Comment Policy

Comments are welcomed and encouraged on this site, but there are some instances where comments will be edited or deleted as follows:

The comment section is for people to add their opinion and add further information. This can add a lot of value to the post and encourage others to comment. If the comments have no relevance to the post than it discourages others to comment.

Some basic rules:

  • Comments need to be on topic of the post.
  • No derogatory comments on race, religion or colour.
  • No swear words, profanity, obscenity or vulgarity.
  • No abusing other commentators.
  • No spamming.

Trolling

This site as other sites that have a political content get trolled regularly to try to take comments off topic and undermine the comment section. That is why comments need to be on topic of the post. Once one person takes the comments off topic invariably others follow then a lot of the comments have no relevance to the post.

Generalised comments on one political party or another does not constitute on topic.

If you do not know what an internet troll is there is an article on Wikipedia which says “In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.” (Click here to read more)

10 Comments on “Comment Policy”

  1. Jack Diamonn June 23, 2013 at 1:28 am #

    I am appalled and ashamed of the level of corruption, and the weakening of the pillar of law by organised labour.

  2. M Bright-Johnston July 21, 2013 at 11:51 am #

    So dosappointed that Andrew Bolt is supporting a person who once again appears to have done the wrong thing by the Australian public with the HSU. Of course this is cronyism and they (Labor) appear to be desperate for decent people to stand for the electorate. If they didn’t internally elect their friends into cushy jobs then they would probably have no one to stand for the senate.

  3. Dallas Beaufort August 17, 2014 at 10:51 am #

    The rum rebellion continues.

    • jamesplatter February 19, 2015 at 10:17 am #

      We need a Bill of Rights like Canada; Common Law for Australia is obsolete!

  4. Anton van de Zandt October 12, 2014 at 9:53 am #

    Royal Commission

    noun
    1.
    (in Britain) a body set up by the monarch on the recommendation of the prime minister to gather information about the operation of existing laws or to investigate any social, educational, or other matter. The commission has prescribed terms of reference and reports to the government on how any change might be achieved

    That what RC’s were designed to do and mainly regarding government corruption. The biggest reason for successful prosecutions are for those that don’t tell the truth during the questioning and get done for perjury but not for the actual corruption deed. Those that tell the truth can no be taken to court as they will argue they can’t have a fair trial as it has been revealed already in a previous event, like the RC. The Eddie Obeads of this world know exactly how it works and will not be brought to face justice for that very reason. Most RC’s are now only for the big end of town, they will be shamed but that will be the extend of their punishment. Yes, RC’s are good to expose the truth but does not have any power to bring the guilty to face justice.
    Sorry, I don’t believe they have a good score card at all.

    • jamesplatter February 19, 2015 at 10:17 am #

      That too!

  5. Garybris October 23, 2014 at 5:52 pm #

    “New Matilda’s lawyer Sandy Dawson told the court there can be no court action under the Privacy Act because there was an exemption for media organisations and “that’s been entirely overlooked” in what he described as “whimsical submissions” by Professor Spurr’s lawyers.”

    Shane I see your “mate” is defending a website to publish……

  6. E A Colbourn April 23, 2015 at 6:53 pm #

    I remember hearing that the Feds would not agree to a Royal Commission because Julie Bishop’s brother had an important position in the Commonwealth Bank and it would not be pleasant for him. Does anyone else know who said that OR if it is indeed true?

  7. Jim McGoldrick August 8, 2016 at 11:20 pm #

    Like what I see, telling the truth will always win along the way. keep it up.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s