Things that make you go hmmmm

Respect is a two way street

Someone posted a comment about how they see the world and I replied with my take on how I see the world. You think homophobia is bad in the west, try living in the middle east. Slavery is evil and right now africans are trading other africans as commodities. These are facts...no old white men involved. etc etc

I may or may not agree with what someone says but I certainly will respect their right to believe in what they feel is true for them and naturally I would prefer it if this stance is reciprocated as it makes for a good debate.

Most of what you're citing as examples of 'human' failings are the equivalent of dumpster fires with camera footage of a white guy lighting the match.

What I don't understand is your statement about divide and conquer, because your entire post was about listing groups and divisions. 

I can respect the ability to hold ones own opinion. Maybe I've read LG's original post on respect the wrong way, thinking it being more about respecting a person just because they are old.

But I really don't get why people want to be an anachronism. 

Baiter and you assume your generation isn't going to fudge things up too? 

I seriously think that for their future that Patrick should meet Ryan.

Married at first sight: YF edition. 

We met at a YF hui a few years back.

As far as I remember sparks didn't fly.

Your point doesn't really make sense. He is on Ryan's side of the argument, you are on the other. It would be kinda weird if he supported you over Ryan, against his own beliefs. 

If he had not illustrated a clear side to one argument, then your point would be relevant. I also find significant differences in the way he debates a point with you, and the way he argues with others. 

But you said he was siding with Ryan because he’s his good mate, and would never dare argue with him. But that’s not true. My point was if he were to side with someone for the sake of it, it’d more likely to be me than Ryan. When in reality we had opposing viewpoints. Your entire point just doesn’t stand up logically at all. 

Of course he sided with one member over the other - he agreed with that persons viewpoint. That’s Nothing to do with him being a mod. 

I don’t really understand your problem with it. He has an opinion on something, he expressed that opinion just like everyone else did, including myself. 

Tegal "as far as I'm aware" you appear to be wrong?

Not really. Briefly meeting once where “sparks didn’t fly” is hardly the greatest romance of the century. 

I’m as disappointed as you, I was really starting to cheer for them as a successful Yellow Fever love story. But it wasn’t to be. 

I do think it has serious potential myself so let's keep on working on it. 

I think the problem is their relationship would have a gender imbalance, so wouldn’t meet the 1 female per relationship quota policy they have in place. 

That was a more tongue in cheek statement as I have noticed both Patrick and Ryan have been very supportive of each other on a few other threads. I am largely clueless as to who are actual friends on this forum.

Yes, I get your point. It just doesn't make sense as he was clearly on one side of the argument, so he wasn't picking and choosing who to support. I am also talking about the entire forum, not this particular thread.

Your not really understanding my point. Its not his argument or his side. Its how he talks and argues differently with certain members of the forum compared to others. 

when two people have so much in common genders can't really be that important

Why exactly are we critiquing Patrick’s bedside manner anyway?

Love is love <3

The narrative in New Zealand that Brexit is an awful thing to have happened I find really interesting. If we were to be a part of some equivalent organisation where we couldn’t control immigration from he Pacific and South East Asia and decisions on our fisheries were made in, say, Singapore (there’s obviously massive treaty implications for this) etc, I think we would overwhelmingly vote for NZexit. The backlash against the TPPA (before it was ‘Comprehensive’ and ‘Progressive’ (but even still then)) and the talk about slashing immigration numbers (for which voters then gave a mandate) in the lead up to the election probably support this. 

I’m not saying that being in or out of the EU is the best thing for the UK, but just wondering what we would do in similar circumstances. 

It's not really that similar, we've had close ties with Europe for many years and the sheer number of non-British Europeans living in the UK doing essential jobs is huge. A lot of those of guys face the prospect of being booted out. On the flip side, and I know several folk who are in this boat, are Brits who live on the continent who face the prospect of of being booted out of Europe.

Trade and education links are huge and we've already seen a fair few companies who have left or will leave the UK should Brexit be finalized.

Most of the Anti-European politicians pointed out the money that would be saved and reinvested in things like the NHS. None of this looks likely to happen, fishing from what I gather is largely unchanged and people forget/chose to ignore the huge amount of Urban redevelopment that was funded through Europe.

Most people who voted for Brexit did so because they were made to feel afraid, (family members have freely admitted to this), and failed to realize that most of the countries woes was down to a series of inept UK governments and not Europe.

Also, the UK wasn't struggling, it had some of the lowest unemployment rates in Europe and a growing manufacturing sector. A lot of companies were manufacturing in the UK because it was inside Europe and therefore exempt from tariffs, if it's outside of Europe then the manufacturing is going to move somewhere else. One article I read had employment in the aviation, space, and automobile industries contracting by 15%.

The immigrants were largely from Eastern Europe and were doing low paid jobs like construction and hospitality, and were probably a net asset to the country.

Errr nope, thats not the case at all 

Fair enough , however if I was a EU citizen back home I'd hardly been putting my feet up, same can be said for Brits leaving in Europe. 

UK government yet to guarantee in law protection against deportation 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-24...

EU Citizens living in UK "have expiry date on residency". Also currently UK citizens living in Europe not guaranteed free movement around the EU. 

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-42279408

 the fear of being booted out or losing certain rights

https://www.ft.com/content/edfbcb46-8810-11e7-bf50...

Increase in deportation last year

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/bre...

That's the ironic thing, brexit occurred largely because of irrational racism yet after leaving Europe the UK will still be forced to have open borders to the EU but will lose a lot of the benefits.

On a lighter note, just had to call ASB about something and got the message that they were "experiencing higher than normal call volumes" and to consider calling back later unless the enquiry is urgent. Decided to hang on and see what happened, expecting a message telling me my expected wait time was 30 minutes or something but then someone answered immediately. Wonder if they just use that first message to try and discourage people from holding on regardless of how many are on hold.

As it happens it was a waste of time anyway as she basically told me to bugger off and look online (which I obviously had already done before feeling the need to speak to a person).

I'm not going to spoon feed you, you will just have to live with the fact that there are some things you don't understand :D

I don't like  modding and I am finding I need to. Everyone watch your step please. 

If you want to treat this like the Stuff comments section then may I suggest you go there.

Out of interest, why did you remove my post?

It's being reviewed.  Some of the mods think it crosses a line we'd prefer not to have debated on here.

It may be unhidden but probably not.

Probably because they did not agree with you.  PC

I don't understand because it makes no sense... One side divides, the other side looks to unite. Looking at your post and all the divisions that you list shows what side you're on. Your world view is of one divided, not the people who are arguing against you.

My personal view is that our tribalism is outdated and is slowly evolving away. I also think that the concept of nation state has passed it's use by date and is redundant. We shouldn't have borders at all...

Also, saying you prefer Putin to Trump... There's strong evidence that Putin has organised for the murder of dozens of people, including the orchestration of fake terrorist strikes as he was coming into power. I've spent a fair amount of time in Russia and the people love him, but he's not a good man and is far more dangerous than Trump.

But I thought the policy was solely aimed at "encouraging diversity"? Now it's a marketing ploy directed at the bar's target demographic? 

Which is it?

Do you actually know or are you just arguing for your own point with anything you can grab at?

This is the common tool people with these opinions use. As soon as the argument gets difficult to justify, then the people on the other side are bigots, nazis, emotional, or just "old white men". Despite the total lack of emotion they were showing up until this point, they're branded as emotional and apparently the conversation should be shut down.

I don't think anyone went into the article "looking to be offended". In fact I don't think anyone has said they were offended at all, they have just expressed their disagreement. Claiming the opposite side of an argument are "easily offended", or "snowflakes" etc, is another tool used by the left and right in equal measure.

If there's one big credit due to "old white men", it's that they are not easily offended compared to the younger demographics, that's for sure.

P.S. I am 36, so honestly not sure where I fit in these demographics! 

It's almost as if there are forum rules which these posts breach.

I disagree (yet am not hiding the post). It doesn’t happen. It’d be a boring forum if it did!

Right. I am going to type this once and will not enter debate on this.

These are primarily a football forum. We let some not football slide in because life gets a bit mental if all you do is live and breath football.

At the same time plenty of journalists and other people visit this forum and find content here. If they find something that could be termed objectionable, that could be used to make a tabloid headline "Yellow Fever welcome our new Insect overlords" then they will not be afraid to use it and the people they will be asking for comment aren't the people hiding behind avatars and usernames on here. It will be the people on the 'about yellow fever' page and who's names are registered with the name Yellow Fever.

Based on this (and there is history in this area) we will sometimes make decisions that people will write off as 'PC gone mad' or censorship, these are private forums and we have the right to manage the content on them. It's clearly something we don't do lightly because in this thread alone there are personal insults to the moderators of these forums and some quite frankly embarrassing generalisations about the people who keep the Fever running that have been left alone.

There are plenty of other forms of Social media where you can debate your political views be they that Stalin sold out to the religious right or that Donald Trump has really helped capture the left wing voters of rural Texas, feel free to take it there.

I don't need to be on the front page of the Herald.

Regards
The Fever's token Elderly White Male.

Revisionist history.

Google 1969 mate.

Quotas and discriminatory policies do not unite. History shows it. Over and over again. 

It should be about equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.

Why do we hear all these principals espoused as if they can only produce positive results? Where is the evidence? 

All these policies do is divide, and make us all very aware of the differences between us, which is the opposite of what we're trying to achieve.

The links Patrick posted to show the work being done to encourage males in nursing and early childhood care are VERY GOOD. They are investing money into finding out why males are not doing these things, and what they can do to support them. So they are helping them to achieve EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY. If they succeed, we will get the right balance in those roles, whatever that might be - we don't actually know. What they are NOT doing is setting an arbitrary number of nurses or early-childhood positions that have to be male. That would be enforcing EQUALITY OF OUTCOME.

I don't understand why people continue to fail to recognise this critical difference in approach. 

Patrick's post showed the opposite way of doing things, from what the Caroline Bar are doing, and is the right way to go, in my opinion. 

Yes Ryan, the free market has failed to achieve a diverse outcome in a lot industries, but the approach you're suggesting is wrong and dangerous in my opinion. No where in the world has a country prospered from enforced, discriminatory policy, ever. There are other ways to do it, and Patrick's post in your support is not actually an agreement with you, it shows a different and better way. I wish they would report that stuff more often rather than some lame bar policy. 

Old White fellas? Please explain. I believe we are to be referred to as "Elders". Perhaps we should form a new political group.......

Senior

Predominently

European

Rightious

Men

or S.P.E.R.M for short. Mods, feel free to delete if you wish. Just trying to lighten it up a bit.