Affidavit @ Affidavit @aussie.zone

Posts

1

Comments

100

Joined

2 yr. ago

I appreciate now, given the context of user report(s), the reason you specified you weren't deleting that person's post.

Regarding your insistence that the user was spreading misinformation however, I believe that you are splitting hairs. That user did not specify the members would be indigenous, they said it would be racist to include specific powers to a specific race in the Constitution. I already explained my viewpoint that representation is power, a view I am sure most people who support the Voice would agree with given a different context such as the one I earlier described.

if the reason for the 'misinformation' accusation is using the labels 'race' and 'racism' to describe indigenous people and singling them out respectively, then by that logic it is also 'misinformation' in other contexts too. If a shop refuses to serve someone because they are aboriginal, they're not being 'racist' because aboriginals are a 'cultural group' not a race?

Note how the following amendments do not change the validity of the argument one bit:

I love how giving specific powers abilities to make representations to government for a specific race cultural group within the constitution is anything but racism cultural groupism. Sounds almost like the textbook definition of racism cultural groupism to me but what do i know.

The word 'disingenuous' is used too often in debate I think, but I'll be honest, that is what it looks like people are being here; intentionally (edit: perhaps subconsciously would be more apt) misunderstanding the 'No' arguments and shutting them down with accusations of lies and misinformation, all so that they don't have to acknowledge that their points are valid.

How the hell do I block someone in Lemmy?

Edit: Never mind. Figured it out. Had to go to the user profile itself because the block pop up doesn't seem to work.

I honestly don't know what the point is? Every single time someone makes an argument for the 'No' side, people accuse the person of 'spreading misinformation' and claim they are 'factually incorrect'.

You mentioned your observations from reading other arguments. I had a brief look at your recent post history for an example of what you meant, and there was one that stood out to me.

Someone made a comment that the Voice would grant powers to a specific race in the Constitution and you loftily replied that you would not be deleting their post but their argument was both 'wrong' and 'misinformation'.

it is not wrong and it is not misinformation, I believe it takes a wild interpretation of the wording to conclude special parliamentary representation is not power.

As an example, people (rightfully) get angered by the major parties throwing 'conferences' where corporations can pay for access to MPs. I doubt many people here would argue these corporations are not being benefited by attending these 'conferences'.

Also, as an aside, while you did not remove that person's post, even mentioning that was an option was not appropriate IMO. How can people have a civilised discussion if they must fear having their posts removed, or being banned from contributing, when a mod or admin disagree with them?

My argument is that the people here rely on ad hominem attacks to 'support' their own arguments. Thanks for proving my point you rude twat.

• They are misinformed
• They are lying
• They can't or won't read
• They are too stupid to understand it
• They don't value democracy

Colour me impressed. I don't think I could have written such a perfect example of why I hate engaging people in dialogue on this issue. I'll leave you to your echo chamber. I'm sure you and all the other people who support a Voice will sway many people to your side with such convincing arguments.

It's astounding to me that every single one of these 'Yes' campaign articles that I've been spammed with over the past few months is effectively saying, "We must educate these ignorant savages. They know not what they are doing."

Do they not see the irony here? Just because someone disagrees with you, does not mean they are ignorant, and assuming so is patronising at best.

Don't get me wrong, between the 'Yes' camp and the 'No' camp, I am mostly in the 'stop wasting taxpayer funds' camp. It's unfortunate that won't be an option in the referendum.

This is the first beef stroganoff post I've seen.

After that stupid beans crap ruined Lemmy for days I blocked every meme community I could; it sounds like this was the right move.

Might give that a go, thank you.

I reckon we have different ideas of what constitutes 'news'.

I think Lemmy needs a filter for random Boebert drivel. This is like the fifth iteration of 'what Boebert did at Beetlejuice' that has dominated my feed.

This alleged 'fact-checking' is an opinion piece. The 'sources' in the article are also opinion pieces—half of them from themselves.

It is abundantly clear that the alleged 'journalist' responsible for fact-checking this had an ulterior motive.

1. The High Court does interpret constitutional legislation
2. The ambiguity does include a risk of delays and dysfunction due to poor wording in the proposed legislation
3. Australians wanting to know what they are actually voting for is not 'misinformation'.

...

I stopped wasting my time here. It is clear that whomever did this assessment was being disingenuous. Won't waste my time reading further.

The Guardian 'journalist': This is a valid point, but I don't like it, therefore, I dub thee 'misinformation/disputed'.

I'm glad I had these smrat (sic) people here to think for me.

1. Press the Super/Windows button
2. Type the letter 'n' (or 't' if on most Linux distros)
3. Press the 'Return' key.

Congratulations, you now opened Notepad / Random open source text editor.

4. Ctrl + S = Save for pretty much everything

The above pattern works for almost every program. There is no need to memorise the ridiculously inconsistent nuances of the 4 different commands you specified.

9/10 times I personally prefer GUI over terminal for efficiency. With three buttons I already have a text editor open. At this point, you've just started typing the letter 'v' in your first step.

This is incorrect. You do not need to log into an account and MicroG works perfectly fine without one. MicroG doesn't use Google Play Services, it replaces it.

Spoken like someone who has never had to deal with corporate 'security' before. Password managers are great, but if your workplace has incompetent IT (e.g. probs 90% of workplaces), then you're SOL and must play the increments game.

Sorry, you must have a special character. Oh... Not THAT special character, it has to be a special special character, that one isn't valid. Ah, no, that one's too long. It should be shorter. It needs to be between 11 and 11.5 characters.

Half the time I now just enter random nonsense until it lets me create an account. Then, when I want to access a website/app again, I just 'forget' my password and reset it to some other random nonsense.

The kids don't give a fuck. It's the backwards parents who can't get their mind out of the dark ages that are 'uncomfortable'.

Did they backtrack already? newpipe.net is literally the first result when I Google it.

One minute in they're claiming the 'No' supporters are falsely claiming a Voice would give special rights to a specific race.

It is literally an amendment to the Constitution to create an advisory body dedicated to supporting a specific race. Whether you agree with affirmative action or not, people aren't bloody stupid. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then I don't need an alleged "independent expert's" ackchyually to tell me it's something else.

I am so over this. Can we have the referendum already? Then we can have the stupid referendum about becoming a republic, and maybe then we can start thinking about all the people who can't afford food or shelter.