What is God?
It's a little annoying at the beginning, but if you make it to the end it is really worth it.
Makarrata
The First Nations Peoples have spoken.
I fully expected this result.
And I wholeheartedly support it.
And I wholeheartedly support it.
Unfortunately, any changes to the Australian constitution needs to go to a referendum and allow the tyranny of the majority an opportunity to vote it down.
Any opposition needs to be quashed!
No ifs, no buts.
This is not a decision that should be left in the hands of ill-informed, bigoted, racist people to deny the first peoples their rightful voice.
There should be no debate.
Zero debate.
Zero debate.
It simply needs to happen.
The First Peoples of our nation have decided on the only pathway to assure their sovereign futures and it is our responsibility as fellow human beings to support this absolutely, resolutely, unequivocally.
We should look to our neighbours for enlightenment and with great humility acknowledge that the chosen pathway will have very little effect on our individual lives but will do an infinite greatness for all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders.
I stand with my indigenous brothers and sisters, united as Australians, to say that this is your moment and I know you will shine through the struggle that lies ahead, knowing that it is nothing compared to the many great struggles that are behind you.
You have spoken and my ears have heard.
If there are marches, you will have my feet.
When you face opposition, you will have my voice.
And if the country splits you will have my allegiance.
That is my Makarrata with you.
When We Rise
When you speak of heroes I don't imagine soldiers in uniform on a battlefield, even though they risk their lives.
And I don't think of firefighters, police, doctors, or nurses who are amazing every day by saving lives.
And I scoff at the thought of that footballer you put on a pedestal and award a medal for having the right combination of genes and training.
No. They are not my heroes.
When I think of a hero I remember the slaves that sang their way to freedom, the women that demanded suffrage, the voices that echoed around the world against segregation and apartheid, those that rallied against war, the patrons of Stonewall and the 76ers, and those that fight for refugees today.
When you talk of heroes I think of all those that have risen up against tyranny, oppression, discrimination, bigotry and injustice armed only with their voices, their placards, their mortal bodies.
Those are my people.
They are my heroes.
Lifestyle choices: the reality behind a PM's gaffe
The Prime Minister has come under fire for yet another verbal gaffe by referring to remote indigenous communities as being a "lifestyle choice". But what does this really mean, and is our much maligned PM a bumbling fool or is he correct? Definitely the first, but probably both.
The term "lifestyle choice" is fraught with danger. It is the favoured pejorative of the anti-homosexual campaigners, the phrase used to denigrate someone's core being and dismiss them as insignificant or to blame them for the discrimination they face, the illness they acquire, and the difficulties they encounter through life.
For that very reason the phrase should never be used by a public official as a political tool to wield like an axe for budget cuts. We are still dealing with human beings who need empathy and deserve solutions that will lift them up, not cast them aside.
Just for the moment I'm going to work with the intent of our misspoken PM, in context, and give him the benefit of the doubt that he rarely ever deserves, rather than joining the angry mob relaying the inferred and emotive response of the media and the left leaning public.
So I say this with much thought and unrelenting candour: for some people, living in a remote community IS a lifestyle and it is a choice.
Just like the family working a drought stricken farm or moving to a mining town, just like choosing between suburban life or a CBD apartment; to marry, or not; to have children, or not; to practice religion, or not. Each of us makes numerous choices every day of the year that determine the lifestyle we lead.
For some that decision to remain in a remote community without employment, with low quality housing and poor access to essential services might also be a choice. But we must also recognise that for others it is a rut, a crutch, or a death sentence from which they might desire to escape.
Just because you are born in a place, doesn't mean you need to stay there, even if you feel tied by family, culture, country, or the fantasy of the dreamtime, which is a religion in all but name. The choice to stay or leave still belongs to the individual.
Nobody should be forced from their home or land, yet there are many instances where the best interests of the individual require authorities to step in and force relocation. The octogenarian battling dementia can no longer live alone in their home of 60 years and is relocated to a nursing home; the children that are removed from an abusive family; the town of Wittenoom evacuated because of continuing asbestos concerns.
I am not suggesting that indigenous people in remote communities should be forced to relocate, but perhaps we can provide significant incentives to encourage them to seek better opportunities, for themselves and their children. Relocation assistance, jobs and housing could be the ticket to a better life if only the opportunity was available. Alas, the current system is insufficient as an incentive to overcome the strong ties to country and the issues of intergenerational poverty that goes with it.
At the very least we should take Warren Mundine's suggestion of creating regional boarding schools where children can attend and then return to their communities for weekends. This can help ensure that appropriate education and health levels for children are attained while giving families and communities the long term opportunity to develop, become sustainable and even flourish.
The future of our indigenous Australians in remote communities is currently bleak, but it can be powerful. We need a government that is willing to step up and work with communities to incentivise positive outcomes, rather than cast blame or legislate penalties for negative outcomes.
We all have a right to make our lifestyle choices, but society works best when the playing field is designed so that everyone can be assisted to make the choices that are best for them.
10 terrorist targets that are better than Parliament House
Our politicians are worried about their workplace being a potential target for a terrorist attack so they have beefed up security to make themselves feel better and our citizens safer, or at least the few thousand that work and visit each day can feel a little more safer than they otherwise would have going through the layers of security that already existed before the #TerrorHysteria invaded.
As much as many of us would enjoy seeing the demise of a few upon Capital Hill, we actually like our billion dollar flagpole and some of the people we elected to sit under it. So, with tongue firmly planted in cheek, I offer the dummies guide to 10 better targets for prospective terrorists to leave their mark on Australia.
10. AFL/NRL clubs or stadiums
You can't get much more Australian than sport, and you won't get more Australians enlisting in the defence force to fight against your fundamentalism than if you target their beloved national religion. It's also one of the few places you can be assured of getting tens of thousands of innocent people in one location as well as live media coverage of your attack sponsored by alcohol, gambling, interest charging banks or burgers with crispy bacon. But be careful of which team you target; an attack on Collingwood might get you more thanks than vitriol, especially if you take out Eddie McGuire in the process.
As much as many of us would enjoy seeing the demise of a few upon Capital Hill, we actually like our billion dollar flagpole and some of the people we elected to sit under it. So, with tongue firmly planted in cheek, I offer the dummies guide to 10 better targets for prospective terrorists to leave their mark on Australia.
Graphic sourced from www.smh.com.au
10. AFL/NRL clubs or stadiums
You can't get much more Australian than sport, and you won't get more Australians enlisting in the defence force to fight against your fundamentalism than if you target their beloved national religion. It's also one of the few places you can be assured of getting tens of thousands of innocent people in one location as well as live media coverage of your attack sponsored by alcohol, gambling, interest charging banks or burgers with crispy bacon. But be careful of which team you target; an attack on Collingwood might get you more thanks than vitriol, especially if you take out Eddie McGuire in the process.
9. Australian Christian Lobby
As its name implies this is a lobby group comprised mainly of conservative, fundamentalist pseudo-Christian fanatics. It has been often argued that they may be one of the most, if not the most, influential lobby group in Canberra. They regularly garner the attention of politicians from both sides of the House to speak at their functions and conferences, where issues like abortion, sexuality, marriage and the sanctity of the 'family' unit is never up for negotiation. Please, take them. We don't like them either.
8. The Tall Poppies
Basically we would like those on our rich list to be taken down a peg or two:
Rupert Murdoch - he still thinks he is Australian and is able to influence our politics even though he technically doesn't get a vote.
Gina Reinhart - amongst other things she is renowned for the fourth worst poetry in the universe, unless you believe the rumours that she is actually a Vogon, in which case she rises to third place.
Andrew Forrest - seems to mean well, but can't keep his pesky nose out of Gina's anal gland and seems to have an unbelievable simplistic solution to every social and welfare issue known to humanity.
7. Catch the Fire Ministries
As one of the most deplorable and bigoted 'Christians' in Australia, particularly focusing his hate speech towards Islam and homosexuality, Pastor Danny Nalliah is deserving of a fatwa, a jihad, a crusade or an untimely death from venereal ebola. He is the founder and President of an evangelical pseudo-Christian church, leader of the Rise Up Australia party, self-proclaimed healer and resurrector of the dead and a moronic young earth creationist amongst many more failings as a modern hominid. Danny recently celebrated his 50th birthday by thanking his mother for not aborting him. If only we could go back in time and convince her otherwise.
6. Adolf Hitler
Speaking of time travel, instead of being a terrorist you could use your boundless energy, endless resources and merciless martyrdom to perfect time travel and go back to the 1930s to kill Hitler, thereby preventing world war 2 and the Holocaust. This would allow the Jews to remain in Europe, Israel would never be established, the Middle East would never have been unfairly conquered and divided and Islam could remain a peaceful religion without all that nasty baggage.
5. Australian Family Association
Founded by fundamentalist Catholics, notably the infamous B.A. Santamaria, as the National Civic Council, the core premise of its existence is similar to the ACL in attempting to 'promote the family as the natural and fundamental unit of society'. Unmarried cohabitation, children out of wedlock, single parents, non-heterosexual relationships and access to IVF or adoption by anyone other than a married couple is offensive to them. Their most vociferous spokespeople have previously warned the public of the secret agenda to turn your boys gay, your girls into prostitutes and to legalise pedophilia and bestiality.
4.Australian Defence League
A nationalist and xenophobic rabble that was once anti-Semitic but found an easier and more popular target in Islam. Apart from racist and Islamophobic rants across the Internet, particularly through its social media accounts, the organisation has come under recent scrutiny after the revelation that members of the Royal Australian Navy involved in the divisive 'Operation Sovereign Borders' are also members of the ADL.
Because of the apparent lack of a single hierarchy or formal structure of this movement it is a difficult target, but one whose annihilation would receive resounding secular and cross-party applause around the nation.
3. Political arsehats
Pauline Hanson, Cory Bernardi, Jacqui Lambie, Mark Latham and Christopher Pyne to begin with, but we could easily list a hundred more. Yes, they are only morons and hardly anyone takes them seriously, but that potentially makes them very dangerous, especially if they were to team up like a nightmarish pack of Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers.
2. Shock Jocks
Andrew Bolt: Convicted perpetrator of hate-speech, self-affirming bigot, general egomaniac and rabid conservative douchebag.
Kyle Sandilands: Moron. Enough said.
Alan Jones: a rabid conservative and, unfortunately, popularly divisive celebrity talkback radio host with a mouth like a 17th century syphillitic tavern wench with Tourette's. He tops this list because of his unmatched ability to excite the masses and potentially incite violence and atrocities against innocent people. His demise can not come too soon, particularly if it is caused by being put in 'a chaff bag and thrown into the sea' as he once suggested be done with former Prime Minister, Julia Gillard.
1. Yourself
Seriously, if you want to make a public statement using martyrdom to promote your cause then just blow yourself up in a wide open space with no one else around. I am happy to post your message on YouTube and ensure that you are remembered as a complete douchebag along with everyone else on this list. Please accept that as a small token of my appreciation for making this world a better place by your absence.
The by-election that wasn't
This was not a by election, it was a wake up call for all of Canberra and each of the state governments. And the message is clear; ignore the citizens at your own peril.
There are undoubtedly a few sore political heads in the wake of he Western Australian Senate re-election held over the weekend. Counting is still in progress, and will continue for some time. It will probably be a couple of weeks before we know who has gained the final seat but we can be fairly certain that we have two Liberals, one Labor, one Green and one PUP, with the two old parties competing for the final seat.
While each party will be claiming its own victories, putting whatever small spin they can manage into action, the rest of us need to take a step back and assess what might have actually happened. It is all guesswork obviously, we cannot make any conclusions on the motivations of voters, there are only assumptions.
So what went wrong and what went right? Let's look at each party in detail before we assume to understand the big picture.
Liberal v Labor
It is fair to say that a big swing against both parties is always expected when viable alternatives are present. We have seen it when the Democrats were in their prime and with the rise of Pauline Hanson or Family First. These are the real swinging voters, not simply disaffected followers of the two old parties. Many political boffins put the swinging vote as high as 20-30%, but I believe it to be about 15% as I prefer to exclude the recidivist protest voters, like myself, who never vote for either major party.
The Liberals, particularly Eric Abetz, were premature to claim that the ALP had a greater swing against them than did the Liberals. The current state of play is that the swings are fairly close with the Liberals down 5.5 and Labor 4.8.
What is more discerning is the combined results of the traditional allies. The Nationals felt a big blow losing a third of their base meaning the Coalition vote decreased by a total of 7.5 percentage points against the combined ALP/Greens vote, which increased by 1.6 points. Even if you assume that the right shifted into the hands of Palmer United Party it leaves the right with a zero change and the left with a slight increase.
Part of their woes also relied on the fact that the Liberals were busy attacking Labor and failed to deal with the real competition, PUP. In addition both lead candidates for Liberal and Labor were noticeably absent from the campaign. Whatever you may think of the average voter, one thing for sure is that they do not appreciate being taken for granted.
It is also clear that the ALP ostracised some of the left with the painful antics of Joe Bullock. Revelations in the last few days of the campaign would have seriously damaged the Labor vote and I suggest that a great many loyal ALP voters went below the line to support Louise Pratt while some others just moved elsewhere, mostly to the Greens. I predict that Louise Pratt will acquire the final seat based on a strong below the line vote from those voters.
Unlike some pundits, I don't think that this had anything to do with the state Barnett government, but no doubt the shark cull policy has attracted some support towards the Greens.
The Greens
Regardless of your politics it is fair to say that The Greens ran one of the best campaigns of their history. Scott Ludlam was everywhere and he stayed on message. It paid out in big dividends with a full quota in their own right and left he ALP's Louise Pratt reliant upon the remainder, as well as strong preference flows, to potentially secure a second Labor seat.
Scott Ludlam's tour de force was undoubtedly his Senate speech to the Prime Minister which gained viral momentum akin to Julia Gillard's misogyny speech. Tony Abbott now seems to have the record for being the subject of the most watched videos of any Australian politician, all negative.
Palmer United Party
PUP was always going to be strong and they have managed to capture the vast majority of protest votes against the coalition. They had the second biggest media presence and again ran a decent campaign appealing to their core constituency, whatever that might actually be - the jury is still out on that one.
Many, including myself, have criticised Palmer for running ridiculous advertising messages promising taxation and other reforms that will be undeliverable and sometimes just pure mathematical fantasy. However, the popularity of the party seems to indicate that fiction is more trustworthy than fact to the politically uneducated. There is clearly an element of Australia for whom Palmer has found a heartwarming, but perhaps fickle, kinship.
Are you listening?
It is my conclusion that the result of this unprecedented Senate election was a direct message to the Abbott government; the voters of Western Australia are disapproving of the current two-party political system and especially of the Abbott agenda.
However, while they disapprove of the Coalition, they remain uncertain of Labor as a viable alternative preferring to support a third way. 33.7% of Western Australian voters support the Liberals while 21.8% are behind Labor. Neither party has a mandate and only barely make a majority between them. 44.5% of the state prefer an alternative to the traditional parties. These are undeniably strong figures that should not be ignored.
They should also ignore at their peril the clear fact that two strong contenders for alternative governance are emerging in the years to come. The Greens are clearly filling the gap left by the defunct Australian Democrats and PUP are following in he wake of One Nation to provide an alternative for the right.
We live in interesting political times.
LinkedIn but LockedOut
When we send a customer service request to an online entity, particularly a social media platform, one expects to encounter a small degree of difficulty. Often these services are outsourced, which means there will be time zone delays, language nuances, cultural barriers and the inevitable aspect of dealing with someone who isn't interested in your level of technological literacy. They have been trained to follow the manual and not actually use their brain to work through an issue with any form of logic or assistance from the customer.
The reason I know that it was my former employer is that I had communication from them enquiring why the access they had acquired was now gone. Yup. They admitted what they had done (albeit in order to edit the organisation profile that I had created) and wanted to get access again. Hell no!
Can you actually believe that they have suspended my account and are now asking me to provide personal identification and a sworn affidavit that I am the owner of my own information to which they have been replying to via the email listed on the account and through Twitter.
This week it turns out that I was due for the latter with LinkedIn. And I am now locked out.
It began on Tuesday afternoon. With a glance at my email inbox I notice two messages from LinkedIn confirming that my password had been changed. That had occurred at 9.26am. It was now 1pm! With thoughts of "I've been hacked" pounding through my skull I quickly reviewed the email links and headers to ensure it was legitimate. It was.
I then dashed across to my LinkedIn app to discover that I was locked out. My password had indeed been changed.
The obvious step was to request a password reset; email received, password changed and a quick review of my account ... all looked fine, no changes. Perhaps this wasn't a hacker, maybe a glitch of some kind. Or perhaps someone gained access through my old work email? No. Would they?
Better be safe than sorry, I deleted my old work email from my authorised address list. It was only there as a means of allowing previous colleagues to discover me through the Outlook add-on. It never occurred to me that someone would use it to acquire access to my account.
Ok. Breathe! Tiny, inconsequential crisis averted I now begin to wonder about who had changed the password. Time for a fishing expedition. I contact LinkedIn Customer Help. And now the real fun begins.
I send a simply worded request asking for info on how my account was accessed and by whom. I partially knew the answer but I just wanted proof. I also informed LinkedIn that I had reset my password to assure them that I was back in control of my account. They responded with a request for screenshots of the emails and their headers.
I understand they must follow the basic procedures to ensure that moron X has his computer turned on, modem plugged in, monitor on, keyboard plugged in etc. but it is always an eye-rolling exercise to bear with. In this case they were checking that it hadn't been a phishing email - it wasn't as I had already verified.
Anyway, I persevere and comply. Screenshots sent. Again I reiterated that I had changed my password, was in control of my account and that I suspected what had happened but just wanted information from them to substantiate my claim.
It was now mid afternoon and I received a final response for the day stating that it had been passed to the 'Trust and Safety Team' for review. It took 24hrs for a response while they 'investigated'. But when they did I was flabbergasted (don't you just love that word?).
Suffice to say, that response was a clear indication that they had not investigated. A quick look at my account would have seen two separate requests for a password reset and two subsequent password changes - one from my previous employer and one from me 4hrs later.
According to LinkedIn it never occurred.
Further this was a stock standard answer for the question of "why did I get a password reset link?", not "why did I get a password change confirmation?".
So, here I was with a service provider that I could no longer trust to adequately investigate a security matter and come up with anything other than a lie. What am I to do.
My retaliation was swift.
The reason I know that it was my former employer is that I had communication from them enquiring why the access they had acquired was now gone. Yup. They admitted what they had done (albeit in order to edit the organisation profile that I had created) and wanted to get access again. Hell no!
By now you may be thinking that this was my own fault. That because I left my my old email address attached to my account that it gave rise to this situation being possible. Yep. I admit it. I failed to see that my former employer would use my old email address to gain access to my account. That is like blaming the rape victim for walking down a dark alley. Yes it was a mistake, but the perpetrator still remains responsible for their actions.
So what do the authorities do after my latest response and a few terse posts on Twitter? They do what any dog does when it is backed into a corner. They bite!
Can you actually believe that they have suspended my account and are now asking me to provide personal identification and a sworn affidavit that I am the owner of my own information to which they have been replying to via the email listed on the account and through Twitter.
Can you actually fucking believe it?
Neither can I.
*facepalm*
9 things I learned from 9 days in Indonesia.
I never thought my first overseas holiday as an adult would be solo and to Indonesia, especially Bali. I say solo, but not alone; I met many wonderful people on this trip and was never travelling alone. As for Bali, well I didn't want to be one of "those" Aussies. But here I am at the end of a nine day adventure that I have vowed to be the first of many.
My adventure was always going to be about activities and food, not alcohol and beaches. I first headed to Lombok, spent four nights at Gili Trawangan and then four more in Ubud before a final day relaxing in Seminyak. I snorkelled, cooked, cycled, rafted, templed, got sunburnt and drenched in rain and I ate my way through every local delicacy I could find.
And it was truly enchanting.
But I also observed the people; the locals and the other tourists. This is what I learned in the last 9 days that will be the foundation of my future travels.
1. Spontaneity and carefree travelling is exciting, but a bit of forward planning avoids costly errors.
2. Even when you think you are paying top dollar, you are not being ripped off. By all means ask for a better price, but haggling to knock off an extra few thousand rupiah is as stupid as trying for 50c at home. The ticket price is still relatively cheap in Aussie dollars and these people deserve wealth as much as you. Don't be stingy. You are not a hero for reducing the income of a person earning the equivalent of a couple of hundred dollars a month.
3. Engage with the locals. They are beautiful honest folk trying to make a life. The least you can do is share some time, learn their language and customs. It will enrich your experience and you will make friends who will be more inclined to help you get around at the best price.
4. Learn the language. At the very least learn to say please (tolong) and thank you (terima kasih) and use it everywhere. Make your mother proud.
5. Be respectful. Remove your shoes, even if others don't. Don't complain about wearing a sarong in a temple. Walk around the offerings on the ground even if it means your feet get wet.
6. Watch where you are walking. Don't trust the ground or the pavement. It is wet, slippery and broken. Hold on going up and down steps.
7. Be kind to animals. Don't kick the dogs or tease the monkeys. You will only prove that you are an arsehole.
8. You never know when or where you may require a toilet break. No really, I mean I need a toilet right now! Preferably with toilet paper.
9. If you came here to hang out with Aussies and get drunk then please stay in Australia. You will make the world a much better place for everyone.
Unhappiness
I am angry because the world is angry.
This incredible, life-giving place is dying.
The human virus invades it;
tears at it, breaks and destroys it.
Humanity is insane.
I am sad because humanity is sad.
This remarkable, intelligent species is hurting.
The disease of selfishness infects it;
too many, too poor, too ill.
Humanity is inhumane.
I am worried because my nation is worried
This prosperous, free democracy is stalling.
The politics of nationalism drives it;
god, Queen, flag and country.
Humanity is a bane.
I am ashamed because my peoples are ashamed.
This beautiful, rich diversity is fading.
The rise of monoculture derides it;
assimilate, integrate, fit in.
Humanity is the same.
I am fearful because my family is fearful.
This safe, free space is disappearing.
The threat of hate pervades it;
taunts, bullies and bashes it.
Humanity is a crime.
I am unhappy because I am unhappy.
This amazing, promising person is breaking.
The wind of doubt erodes it,
whips, cuts and thrashes it.
Humanity is to blame.
The Australian Democrats
It's about time that I started writing again. My blog seems to be a good place to commence.
Recent events have brought the Australian Democrats back into my life, albeit from the distance of Twitter, however it seems that little has changed and that another split has unfurled.
While I watch and wait for the outcome I am reminded of this graphic that I hacked back in the day when the party lost key Senate seats and the final death knell was tolling.
Recent events have brought the Australian Democrats back into my life, albeit from the distance of Twitter, however it seems that little has changed and that another split has unfurled.
While I watch and wait for the outcome I am reminded of this graphic that I hacked back in the day when the party lost key Senate seats and the final death knell was tolling.
A Castle On The Shore
There is something culturally significant and alluring about the Australian coastline. Between its rugged southern cliffs and the tropical northern points lie a myriad of seductive sandy coves or stretches of long white beaches that spear the horizon like a comet in the night sky, bordered by thousands of miles of dunes with hues and shades to make a rainbow weep in despair at its own lack of beauty.
The Aussie sun, sand and surf is infamous for its body beautiful, bronzed bathers but equally, more recently, for the less appealling 'beached whales' that accompany the army of eskys and umbrellas on most weekends and public holidays. But while the aesthetic lustre of naked skin and lustful curves becomes a rarer and less forgiving sight, some things will never change.
Since the earliest of times, small children have watched attentively as older siblings built sand castles that often resembled St Basil's Cathedral as if it were sculpted by a collaboration of Picasso and Dali in a fit of artistic chaos fuelled by a night of absinthe and opium.
Adorned by whatever flotsam and jetsam happens to be scavenged from the shoreline, these remarkable constructions bear little resemblance to reality and, briefly, even seem to defy the laws of physics before being crushed by the youngest child as they pounce on the precariously teetering turrets in a cataclysmic demolition of 9/11 proportions.
The juvenile engineers will scream with disdain and the adults quickly intervene to prevent retaliatory strikes from those armed with plastic pails and shovels. A grey haired mediator is appointed to assess ground zero and resolves to assist in the reconstruction effort, promising to "build it bigger and stronger and better than before".
All parties excitedly agree to the proposal, with the false hope that the mediator has some esoteric knowledge about the qualities of sand and water. The building phase resumes once more as the sounds of peace echo through the warm breeze, caress the ocean spray and frolic with the screech of gulls.
Solid foundations are mapped out and compacted by a hundred eager footsteps. Walls are built as thick as they are high, and a moat is dug wide enough for any suitably scaled clipper to navigate at sailing speed without fear of running aground. An esky lid becomes the drawbridge, ensuring that a two year old giant can view the progress without causing further havoc.
Turrets soar into the air, three and four pails high. A pail being the industry standard measurement for feats of engineering in this environment. The ageing foreman takes on most of the critical labouring tasks himself and sends his minions scurrying down the shoreline and into the dunes to secure materials for the fortification of the great building.
Many grand and exotic paraphernalia are returned to site and are first shown to respective mothers and grandmothers for assessment. A grimace or look of disgust from the matriarchs are a signal of approval to the proud scavengers and only increase their enjoyment of this collaborative effort as they squeal with laughter at their daring insolence.
Nature is recycled in a way that even the gods could not have predicted. Crab limbs become cannons, pieces of shell that survived the tumbling across reefs are reborn as armour cladding for battlements, while cuttlefish remains form the many brattices and hoardings from which the army can defend the castle walls. Strips of seaweed are tied to twigs and placed high atop each turret to proudly announce the royal standard under which this city is protected.
A quarrel breaks out between the three boys over who should be king. As swords are drawn and duels challenged, a fair lady charms the would-be knights with her siren voice and proclaims that Queen Barbie of Malibu shall rule, promptly placing Her Majesty atop the largest building in the keep.
The small guild of artisans stand back to admire their work and the foreman instructs the 2 year old giant how to dig away a small portion from the side of the moat and create a trench toward the ocean.
With each consecutive wave lapping the shore, a trickle of water begins to emerge in the trench. Six waves later and the sea starts streaming into the moat as the sandsmiths jump and squeal and clap their hands in appreciation of the miracle unfolding before them.
Matriarchs of two eras are dragged from their comfortably reclined positions and begged to give attention to the grand design of the latest generation. Pleasantries and polite accolades are duly offered and received before life is allowed to return to its dull, but serene, talk of the latest health concerns for poor Aunt Sally.
Back to the new fortification protecting Australia's shores, the builders seemed to have moved onto new projects. The three boys taking the southern part of the kingdom for practising their swordsmanship and jousting skills while their two female counterparts attend to Queen Barbie, ensuring that the castle is appropriately fitted with everything Her Majesty desires.
The two year old giant is given a royal pardon, appointed to be the city's sentry and allowed to wade through the moat on the promise to never touch the castle.
As the warm afternoon becomes cooler with a shifting southerly breeze swirling sand around legs and into eyes, it is time to pack away the accoutrements of modern civilisation and bid the medieval fortress a fond farewell.
With its creators carried away by horseless carriages that are unfamiliar to its own era, the empty relic stands forlornly on the beach like a discarded toy in a field.
In a few short hours the sun will set on this small human endeavour. The flags blown from their poles by gusts of wind, the tide creeping in and lashing away at every grain of sand in its foundations, with the towers eventually crumbling into ruin.
By sunrise the next day, no trace of the thriving civilisation would remain where once Queen Barbie of Malibu ruled.
The pride of humanity over its entire existence is simply no match for the endless humility of nature.
The Aussie sun, sand and surf is infamous for its body beautiful, bronzed bathers but equally, more recently, for the less appealling 'beached whales' that accompany the army of eskys and umbrellas on most weekends and public holidays. But while the aesthetic lustre of naked skin and lustful curves becomes a rarer and less forgiving sight, some things will never change.
Since the earliest of times, small children have watched attentively as older siblings built sand castles that often resembled St Basil's Cathedral as if it were sculpted by a collaboration of Picasso and Dali in a fit of artistic chaos fuelled by a night of absinthe and opium.
Adorned by whatever flotsam and jetsam happens to be scavenged from the shoreline, these remarkable constructions bear little resemblance to reality and, briefly, even seem to defy the laws of physics before being crushed by the youngest child as they pounce on the precariously teetering turrets in a cataclysmic demolition of 9/11 proportions.
The juvenile engineers will scream with disdain and the adults quickly intervene to prevent retaliatory strikes from those armed with plastic pails and shovels. A grey haired mediator is appointed to assess ground zero and resolves to assist in the reconstruction effort, promising to "build it bigger and stronger and better than before".
All parties excitedly agree to the proposal, with the false hope that the mediator has some esoteric knowledge about the qualities of sand and water. The building phase resumes once more as the sounds of peace echo through the warm breeze, caress the ocean spray and frolic with the screech of gulls.
Solid foundations are mapped out and compacted by a hundred eager footsteps. Walls are built as thick as they are high, and a moat is dug wide enough for any suitably scaled clipper to navigate at sailing speed without fear of running aground. An esky lid becomes the drawbridge, ensuring that a two year old giant can view the progress without causing further havoc.
Turrets soar into the air, three and four pails high. A pail being the industry standard measurement for feats of engineering in this environment. The ageing foreman takes on most of the critical labouring tasks himself and sends his minions scurrying down the shoreline and into the dunes to secure materials for the fortification of the great building.
Many grand and exotic paraphernalia are returned to site and are first shown to respective mothers and grandmothers for assessment. A grimace or look of disgust from the matriarchs are a signal of approval to the proud scavengers and only increase their enjoyment of this collaborative effort as they squeal with laughter at their daring insolence.
Nature is recycled in a way that even the gods could not have predicted. Crab limbs become cannons, pieces of shell that survived the tumbling across reefs are reborn as armour cladding for battlements, while cuttlefish remains form the many brattices and hoardings from which the army can defend the castle walls. Strips of seaweed are tied to twigs and placed high atop each turret to proudly announce the royal standard under which this city is protected.
A quarrel breaks out between the three boys over who should be king. As swords are drawn and duels challenged, a fair lady charms the would-be knights with her siren voice and proclaims that Queen Barbie of Malibu shall rule, promptly placing Her Majesty atop the largest building in the keep.
The small guild of artisans stand back to admire their work and the foreman instructs the 2 year old giant how to dig away a small portion from the side of the moat and create a trench toward the ocean.
With each consecutive wave lapping the shore, a trickle of water begins to emerge in the trench. Six waves later and the sea starts streaming into the moat as the sandsmiths jump and squeal and clap their hands in appreciation of the miracle unfolding before them.
Matriarchs of two eras are dragged from their comfortably reclined positions and begged to give attention to the grand design of the latest generation. Pleasantries and polite accolades are duly offered and received before life is allowed to return to its dull, but serene, talk of the latest health concerns for poor Aunt Sally.
Back to the new fortification protecting Australia's shores, the builders seemed to have moved onto new projects. The three boys taking the southern part of the kingdom for practising their swordsmanship and jousting skills while their two female counterparts attend to Queen Barbie, ensuring that the castle is appropriately fitted with everything Her Majesty desires.
The two year old giant is given a royal pardon, appointed to be the city's sentry and allowed to wade through the moat on the promise to never touch the castle.
As the warm afternoon becomes cooler with a shifting southerly breeze swirling sand around legs and into eyes, it is time to pack away the accoutrements of modern civilisation and bid the medieval fortress a fond farewell.
With its creators carried away by horseless carriages that are unfamiliar to its own era, the empty relic stands forlornly on the beach like a discarded toy in a field.
In a few short hours the sun will set on this small human endeavour. The flags blown from their poles by gusts of wind, the tide creeping in and lashing away at every grain of sand in its foundations, with the towers eventually crumbling into ruin.
By sunrise the next day, no trace of the thriving civilisation would remain where once Queen Barbie of Malibu ruled.
The pride of humanity over its entire existence is simply no match for the endless humility of nature.
Lugere
From the last wind through autumn lungs;
Across the endless ache of winter bones
Through the dark shadow on a spring mind;
Into the constant drought raping a summer heart
Ever changing seasons bring nought new life;
The passing years unease tormented souls
Tears no longer flowing; dry faucet, an empty well
Time steps solemnly to the beat of a silent drum
Every surface gathers dust, thick shrouds of mourning
Heavy drapes, closed against rotting boarded windows
Cobwebs fill the dark, dank, lifeless spaces,
They speak like tombstones in a soulless graveyard
Haunted by the memories of pride and glory left behind
Old dreams, broken promises, forgotten lives
Collected, hoarded, possessed and now unwanted
An obsessive compulsion of nostalgic sentiment
No breath nor life, no mind nor soul
A broken home, heart broken; forgotten and unforgiven
Take heed, a living corpse; have pity, the walking dead
Abandoned empty vessels, derelict zombie love
Across the endless ache of winter bones
Through the dark shadow on a spring mind;
Into the constant drought raping a summer heart
Ever changing seasons bring nought new life;
The passing years unease tormented souls
Tears no longer flowing; dry faucet, an empty well
Time steps solemnly to the beat of a silent drum
Every surface gathers dust, thick shrouds of mourning
Heavy drapes, closed against rotting boarded windows
Cobwebs fill the dark, dank, lifeless spaces,
They speak like tombstones in a soulless graveyard
Haunted by the memories of pride and glory left behind
Old dreams, broken promises, forgotten lives
Collected, hoarded, possessed and now unwanted
An obsessive compulsion of nostalgic sentiment
No breath nor life, no mind nor soul
A broken home, heart broken; forgotten and unforgiven
Take heed, a living corpse; have pity, the walking dead
Abandoned empty vessels, derelict zombie love
The pathway to understanding
To understand any subject, one must gain the necessary breadth and depth of knowledge that usually leads to a simple, yet unfaltering conclusion - the truth.>
But there are very few absolute truths known to humanity, and so the pathway to understanding can only be obtained through the accumulation of experience derived from many a life's daily experiments, either directly or through the work of others handed down through the ages. As we progress we edge measurably closer to the truth.
The traveller on this path will naturally have an inquisitive mind. They must care deeply about the subject to set out on such an arduous journey of research. In fact, they must care so deeply that they are willing to delve into the darkest places and are prepared to discover the most shocking of truths. What if the world is not flat or riding on the back of a giant turtle?
Yet, all the while the inquirer must remain coldly objective and aware of the numerous distractions, tangents and falsehoods that will throw them off the trail and risk losing sight of the truth.
This is the essence of the pathway to understanding; to care so deeply that the desire to understand allows for the objective process of questioning/researching/knowledge to ultimately lead to new understanding.
This is what we know as empathy.
On the other hand, sympathy is the irrational attraction of two like-minded beliefs drawn together as anecdotes in a falsehood dressed up as proof; a self-destructive co-dependency of propaganda.
For you to sympathise with my experience is to merely unveil your self-indulgence or servility by attempting to relate only to some peripheral similarities between our unique and separate circumstances. Our experience is more distinctly different than your simple desire for fraternity will allow you to believe.
To show me empathy displays your humanitarian character. It respects the simple truth that you do not (and probably cannot) have the complete knowledge to understand and fully comprehend my circumstances, that you are only an observer.
Yet it also demonstrates that you care enough to seek a level of understanding, rather than assume it's ownership through some inferior thread of connectivity.
The pathway to understanding is empathy; and the truth usually resides somewhere between at least two plausible perspectives.
But there are very few absolute truths known to humanity, and so the pathway to understanding can only be obtained through the accumulation of experience derived from many a life's daily experiments, either directly or through the work of others handed down through the ages. As we progress we edge measurably closer to the truth.
The traveller on this path will naturally have an inquisitive mind. They must care deeply about the subject to set out on such an arduous journey of research. In fact, they must care so deeply that they are willing to delve into the darkest places and are prepared to discover the most shocking of truths. What if the world is not flat or riding on the back of a giant turtle?
Yet, all the while the inquirer must remain coldly objective and aware of the numerous distractions, tangents and falsehoods that will throw them off the trail and risk losing sight of the truth.
This is the essence of the pathway to understanding; to care so deeply that the desire to understand allows for the objective process of questioning/researching/knowledge to ultimately lead to new understanding.
This is what we know as empathy.
On the other hand, sympathy is the irrational attraction of two like-minded beliefs drawn together as anecdotes in a falsehood dressed up as proof; a self-destructive co-dependency of propaganda.
For you to sympathise with my experience is to merely unveil your self-indulgence or servility by attempting to relate only to some peripheral similarities between our unique and separate circumstances. Our experience is more distinctly different than your simple desire for fraternity will allow you to believe.
To show me empathy displays your humanitarian character. It respects the simple truth that you do not (and probably cannot) have the complete knowledge to understand and fully comprehend my circumstances, that you are only an observer.
Yet it also demonstrates that you care enough to seek a level of understanding, rather than assume it's ownership through some inferior thread of connectivity.
The pathway to understanding is empathy; and the truth usually resides somewhere between at least two plausible perspectives.
A New World Religion Backed by the United Nations
This article was subsequently published at Online Opinion
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=12002
The world is going barking mad with religiosity! While many of us feel that we have known this for a long time, it has always been difficult to find substantial evidence that wasn't countered by arguments of religious vilification.
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=12002
The world is going barking mad with religiosity! While many of us feel that we have known this for a long time, it has always been difficult to find substantial evidence that wasn't countered by arguments of religious vilification.
However, I’m not talking about Islamic suicide bombers, Protestants vs Catholics in Ireland, the abhorrent members of Westboro Baptist Church, ‘pro-life’ radicals bombing abortion clinics, or any of the other examples of minority groups being less than good examples of the faiths they follow.
Instead, I would like to open your eyes to a new pervasive religion that is steadily growing and insidiously lurking in your community. If successful it will have a terrifying impact on the existence of life as we know it.
Regardless of your political views, spiritual beliefs, faith or lack thereof, please bear with me for a moment while I tell you a short story. Even if it sounds a bit familiar, please persevere.
This story is set on a unique world; a smallish blue-green environment with abundant vegetation and teeming with wondrous life forms on land, air and water. In this world, there is a sentient humanoid species who believe that their world has an undefinable, immeasurable and yet omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent and benevolent energy force that interacts with all life forms.
This force gives them life, nourishes, teaches and provides them with all that is needed to live well and, as if they were its own children, they call this force "Mother".
They recognise that Mother is an indivisible community of diverse and interdependent beings with whom they share a common destiny and to whom they must relate in ways that benefit Mother.
However, their world is confronted by an evil that is attempting to dominate and exploit Mother and other beings. This evil is causing severe destruction, degradation and disruption of the life-sustaining communities, processes and balances of Mother which now threatens the wellbeing and existence of many beings.
They are conscious that this destruction is also harmful to their own inner wellbeing and is offensive to the many faiths, wisdom traditions and indigenous cultures for whom Mother is sacred. These clans are acutely conscious of the critical importance and urgency of taking decisive, collective action to prevent the evil enemy causing impacts on Mother that threaten the wellbeing and survival of all species.
Sound familiar? No, it isn't the plot from James Cameron's blockbuster, Avatar - but the resemblance is not a mere coincidence. While Avatar has been justifiably compared to the historical and current issues of our own world, it now seems that the lines between fantasy and reality have blurred even further.
Apart from a few tweaks for syntax, everything above in italics is a direct quote from the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth, which was passed in Bolivia on 22 April 2010 at the World People's Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth and has since made its way to the plenary floor (here and here) of the United Nations.
'Mother Earth' has been transformed from a metaphoric and mythical euphemism into pseudo-scientific woo! You have not entered the Twilight Zone; you are not watching a CGI enhanced movie; this is reality and the world is about to enshrine the beliefs of a new-age religion (or a revival of ancient mysticism) into legal rights on par with those of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Now, before you retort with “it's all about protecting the environment” or label me a shill for capitalism and corporate world domination, let me correct you. For the record, I am a staunch environmentalist. I believe in, and promote the protection of landscapes, habitats and species. I readily acknowledge that human activity is essentially bad for this world and that we need to curb our greed and consumerism. You will hear no argument from me on those facts.
But, that is NOT the point of this rant. What I object to is the use of pantheistic and Gaia inspired language that, if adopted on an international level in a legal treaty, will have the effect of making "Mother Earth" the new deity of a green-religion forced onto all of Earth's citizens.
No, I am not being overly dramatic. Read the details for yourself so that you can fully comprehend the implications. It is littered with religious undertones and metaphors that have enormous legal repercussions on every human being:
"we must establish systems for governing human behavior that recognize the inalienable rights of Mother Earth and of all beings that are part of her" and
"the fundamental freedoms and rights of Mother Earth and of all beings should be protected by the rule of law, and that the corresponding duties of human beings to respect and defend these rights and freedoms should be enforced by law"
Such statements, when taken to their natural conclusion, imply that you and I cannot even dig a hole in the ground or kill a cockroach for fear of prosecution under some future law. Even cleaning your house might become illegal because of the bacterial colonies that you would destroy in the process!
This is not merely a feel-good unifying statement of our inarguable environmental responsibility as custodians of the Earth. It is a deliberately transformational credo that redefines our very existence and our relationship with all life on this planet.
All of this poppycock has stemmed from the rising groundswell of support for an environmental movement that has ceased to function as a sensible social and political force. It is now, undeniably, a zealous quasi-religious cult that wishes to impose a narrow-minded and anti-scientific view that all life is part of one universal ‘energy force’, which we are now obliged to pay homage to, for all that 'she' has done for us.
This is nothing short of irrational pandering to the fantasies of earth-worshipping, crystal-healing, indigo children. Human beings are now eagerly lining up to be the sacrificial lambs at the altar of Gaia.
This type of international politicking and pseudo law-making will do very little to improve our relationship with the environment or save many species from extinction, but it will make some people feel good as they run naked through the forest with blue birds on their shoulders and rabbits bounding at their feet singing some Disney inspired anthem. Except that the forest is likely to become a restricted area - after all, animals and plants will have a right to exist without any human interference.
This is not an isolated event to be ignored or passed off as the random act of a fringe third world nation. This has been decades in the planning and follows the inclusion of Rights for Nature into the Ecuadorian Constitution in 2008 and the United Nations' proclamation of April 22 as International Mother Earth Day, distinct from Earth Day on March 22 each year.
The UN's own website for Mother Earth Day states:
In 2009, at its Eighth Session, the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues requested special rapporteurs to prepare a Study on the need to recognize and respect the rights of Mother Earth. At its Ninth Session, the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues will discuss the findings of the study, as well as works toward establishing a Declaration on the Rights of Mother Earth.
Please note that the United Nations did not act out of mere tokenism. This is a predetermined action to meet a predefined goal and it is sanctioned and supported by the member nations of the UN. Conspiracy theories aside, there is a real agenda in play and it is supported by:
Agenda 21: an initiative of the United Nations that seeks to create a world bound by the principles of sustainable development; and
Codex Alimentarius the UN global strategy to manipulate and control agriculture, food and supplements devised in 1963 and guided by the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and World Health Organisation (WHO) with the support of 184 member nations.
All of this is pointing to a future where your current life and lifestyle is marked for demolition as unreasonable restrictions are inevitably placed on the energy you consume, the food you eat, the materials you buy and even the places you are allowed to visit.
The reality for the 7 billion human inhabitants of Earth is that something needs to change; to continue on a destructive path is certainly unsustainable. On that we can agree.
But the answer is not to anthropomorphise the environment, to give rise to a crass spirituality or empower the most weirdly radical movement of the modern era. Nor is it to throw the human race into an era of reliance upon heavily regulated food production by profit-driven corporations reminiscent of the science fiction classic, Soylent Green.
The answer lies in education and self-regulation of our own consumerism. We may not be doing enough in a timely manner, but we are making changes, slowly and surely.
Faith in our ability to succeed on that pathway is far more palatable than faith in Gaia and the religiosity that surely follows.
The cult of scepticism can't take criticism
I've been listening to several "skeptic" (US spelling - urgh!) podcasts over the last few months. I really enjoy Skeptoid, the Skeptics Guide to the Universe and the SGU 5x5. Each of these, along with DrKarl adequately provide my weekly dose of reality science.
I have also been listening to The SkepticZone but have been disappointed with how they present the show and discuss topics. There is a lot of inside jokes, sarcasm and unnecessary banter that comes off as ridicule, derision, condescending and even contempt.
While some may find this amusing, I feel that it simply shames and mocks anyone who happens to believe the "woo" (what the sceptics like to call pseudo science) rather than having any real educational benefit. Given that these folk profess to be 'educators' they seem to know nothing about pedagogy. I doubt that anyone could 'learn' in such an environment.
I finally decided that my time could be spent on other things than to continue listening to any more of their self-righteousness. I unsubscribed and wrote the following review on iTunes:
A podcast for the converted (2 stars)At first I enjoyed the jovial banter and casual meanderings of this podcast, but then it happened; the novelty wore off. I began to tire of the condescending attitude, the "in-crowd" jokes and the constant put downs of their opponents! It seems that the Skeptic Zone crew have axes to grind and like to rub noses in the proverbial.I have no time for pompous people who appear to laugh at anyone who isn't as clever as they consider themselves to be. They should be using this podcast to reach out and educate, but instead they choose to demean and ridicule.I suggest that newbie skeptics should stick with Skeptoid or The Skeptics Guide to the Universe for less drivel and more grounded discussion with far less derision.
I admit that I could have worded this a lot better, and if I had been approached appropriately I would have considered a revision that was less critical of the individuals and more focused on the issues with the tone of the format. As you'll soon understand, I'm reticent to do that now.
My second mistake was to engage two of the podcasters on Twitter. The ensuing debacle is a textbook case of how NOT to react to criticism, especially towards customers in a public forum. See how many examples of poor debate, ineffective conflict resolution, bad customer service and negative PR you can spot. Admittedly Twitter, with its 140 character limitation, is horrendously tragic for effective debate, but this is no excuse for the tirade of vitriol foisted upon me.
Remember to keep this in a customer service context; I (polemicol) am the difficult customer with the complaint and they (skepticzone, DrRachie and podblack) are the service providers reacting to my criticism.
- - - - -
7:01 PM Mar 18th @SkepticZone your podcast would be better if you used it to inform & educate instead of scoff and ridicule. I have unsubscribed.
- 7:05 PM Mar 18th SkepticZone @PolemiCol I have not had the chance to hear your weekly podcast yet.
- - - - -
RACHAEL DUNLOP @DrRachie:
7:07 PM Mar 18th @DrRachie congrats on your shorty award. Take a tip - tone down the ridicule & self-righteousness on SkepticZone. It's unbecoming.
- 7:11 PM Mar 18th DrRachie @PolemiCol thanks on the congrats. Can I ask what did you thought was self righteous specifically, to help for future? Cheers
- 7:46 PM Mar 18th DrRachie @PolemiCol Sometimes it's difficult to find a balance between going in hard when harm is caused & educating. I'll take it on board, cheers
- 10:05 PM Mar 18th @DrRachie that should have been I.e. not e.g.
- 10:09 PM Mar 18th DrRachie @PolemiCol I didn't realize it comes across that way. Admittedly sometimes I deride, eg ear candles. I'll keep it in mind, thx
- - - - -
At this point it seems that Dr Rachie has dealt with me in a civilised and mature manner, seemingly taking on board my criticism as it was intended. At this point I thought everything was rather reasonable. And then it was if I was channelling Homer Simpson ...
"Or what? You'll release the dogs? Or the bees?Yes, along came the dog with bees in her mouth ...
Or the dogs with bees in their mouths so when they bark they shoot bees at you?
- - - - -
KYLIE STURGESS @podblack:
2:05 PM Mar 21st podblack @PolemiCol - email to let us all know if you condemn us _all_ - or just @DrRachie with your review. http://is.gd/aR77u & http://is.gd/aR78H.
- 2:23 PM Mar 21st @podblack I don't think "condemn" is the right word. I hope you can all work with criticism and aim to improve the show
2:56 PM Mar 21st podblack @PolemiCol - if you bothered to outline EXACTLY what issues, examples, constructive criticism - then we'd listen. You just 'unsubscribed'.
2:58 PM Mar 21st podblack @PolemiCol - you clearly don't know the show if you're unaware that we work as educators (Richard, Rachie & myself) and always review.
2:59 PM Mar 21st podblack @PolemiCol - as it is, the most decent thing you could do is remove your review. I doubt you will, but I guess you don't aim to improve. :/
2:58 PM Mar 21st podblack @PolemiCol - you clearly don't know the show if you're unaware that we work as educators (Richard, Rachie & myself) and always review.
2:59 PM Mar 21st podblack @PolemiCol - as it is, the most decent thing you could do is remove your review. I doubt you will, but I guess you don't aim to improve. :/
- 2:12 PM Mar 22nd @podblack its not the only bad review you have. Learn from it, or live with it. I'll remove the review when it is no longer true.
- 2:32 PM Mar 22nd podblack @PolemiCol - You learned nothing then. You gave no feedback apart from complaints and expect us to change? We don't need you - bye.
- 2:10 PM Mar 22nd @podblack I raised this issue at Skeptics in the park - but you brushed it off. Instead of being defensive, try being a skeptic Dr R did
- 2:33 PM Mar 22nd podblack @PolemiCol - when? And if you think not an issue, try reading my work. Complaining without evidence, chip on shoulder - not worth our time
- 2:35 PM Mar 22nd podblack @PolemiCol actually, she agrees. Listeners like you who do nothing but write reviews without talking first - @drrachie & I agree.
- 3:52 PM Mar 22nd @podblack "listeners like you" ?really? try applying a bit of critical thinking to the way you are handling my criticism
- - - - -
And then to top it all off, after I had posted a tweet asking for my followers to pass the good word around that I had a room to rent out, the bee-devil-dog then posted the following, before having second thoughts and deleting it from Twitter:
time not captured podblack @PolemiCol - don't expect help from anyone I know in Perth, that's for certain.
time not captured podblack @PolemiCol - don't expect help from anyone I know in Perth, that's for certain.
- 4:39 PM Mar 22nd @PolemiCol - don't expect help from anyone I know in Perth, that's for certain. (via @podblack) // credit to you for rethinking & deleting
- - - - -
So I put out a peace offering:
8:39 PM Mar 22nd @SkepticZone it seems we are embroiled in a bizarre conflict which could do with some resolution. Can we do it? Cc @podblack @DrRachie
- 8:57 PM Mar 22nd DrRachie @PolemiCol most certainly. Would you prefer to email me? Rachael at skeptic zone dot tv
Subsequently, I sent the following by email:
SkepticZone, iTunes and Twitter - 22 March 2010 22:43Rachael,
Please forward this to Kylie, Richard or anyone else involved with SkepticZone at your discretion.
Let me firstly say that I stand by my comments. However, I seem to be guilty of a similar thing to what I've accused the podcasters of doing and for that I am sorry. I could have worded the review better and I hope to be able to rectify that.
I want to thank you for the mature approach you took in responding to my initial tweet. While I was disappointed with Richard's 'lets-see-you-do-better' retort I can overlook it as an off the cuff remark, however I am completely baffled by Kylie's explosive behaviour, which included removing me from the Perth Skeptics group.
Oddly, I've been left feeling that my mistake was in alerting yourself and Richard to my view. Anonymity would have had a distinct advantage, but I've always felt honesty and openness has a better place in life.
My concern is now twofold; the issue about tone in the podcasts remains and I would be happy to discuss that further if it has merit. The greater issue for me is the manner in which I was treated in a public forum. While that is something that I could simply brush off, or resolve solely with Kylie, there is the broader ramification that it has potential to do more damage to SkepticZone than my isolated review ever could.
Imagine having that exchange with a shop assistant or a customer service officer at a bank. Imagine a chef blasting a restaurant critic for a bad review or worse, kicking them out of the local dinner club? It is a ridiculous thought, but that is in effect what has happened.
I'm keen to discuss this and come to a point of reconciliation with all parties.
I received a response from Dr Rachael Dunlop, and though we disagree on one point, I feel satisfied that it has been resolved as best as we can. To that end, she deserves many accolades for her exemplary attitude and conduct.
Unfortunately I can't say the same for Kylie Sturgess (@podblack), who is IMHO one of the most emotionally voracious individuals I have ever encountered in the scientific community. If you come across her in real life, I advise you to avoid any possibility of confrontation, for your own peace of mind and perhaps your safety too.
Kylie removed me from the Perth Skeptics group, which she administrates on MeetUp.com. When I tried to make peace and requested to rejoin I was sent a terse email:
I run this group, I pay for this site and you are not welcome
here due to what I consider to be threatening behavior towards
my friends.
Go away.
Do not contact me again.
The main points to take from this are as follows:
- everyone is in the marketing game - even non-profit organisations or podcasters
- a customer has every right to leave any review they see fit
- customers are not obligated to approach a service provider with complaints
- service providers who only expect positive reviews are delusional
- attacking customers doesn't win business
- conflict resolution should be a priority for any service provider
- beware: social media leaves an accurate record of events
Sceptics (or skeptics) are equally at risk of cult-like groupthink mentality - ironically instilling blind faith in their leadership, who are often given guru status. If those that worship the scientific method allow themselves to become the centre of a faith-based movement, it will inevitably detract from the reasonable openness of mind that science should be promoting. It thus becomes even more dangerous than the ignorance of psuedo-science.
What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)