Hard News: The conversation they want to have
291 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 Newer→ Last
-
God, you mean they might be related? Or am I remembering the surname wrong too?
-
I've never been to London and LMFAO hearing people bleat about how horrible it is to be there.
Outside of the coffee debate, two items are pertinent: 1) it's my favourite place in the world by a long shot. 2) living there is utter hell.
-
Isn't d4j some guy from Tauranga called Russell Burns? Is Peter a relative who is doing the hosting, etc?
No, d4j is Peter Burns, of various South Island addresses. Redbaiter is Russell Fletcher of Tauranga.
With which would you rather have a drink?
-
Andrew - that report is quoting Peter Burns - it's only his version. The blogger dad4justice has some rather questionable attitudes to subjects such as women and families.
I guess we will have to wait for the court case.
-
With which would you rather have a drink?
If I'm the one who gets to mix the drinks, I'd happily do it with both.
-
With which would you rather have a drink?
I see you are honing your skills at composing referendum questions.
-
rather questionable attitudes
You mean he blows goats, surely.
-
Was in London for June. I can feel your pain.
If you're in London, you'll have to head into the west end. Monmouth and Bar Italia are still really good,Bar Italia must have improved again since I was was last there in 2000 then. I went there straight off the plane and was seriously disappointed by the experience.
but Flat White, on Berwick St, is not only the best coffee in London, but possibly the best coffee I've ever had.
I really hanker to go there.
-
No, d4j is Peter Burns, of various South Island addresses. Redbaiter is Russell Fletcher of Tauranga.
Actually, he's not Russell Fletcher of Tauiranga, Gordon Maclauchlin changed the name to protect the odd.
-
Andrew - that report is quoting Peter Burns - it's only his version. The blogger dad4justice has some rather questionable attitudes to subjects such as women and families.
I guess we will have to wait for the court case.
Oh, you mean the "real" story (that one sounded out there enough for me).
Heh. D4J may take the stand!
-
With which would you rather have a drink?
As long as they were unarmed, I should think that would be hilarious good times, as a one-off event anyway.
-
The estimable Ryan Sproull had a beer with D4J in Christchurch and seems to have had an okay time.
-
Actually, he's not Russell Fletcher of Tauiranga, Gordon Maclauchlin changed the name to protect the odd.
Are you sure? Redbaiter was identified as Russell Fletcher five years ago here, and seems to be known by that name on Usenet, where he was dispensing his angry wisdom before Kiwiblog even existed.
And then there's the buffet restaurant episode ... which might be about someone else entirely but was posted as 'Redbaiter News Vol 1'.
-
The estimable Ryan Sproull had a beer with D4J in Christchurch and seems to have had an okay time.
I should answer my own question and say that if I had to choose, I'd choose D4J too. He's all-too-human. I'd guess that irl Redbaiter would just be a thundering bore.
-
I asked Redbaiter to have a drink with me. His response seemed genuine and polite to me. I suspect I'd find the same thing with him. Most people are just decent folk. You can't go judging them by their online persona, which is often more a representation of their frustrations than their whole person.
-
Of course you could make the point that perhaps our online selves are who really are, and we're just too shy to be complete arseholes face to face.
-
Are you sure?
Well I was... but 5 years ago trumps my info. Which came from a source who would/should know.
That restaurant episode is quite bizarre.
-
Of course you could make the point that perhaps our online selves are who really are, and we're just too shy to be complete arseholes face to face.
Or rather that our online selves are one of many social constructs expected or chosen according to a given occacsion. I suspect for many the unrestrained on-line persona is already dyiung or has been educated/ignored to extinction.
Tried editing the preview box - doh !
-
Of course you could make the point that perhaps our online selves are who really are, and we're just too shy to be complete arseholes face to face.
He speaketh the truth, for sure. Never underestimate the power of not being able to see your opponent's face.
-
I went there straight off the plane and was seriously disappointed by the experience.
I've heard/read similar comments about Flat White as well. I guess no place is immune to trainee (or even sloppy) baristas; especially in a country that doesn't have much of an espresso culture. Actually, I quite like the places that you can tell what kind of coffee you'll get by who's manning the machine that day. Also, personal taste counts for a lot - the triple-shot in FW wasn't nearly as strong as I'd normally opt for, but the blend & the extraction was so clean that I didn't care. Started making me question whether I've inadvertently substituted "strong" for "good" all these years.
To be fair, on my 2000-01 stint in London I forsook Bar Italia after discovering Monmouth, but I only ever remember it to be good. Granted, standards drop when you're there for any length of time.
-
Of course you could make the point that perhaps our online selves are who really are, and we're just too shy to be complete arseholes face to face.
I once had a hardarse Essex bloke say to me that nobody called him an asshole, I replied "that's because you're a cunt"
We have been good mates ever since, in fact he calls me Dad.
<irony an at> -
I should have added that those who have no problems being arseholes irl become radio talkshow hosts. But you knew that.
-
You can't go judging them by their online persona, which is often more a representation of their frustrations than their whole person.
...Of course you could make the point that perhaps our online selves are who really are, and we're just too shy to be complete arseholes face to face.
I find the whole internet communication thing eminently fascinating. I think people automatically assume that all communication is inherently similar, and I think that's a big mistake. Every time we discover a new medium, we have to learn how to "do" it - to manage its unique set of characteristics, and also address the assumptions we make about our audience and our own message.
I wager we're by far most able to communicate in an environment where we're responding in real time to a small number of people (say, 1-5) whose faces we can see, and whose first language is the same as ours. Whether we're less inclined to say stuff that makes us sound like arseholes is nothing to do with us being "shy" or "cowardly" and everything to do with finding an optimal way of making ourselves understood.
Adjust any of those characteristics and you have to adjust the way you parse all your communication - your own and others'. Some forms of media are relatively easy to negotiate, but often a change in a characteristic triggers a whole bunch of behavioural changes that the subject may not even notice.
On the internet, you have the ability to broadcast anonymously a crafted message to an unknown-but-probably-large number of people who are equally anonymous. On forums, it's sort of real-time, but you still get to think about what you're going to say. In some people this triggers a bunch of unhealthy assumptions about the one's own value in contrast to the rest of one's audience, and so they appear as trolls, or at the least, arseholes. Others assume their audience are as aware of their "human-ness" as the RL people they deal with, and tend to be more easily offended by abstract debate. Another common behaviour I've noticed is that many people tend to be a lot more open about their own lives on the net. Guaranteed anonymity - specifically facelessness - seems to lead to complacency about privacy that ends up having the opposite effect. It's all really interesting, I think.
-
While the estimable Mr. Sproull's Jesus-like extension of tolerance to the more fetid denizens of the blogosphere may be admirable in itself, the opportunity to touch the hem of his garment doesn't appear to work any measurable tranformation in the afflicted. As can be seen from the fawning comment here, his Sol Square drinking buddy is still the same old unreconstructed salt-of-the-earth fag-baiting misogynist.
-
Personally, although online I am polite and constructive, in the flesh I'm a boorish dullard fond of shouting down dissent. Funny how that works.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.