Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

LIVE NOW: Glenn Greenwald, Assange, and Kim Dot Com in NZ

kim.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 154 posts

Re: LIVE NOW: Glenn Greenwald, Assange, and Kim Dot Com in NZ

#101

Post by jacquesm »

tankenmate wrote: post #94
vorg wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would also be good to have more engagement of non-citizen New Zealanders this election also! For non-Kiwis... New Zealand is one of the very few countries in the world where non-citizens are allowed to vote in national elections. Permanent residents who have lived in NZ for only 1 year can register to vote, though they don't have to. They're not allowed to become citizens until they've lived in NZ for 5 years howe…

Actually Australians don't have to vote, they are required by law however to attend a polling station on polling day or have registered for a postal vote and returned the postal vote envelope. The actual vote papers can be blank, or indeed you can write in if you want; even for people who aren't on the official ticket (i.e. you can legally vote for Mickey Mouse). If a write in gets enough votes they are free to accep…

Australia is behind the times in this respect. Voting is a right, not an obligation and non-participation is a form of protest against the system as a whole rather than a forced choice between multiple options none of which you may agree with.

Re: LIVE NOW: Glenn Greenwald, Assange, and Kim Dot Com in NZ

#102

Post by jamespo »

jacquesm wrote: post #92
tomp wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think calling him a rapist is correct. AFAIK, no-one (including him and his lawyers) is contesting the accusations against him, including the one that he had sex with a sleeping woman, which IMO is definitely rape. Of course, I still think that the whole charade around having him extradited to Sweden for questioning is just a tiny little bit too convenient for the powers-that-be to think it's only about the rape.

Have a read: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/23/women-a... That is one piece that speaks strongly to me, mostly because of the position the women that wrote it take.

Just the picture byline I find interesting: "Julian Assange has made it clear that he is available for questioning by the Swedish authorities, in Britain or via Skype."

Since when do those under suspicion get to dictate to the authorities how they conduct their investigation?

Re: LIVE NOW: Glenn Greenwald, Assange, and Kim Dot Com in NZ

#103

Post by jacquesm »

jamespo wrote: post #102
jacquesm wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have a read: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/23/women-a... That is one piece that speaks strongly to me, mostly because of the position the women that wrote it take.

Just the picture byline I find interesting: "Julian Assange has made it clear that he is available for questioning by the Swedish authorities, in Britain or via Skype." Since when do those under suspicion get to dictate to the authorities how they conduct their investigation?

They don't, but Assange being somewhat paranoid is something the Swedes should be able to accommodate, especially if they want to resolve the case. Their strategy makes more sense if they don't actually want to resolve that case.

Re: LIVE NOW: Glenn Greenwald, Assange, and Kim Dot Com in NZ

#106

Post by nmjenkins »

jacquesm wrote: post #101
tankenmate wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually Australians don't have to vote, they are required by law however to attend a polling station on polling day or have registered for a postal vote and returned the postal vote envelope. The actual vote papers can be blank, or indeed you can write in if you want; even for people who aren't on the official ticket (i.e. you can legally vote for Mickey Mouse). If a write in gets enough votes they are free to accep…

Australia is behind the times in this respect. Voting is a right, not an obligation and non-participation is a form of protest against the system as a whole rather than a forced choice between multiple options none of which you may agree with.

I disagree. Voting is a responsibility, hard won through history and still not a privilege available in all countries. As pointed out by the parent post you absolutely do not have to agree with any of the options. 50% of the population spoiling their ballot paper would be a massive statement and precipitate political upheaval. 50% of the population not bothering to show up just says they don't care.

Re: LIVE NOW: Glenn Greenwald, Assange, and Kim Dot Com in NZ

#107

Post by sjwright »

jacquesm wrote: post #101
tankenmate wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually Australians don't have to vote, they are required by law however to attend a polling station on polling day or have registered for a postal vote and returned the postal vote envelope. The actual vote papers can be blank, or indeed you can write in if you want; even for people who aren't on the official ticket (i.e. you can legally vote for Mickey Mouse). If a write in gets enough votes they are free to accep…

Australia is behind the times in this respect. Voting is a right, not an obligation and non-participation is a form of protest against the system as a whole rather than a forced choice between multiple options none of which you may agree with.

Did you read the parent? You don't have to vote in Australia. You just have to show up and not vote -- or alternatively accept a trivial fine.

(I personally think mandatory voting is a crappy system, but less crappy than all the alternatives. Much like capitalism.)

Re: LIVE NOW: Glenn Greenwald, Assange, and Kim Dot Com in NZ

#108

Post by Nanzikambe »

aw3c2 wrote: post #27

This feels like the typical Kimble self-advertising event. Disgusting.

Regardless of my distate for KDC, I have to say: I disagree.

Given the allegations * regarding the illegal involvement of state security apparatus in his case, I can totally see that this event represented an ideal platform for everyone participating.

Though KDC did use the event to plug products & services, that wasn't the focus of the event. In his shoes, I think you'd have to concede that he'd have been an idiot not to do so.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Dotcom#Political_fallout_f...

Re: LIVE NOW: Glenn Greenwald, Assange, and Kim Dot Com in NZ

#109

Post by [deleted] »

jamespo wrote: post #102
jacquesm wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have a read: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/23/women-a... That is one piece that speaks strongly to me, mostly because of the position the women that wrote it take.

Just the picture byline I find interesting: "Julian Assange has made it clear that he is available for questioning by the Swedish authorities, in Britain or via Skype." Since when do those under suspicion get to dictate to the authorities how they conduct their investigation?

[deleted]

Re: LIVE NOW: Glenn Greenwald, Assange, and Kim Dot Com in NZ

#110

Post by jacquesm »

nmjenkins wrote: post #106
jacquesm wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Australia is behind the times in this respect. Voting is a right, not an obligation and non-participation is a form of protest against the system as a whole rather than a forced choice between multiple options none of which you may agree with.

I disagree. Voting is a responsibility, hard won through history and still not a privilege available in all countries. As pointed out by the parent post you absolutely do not have to agree with any of the options. 50% of the population spoiling their ballot paper would be a massive statement and precipitate political upheaval. 50% of the population not bothering to show up just says they don't care.

50% of the population not showing up shows there is a huge problem.

There are only 22 countries left in the world where voting is compulsory and only a few of those are countries that have good reasons for that rule.

As soon as your country appears in lists that also contain 'North Korea', 'Congo', 'Lebanon' and 'Thailand' when it comes to political matters you really have to wonder if you're on the right path.

The only countries imo which have a legitimate reason to make voting compulsory are those that are so small that the statistical basis underlying the decisions taken based by the people voted for would be removed.

A vote is a 'poll' just like every other and you don't need a 100% sample in order to reach statistical significance.

I'd be very suspicious of any elections that did have 100% turnout.

Post reply on HN