together in a say party, each would show some reserve.
We would be mentally looking and trying to put the mental picture together with our minds ones.
Some would be disappointed, some not.
As we tendered to differ most, would ,for peace sake, back off.
Its human nature.
Am I right in thinking protocol in the written word is different?
That as we put more effort in we stick closer to our true thoughts?
I will have a go, Rechtub, you and I have been close to mates here, I respect you.
But so far very little of what you say, is the truth worth it?
Look we probably would get on well, but that is the way it is.
SONOFGLION!well remember my talk about the Irish? Shean is one of my past parentage.
I love the Irish, the built my party union country,and can be some, mad as hatters!
I trust your reported past links to my party, honor them, but not your thoughts on them.
Yet in truth we think, very often the same,no room for me or you in the ALP PTY LTD we see today, see we are workers!
Every time we differ, often, it does not mean we are enemy's ok?
I promise you!on matters of boat people refugees and middle eastern migrant enclaves I have lost Friends HERE!
For saying what I truly think.
Are we strong enough to be honest here?
Or do we do the social shuffle like at that party? faking sincerity and living a lie.

Thank you, Lexi, for your info in your post of Sunday, 5 August 2012 at 4:01:36 PM. I had no idea that Seajaye had passed away. I had thought that there had come to be a parting of the ways between him and OLO, but not one occasioned by passage through the veil.

Just a little spooky that it is one year to the day from his passing, on 5 August 2011, that we are discoursing in his remembrance, whether that was known in advance, or, as in my case, not.

The Courier Mail link proved to be of little definitive help, with the only Christopher . Morgan, deceased, being one Christopher Paul Morgan who died in early 2012. However, the Stanthorpe Border Post of 2 August 2012 contains an 'In Memoriam' notice for a C.J.Morgan who died on 5 August 2011. See: http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/warwickdailynews-au/obituary.aspx?n=cj-morgan&pid=158877900#fbLoggedOut

Seajaye always said he lived somewhere in the Granite Belt.

It seems, Lexi, you were not guilty of Chinese whispering in this respect. I apologise for any inference that you may have been. For all that we may have approached many subjects from different angles, Seajaye and I shared a genuine mutual admiration for satire. Hence the honorifics I heaped upon him from time to time. He deserved them, and I was only too happy to bestow them!

In memory of Seajaye, we should note that there are not just nutcases out there, but WINGNUT cases, all giving good reason to preserve our respective anonymities. May Seajaye, the Lord Dymo, Thread Labeler-in-Chief of OLO, Scourge of all the Wingnuts, rest in peace. http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4082#101818

Old CJ was an enigma if ever there was one. He implored people to write under their real names, but he was such a rude respondent while writing under his real name, with the worst level of false assertions made against people that I’ve seen from any poster on OLO.

And I didn’t cop it half as bad a poor old Daggett!

Sorry Suse, but a spade is a spade.

I told him as much many times. And so did many others, copiously. But to no avail.

For a long time we were good OLO buddies. I referred to him affectionately as Ceej in many posts. But ultimately he had to insist on having a fractured relationship, despite us having a lot of common ground.

So I guess it comes down to a person’s nature as to whether they are a tactful respondent or not, rather than if they write under ‘spewdonym’ or their real name.

Anyway, I choose to remember the friendly CJ, with whom I had lots of good OLO barter.

.

He passed away one year ago today. Wow, that is a little bit eerie.

RIP old mate.

Ceej, Seajaye, Wingnut, The lord dymo, "get help Ludwig".

Hehehehe. He did indeed inject some life and spirit into old OLO!

I never place myself as other than the middle of our pond here in OLO.
Welcome new posters, we once all did, because it should be so.
And I ruffle feathers.
Is truth ok?
Should we contain our views?
Over night Lexis reply to Rechtub, his post above it, my answering post, bought me concern.
See I remain unconvinced, forever,that any one who utters complaints about wage rises penalty rates back packers taking our jobs, unions unionism, knows every thing about IR.
Rechtub tells us we are getting boring.
Yet are we?
I find it hard work, trying to talk issues out with him, he can not take criticism!
ANY rebuttal of his view is seen as attack.
Yes, I was a Union official! an HONEST ONE.
My union the best this country has, was named scab! by the radicals.
Because we, with our members with us, heard the bosses side.
Rechtub tells us he is unafraid to be known, but has not and should not,told us.
I believe nothing is to be gained by naming our selves, but that some times great danger can come from doing so.
I had a wild man,an insane man, with a history of just that, on my door step, sent by another.
While old I am not the man he expected and he left fast, be aware,others have told you, some true idiots are out there.
And Rechtub, mate, know every opinion has value, but it varies.

Dear Forrest,

I'm glad to have been able to fill in some details
for you regarding CJ Morgan's death. I had assumed
that you didn't know. There's quite a few posters
who have disappeared from ths shores of OLO. CJ's
the only one that I know of who died. I wonder if
anyone knows what's happened to Pelican?

Dear Belly,

There's many people on this forum with whom we may not
agree however thankfully very few people stoop to really
nasty behaviour like some of the comments that I've
been reading on Gay Marriage by Peter Sellick in the
articles thread. It appears that the issue of same-sex
marriage is a really emotive one for some people.

We can only hope pelican is ok Lexi.
Same sex is always going to be a hard subject.
I agree let them have a form of wedding and equal rights.
I live in close proximity to female same sex enclave, and while asking for their rights protecting mine too.
Mine not to be picked, on because of my sex, it happens, and to avoid them as I would ANY controlling group.
Our main issue here seems, to me at least, to be a very few who dislike the value others put on thoughts posted here.

Belly ,you are the personification of tribalism.According to you,Labor can do no wrong and Unions always have the well being of their members upper most in their policies.

I trust no political party or large organisation.They all have one singular purpose,ie the well being of those who have grasped the reigns of power.

Our system has become totally corrupted and people like you are part of the problem.

Alas, I miss CJ. I rather enjoyed his comments.

On the anonymity issue:

I imagine that for some people, having to reveal their true identities would certainly tone down their commentary, but it would have other effects. I certainly wouldn't comment on certain topics I find interesting, because my employers might not be keen on it.

If said so before as well - those who have nothing to lose don't mind real-name registration, but those employed in certain positions risk more. In certain instances, these people can have important input as their work can inform their commentary.

In the past I got more entangled in debates on OLO, though now I just find it pointless and tiring. Somewhere along the line I found that there wasn't much point as often those debating didn't care how many sources or links you could find to back your claims, they'd just revert to their initial stance.

Now I rarely descend into mud-slinging.

... I make an exception for Arjay though, because frankly, I'm not entirely convinced he's not engaging in some kind of brilliant satire. I prefer that theory to believing he's actually become such a caricature of a conspiracy theorist. By this point, I wouldn't be surprised if he began suggesting tinfoil hats to combat American psy-ops, possibly in cahoots with the Illuminati.

Garn. Tinfoil hats! Psy-ops! Obama! CIA! Trilateral commission! What can you put together for us?

arjay, good morning my sad Friend.
A truth exists here that goes over your head.
In truth every one who has seen me get heated here rest assured you in truth have not!
I am the owner of a bad temper, have spent half my life trying to control it.
And have here.
Let these facts speak for me, I have never, and never will, told arjay just what I Think of him.
His understanding of issues, ability to think clearly,.
But arjay you, not me, fight my fight for me!
And win it handsomely! for that I thank you.
ANY OBSERVER knows just by my post history!
I take to Labor/Unions, almost every day!
I DEMAND! on behalf of THE MOST IMPORTANT PEOPLE IN MY WORLD the members and supporters of both!
Improvement and accountability.
Arjay, sit quietly and think, take a break drink your coffee or tea.
Then post, now stop, no NO! think! if I answered you with the thoughtless rant you posted,would this site become just another low class graffiti wall?
I reserve my right not to *EVER* abuse you,you add color to the place.
Say some thing controversial mate! so we can have an argument!
I take no offence at the rant and hope others understand.

Arjay my compatriot in conspiracy, it was a bit of a surprise to see you hook into Belly, I thought that was my gig, lol. Don’t concern yourself with the thoughts of those who only “see” what they are told.
I think it is time for a core conspiracy thread.

Sonofglion! read my HSU blue color view thread,read my Gillard what do you think one.
Look at the calm before the storm.
Then ANY thread about my party, that did not see me demand better.
Our arjay adds color here, nothing he says makes sense,but he entertains us.
You entertain me!
I like puzzles.
Still trying to put you together, can you lend me this missing pieces?
Leg pulling mate!

Belly I don’t know “what” the Labor party is anymore and I can say the same of the Coalition to a lesser extent. The convergence of political parties of the left and the right in first world nations simply because they struggle to be all things to all people is disorientating. Each side has given ground on the manifestos that built the original parties. I don’t give a tinkers cuss about the Coalition excepting for their fiscal policies, but the loss of the “old true believers” Labor party genuinely distresses me.

The only solution to my mind is something that I know you hate….Remember the DLP split Belly? To gain any credibility back there has to be a statement of change via a purging of the lawyers and barristers that hijacked the party and replaced the suburban beer with an inner city chardonnay. But I doubt that there is even a core of old style true believers left in the party’s apparatchik. There are many left in the rank and file, but they are dying out with their generation and the new Labor fodder has a strong tinge of green running through it given they are the politically correct generation.

That you stick to the party even though the faults and treachery is obvious is what I think Arjay was alluding to. You can knock them all you like, call Gillard for the self serving creature she has morphed into, but you will still vote for them tiger.

SOG yes your criticisms are clearly true.
Until you bring arjay in to the discussion and brand me wrong for sticking.
Consider this, it is my view no poster, LIBERAL CONSERVATIVE GREEN, has been more damming of the ALP than me.
I damn them not for policy's but procedure.
For the very thing you dislike most, the take over by middle to high income/class, of my birth right.
I think your charge is, why vote Labor?
In the next year, yes still,the events leading up to the near death of NSW ALP at the hands,[must it always be so?] of CRIMINALS who bring power from ethnic groups will blacken us.
The products of mating flys are known, have been for decades,and the whole now pays for the crimes the fools gave them power to do.
Both sides have such.
A thought, how many times have you and arjay seen me speak like that?
Could it be in doing so I am REPRESENTING THE TRUE BELIEVERS?
Demanding the sun shine returns?
SOG what are the benefits in changing my vote?
Do you see shattering the anti conservative vote as Greens have of benefit to any one?
Let Liberals, using the votes you say we should give them, do what they dream of, rule by right of birth forever.
While you share arjays dyslectic 9/11 views reality is history will remind us all, trouble and all this ALP has delivered again, true change of benefit to our country and the true believers.

Did anyone watch "Q and A," on Monday night?
It was telecast from Brisbane with a Brisbane
audience and it was a very interesting show.
There certainly seems to be quite a lot of
dissatisfaction in "Paradise," under "Can Do,"
Newman. There certainly was a huge divide between
George Brandis (Liberal) and Craig Emerson (Labor),
on the panel. And as someone pointed out -
"It's all very well to have budgets in surplu -
however then you have communities in deficit.
Don't people matter any more?

How will it change Belly, the same powerbase that runs Sussex St runs the party.

They are all duds my fair Lexi. The committee that Newman appointed to sort out the coal seam gas vandals are, bar two, apologists for the mining industry. Newman’s a dud, as was his Labor predecessors. We have Barry O'Liar running NSW and nothing has changed, vested interest is catered for as the plebs watch promise after promise do a 180.

Note this well Belly and TRTL.I do not e deal in conspiracy theory.It is conpsiracy fact backed up by connected events,truth and logic.

International central bankers control the West.They create from nothing all the money to equal our increases in productivity + inflation as debt.We are their debt bitches who are totally indentured and enslaved by them.Our ATO are merely another agent of these central banks who collect all the money to pay for the debt we should not be in.

If private central banks can create money from nothing to equal our growth,why cannot our RBA do likewise and reduce our taxes by half.We could have debt free infrastructure like China,but no,our own Govts have sold us out to a private cartel of banksters.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/obeid-son-likely-to-avoid-166m-council-debt-20120808-23un2.html
Why do I post this link? it highlights indeed SPOT LIGHTS the filth within my party.
Not to prove arjay and SOG are wrong,they do not matter.
Not to prove my statements about my true nature, that does not matter believers will believe others not.
As my party puts NSW in its past, John Robinson a man of honesty is doing that.
As we face the loss, it will be so, of the NT AND Tasmania, contaminated by the green/Labor [right way round] air wasting gang.
I remind the folk fighting for their self interest over the bones of my party they need to read and understand.
The free feed is over!
They feast on a table made up of the dreams and aspirations of the folk they stole the party from.
To day is the start.
Of rebuilding the ALP.
Vermin from the HSU/ALP/Sussex street are doing more damage to our brand than Tory's!
fix it!

Belly I agree that Robertson is cleaner than most politicians. The sale of the union kid’s holiday camp was a bit sleazy, the developers got it for half the market rate, that was his doing and it was shifty. As you know he pushed for the election of parliamentary representatives to be a rank and file plebiscite and that is a positive move, if he can get it in.

Belly just about the Obeid thing, tribalism corrupts. In last Sundays paper a Caucasian Liberal member was whinging that an influx of Middle Easteners were stacking his branch. He whinged about them having their discusssions in Arabic. So your party is not the only one sought out to gain a power base by the culture that now lives within ours.

Sonofglion that sale was well under way before Robinson took over.
Truly bloke,much of the mud throwing was just that, no substance.
If the rest followed him? what a good thing it would be!
As for O,bead? lets leave Liberal dirt out of this,well aware of it but!
Obied lead a faction, he owned the votes!
He is, was and always will be a criminal.
I taste in my mouth a bitterness every second of every day!
Knowing , with one other, he used the power generated by union members and Branch's, to BETRAY THEM!
Open the wound let it run freely, not continue the betrayal by miss using that word I despise.
One that now means exactly the opposite to its once meaning.
SOLIDARITY.