Play Nice Random Chat Thread VI

[Val Keating]

Well, when every side is playing for interwebs wins, what's the point in event trying to have a nuanced discussion?

He’s not doing it for an Internet win.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

It's funny seeing people lose their mind over again after this tweet:

I think they thought after his apology and all the controversy that he wouldn't discuss covid again or would just repeat the government narrative haha.

he can't do that!!! His apology wasn't sincere. Ban him from the planet!!!

Hmmm:

The company, which has been working with Tokyo's Kitasato University on testing the drug as a potential treatment for COVID-19, did not provide further details. The original Reuters story misstated that ivermectin was "effective" against Omicron in Phase III clinical trials, which are conducted in humans.

 

[Val Keating]

Hmmm:

It’s an old tweet.

 

[ferball]

Classic ferbs. I don't know anything about someone but i did a 1 min google and now i have made up my mind.

Yeah nah... ever since Wisconsin (huh? - GG) a decade ago I've followed what goes on with that shit. There is a nasty trend in the US and it was kind of topped off a few weeks ago when an Amazon warehouse refused to let its workers go home when a tornado was on the way. Sort of thing you probably cheer for hey.

 

[ferball]

You don’t have to like him. Still got to respect him taking them apart like that. They obviously thought they’d steam roll him but he thrives on this type of sh*t. He took apart business insider last year. Rapaport tried to sue him and he took Rapaport’s lawyers apart.

Whatever you think of his character, the blokes as cold as ice.

Honestly I couldn't give a **** about two (groups of) shitheads I have nothing in common with, or even like, arguing about stuff on the other side of the world.

 

[ferball]

Hmmm:

Ivermectin was informally prescribed for COVID in Japan for months and they had very few problems with it while the rest of the world was struggling with the delta variant of it.

 

[Swallow_Wood]

He’s not doing it for an Internet win.

If its not for an internet win where's his comment on its effectiveness on Delta or other strains? Instead we get a cheeky 'Well, lookie here...'

I don't expect Joe to have a nuanced discussion on Invermectin given his position on it in the past and his connection with people who have been crowing on its effectiveness against other strains long before any trials had been undertaken. I don't expect him to accept that some of his guest on his highest rating eps have their own anti-establishment agendas and aren't the leading experts they espouse themselves to be. I don't expect him to take a look in the mirror and learn that his world view is antithetical to large scale controls required during a global pandemic. And I also don't expect him to accept that with bringing the biggest podcaster in the world comes a responsibility to ensure that you are able to have nuanced and balanced conversations on certain topics.

Look, I like Joe and have listed to his podcasts for years. Paul Stamets, Brian Cox, Sam Harris, Tristan Harris and Daniel Schmachtenberger, Neil Degreasse-Tyson, Bill Burr etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. Some amazing guest and some fantastic conversations over the years. But Joe's personal ideological leanings most certainly crept into his narrative on covid and have led to some very questionable interactions. For example, pushing Robert Malone as an expert on and the inventor of mRNA vaccines? Give me a ****ing break. That's like saying that Henry Ford is an expert on and inventor of formula one cars. Allowing Bret Weinstein to call the vaccine rollout the crime of the century without calling him on it after he had been publicly melting down for months post his cancelling at his former employer? Joe is a smart guy, a curious guy, but he's not smart enough to understand his own biases and the many nuances of his conversations and the responsibility that he has when engaging with so called experts during a pandemic. And like it or not, he can't hide behind the 'I'm just a comedian and MMA aficionado' thing. He gets paid the big bucks to engage with a wide range of people to discuss a wide range of topics to a massive audience, and with that comes wide reaching responsibility.

I don't think he deserves to be cancelled. I don't think he is a racist and a bigot. But he has an ego, he has a particular position on controls in place because of the pandemic, he is a multi-millionaire and has the social disconnect that comes with that. And all this is obvious if you, like me, have listened to his podcasts for years. I have stopped listening to him in recent months because his biases on covid have infiltrated so many of his discussions that it became grating. Good luck to him. I hope those who are coming after him fail because he has a great show. But he also needs to take a look in the mirror and figure some shit out.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

It’s an old tweet.

Ah, GG seems to be implying he just put it out and people lost their minds. I guess that's why he used a screenshot rather than a link

 

[Val Keating]

If its not for an internet win where's his comment on its effectiveness on Delta or other strains? Instead we get a cheeky 'Well, lookie here...'

I don't expect Joe to have a nuanced discussion on Invermectin given his position on it in the past and his connection with people who have been crowing on its effectiveness against other strains long before any trials had been undertaken. I don't expect him to accept that some of his guest on his highest rating eps have their own anti-establishment agendas and aren't the leading experts they espouse themselves to be. I don't expect him to take a look in the mirror and learn that his world view is antithetical to large scale controls required during a global pandemic. And I also don't expect him to accept that with bringing the biggest podcaster in the world comes a responsibility to ensure that you are able to have nuanced and balanced conversations on certain topics.

Look, I like Joe and have listed to his podcasts for years. Paul Stamets, Brian Cox, Sam Harris, Tristan Harris and Daniel Schmachtenberger, Neil Degreasse-Tyson, Bill Burr etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. Some amazing guest and some fantastic conversations over the years. But Joe's personal ideological leanings most certainly crept into his narrative on covid and have led to some very questionable interactions. For example, pushing Robert Malone as an expert on and the inventor of mRNA vaccines? Give me a ******* break. That's like saying that Henry Ford is an expert on and inventor of formula one cars. Allowing Bret Weinstein to call the vaccine rollout the crime of the century without calling him on it after he had been publicly melting down for months post his cancelling at his former employer? Joe is a smart guy, a curious guy, but he's not smart enough to understand his own biases and the many nuances of his conversations and the responsibility that he has when engaging with so called experts during a pandemic. And like it or not, he can't hide behind the 'I'm just a comedian and MMA aficionado' thing. He gets paid the big bucks to engage with a wide range of people to discuss a wide range of topics to a massive audience, and with that comes wide reaching responsibility.

I don't think he deserves to be cancelled. I don't think he is a racist and a bigot. But he has an ego, he has a particular position on controls in place because of the pandemic, he is a multi-millionaire and has the social disconnect that comes with that. And all this is obvious if you, like me, have listened to his podcasts for years. I have stopped listening to him in recent months because his biases on covid have infiltrated so many of his discussions that it became grating. Good luck to him. I hope those who are coming after him fail because he has a great show. But he also needs to take a look in the mirror and figure some sh*t out.

I mean he isn’t doing it for Internet wins because he doesn’t read any comments.

 

[big_e]

Portnoy is a scumbag.

 

[Swallow_Wood]

I mean he isn’t doing it for Internet wins because he doesn’t read any comments.

That's a very narrow view on what an internets win is Val. You post stuff like that, you're playing for wins whether you read the replies or not.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

Yes:

Source: Renzetti, C. M., & Edleson, J. L. (2008). Hague convention on the civil aspects of international child abduction. In Encyclopedia of interpersonal violence (Vol. 1, pp. 303-304).

Interesting to note ferball that this article suggests one solution would be to amend the implementing legislation in convention states. In Australia that is s111B of the Family Law Act, but the real grunt is in the regulations - FAMILY LAW (CHILD ABDUCTION CONVENTION) REGULATIONS 1986

It would actually be relatively simple to enshrine something in there that recognises that exposure to family violence presents a risk to the children for the purposes of Article 13.

Also interesting to note that in my search for the regulations I came across this article Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction - Australian Lawyers Alliance which decries the missed opportunity the HCA had to hear a case and potentially set this as a precedent, which would then obviate the need for legislative change.

 

[Kangaroos techno]

If its not for an internet win where's his comment on its effectiveness on Delta or other strains? Instead we get a cheeky 'Well, lookie here...'

I don't expect Joe to have a nuanced discussion on Invermectin given his position on it in the past and his connection with people who have been crowing on its effectiveness against other strains long before any trials had been undertaken. I don't expect him to accept that some of his guest on his highest rating eps have their own anti-establishment agendas and aren't the leading experts they espouse themselves to be. I don't expect him to take a look in the mirror and learn that his world view is antithetical to large scale controls required during a global pandemic. And I also don't expect him to accept that with bringing the biggest podcaster in the world comes a responsibility to ensure that you are able to have nuanced and balanced conversations on certain topics.

Look, I like Joe and have listed to his podcasts for years. Paul Stamets, Brian Cox, Sam Harris, Tristan Harris and Daniel Schmachtenberger, Neil Degreasse-Tyson, Bill Burr etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. Some amazing guest and some fantastic conversations over the years. But Joe's personal ideological leanings most certainly crept into his narrative on covid and have led to some very questionable interactions. For example, pushing Robert Malone as an expert on and the inventor of mRNA vaccines? Give me a ******* break. That's like saying that Henry Ford is an expert on and inventor of formula one cars. Allowing Bret Weinstein to call the vaccine rollout the crime of the century without calling him on it after he had been publicly melting down for months post his cancelling at his former employer? Joe is a smart guy, a curious guy, but he's not smart enough to understand his own biases and the many nuances of his conversations and the responsibility that he has when engaging with so called experts during a pandemic. And like it or not, he can't hide behind the 'I'm just a comedian and MMA aficionado' thing. He gets paid the big bucks to engage with a wide range of people to discuss a wide range of topics to a massive audience, and with that comes wide reaching responsibility.

I don't think he deserves to be cancelled. I don't think he is a racist and a bigot. But he has an ego, he has a particular position on controls in place because of the pandemic, he is a multi-millionaire and has the social disconnect that comes with that. And all this is obvious if you, like me, have listened to his podcasts for years. I have stopped listening to him in recent months because his biases on covid have infiltrated so many of his discussions that it became grating. Good luck to him. I hope those who are coming after him fail because he has a great show. But he also needs to take a look in the mirror and figure some sh*t out.

He is human so it's only natural. It's not like he is expected to be an expert on every issue. Joe has always had biases. And he's been called put before - UFC USADA bias and Jack Dorsey soft ball that forced him to recover the issue. Can you really blame him for digging in on this issue? A lot of people went in hard for him over the 'horse dewormer' stuff (especially CNN) - hell they even went as far as to use filters to make him look sick and weathered...

After all of that it's only nature to want to shove it in people's faces when there is conflicting research.

As you know he's a grinder and he's worked his way to where he is now. He's gotten to a point where he doesn't really need to answer to anyone. I doubt he's going to change too much. In a perfect world people wouldn't force content creators to do what they want and tow a certain line on every issue. Maybe instead we should be challenging more people to think for themselves. To take their own time digging into the research and formulating their own opinions.

 

[blackshadow]

Wonder where the truth actually sits here
View attachment 1323882

https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2022/02/06/spotify-joe-rogan-podcast-removed/

I think Spotify has been caught on the hop and is now under pressure from all sorts of people.

They've alienated a lot of musicians, more about very little payment for their work but they're see someone like Rogan being paid a fortune.

Obviously Spotify doesn't like a lot of the content from Rogan or it wouldn't have been pulled.

Neil Young has obviously lit the torch that has prompted this to all come out.

Spotify is spinning out of control trying to balance the needs of their main content providers in musicians and not to alienate paying subscribers (survey showing 19% will cancel - personally I think that's way too high) versus the almighty dollar from Rogan.

 

[ferball]

Jesus Charlie, that story is horrible.

But that's exactly the point.

It does seem that the problem there isn't the treaty itself but the fact an Australian court ignored that someone who only has supervised custody rights in a supervised facility and that NZ courts themselves considered the guy in NZ to be a serious risk to the child.

I can understand this happening in places with a less robust legal system but it shouldn't ... wait a minute what am I saying... Ignore that.

 

[Swallow_Wood]

He is human so it's only natural. It's not like he is expected to be an expert on every issue. Joe has always had biases. And he's been called put before - UFC USADA bias and Jack Dorsey soft ball that forced him to recover the issue. Can you really blame him for digging in on this issue? A lot of people went in hard for him over the 'horse dewormer' stuff (especially CNN) - hell they even went as far as to use filters to make him look sick and weathered...

After all of that it's only nature to want to shove it in people's faces when there is conflicting research.

As you know he's a grinder and he's worked his way to where he is now. He's gotten to a point where he doesn't really need to answer to anyone. I doubt he's going to change too much. In a perfect world people wouldn't force content creators to do what they want and tow a certain line on every issue. Maybe instead we should be challenging more people to think for themselves. To take their own time digging into the research and formulating their own opinions.

I don't care for the underhanded tactics or the dragging of his name through the mud. It's just not on.

Good on Joe for taking care of his health. But his whole I got over covid easy thing stank of an out of touch, healthy, rich white guy using his money, time and access to look after his health and thinking everyone else should do the same. A very American libertarian perspective.

And it would be nice if people did their own research and took responsibility for their own education on certain topics but its just not going to happen. They listen to Joe and believe what they hear, like mRNA vaccines are dangerous and spike proteins will get into your brain and the vaccine rollout is the crime of the century. It's Joe's responsibility to manage the role that he has created for himself, whether he wanted it in the first place or not. He's not just a comedian and MMA commentator anymore.

 

[Ligma]

In better news I just served Derryn Hinch

 

[B4Bear]

In better news I just served Derryn Hinch

Shame, shame, shame.

 

[Ligma]

Shame, shame, shame.

Old bloke legit made a mess in the changeroom

 

[blackshadow]

Old bloke legit made a mess in the changeroom

That type of mess?

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

In better news I just served Derryn Hinch

Contempt of court again?

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

Jesus Charlie, that story is horrible.

But that's exactly the point.

It does seem that the problem there isn't the treaty itself but the fact an Australian court ignored that someone who only has supervised custody rights in a supervised facility and that NZ courts themselves considered the guy in NZ to be a serious risk to the child.

I can understand this happening in places with a less robust legal system but it shouldn't ... wait a minute what am I saying... Ignore that.

It is horrible. My only word of caution would be not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. In this case there was clearly a lot of evidence of abuse and in particular the access arrangements put in place in New Zealand for the protection of the children should have been given more weight.

However, clearly a large impediment to the court was that despite multiple accounts of family violence, nothing had ever proceeded to conviction. It is difficult (impossible really) for an Australian court to make a finding of assault, when that is not the matter being heard, and moreover it is in a foreign jurisdiction with the other party located there.

Clearly this is a much larger problem about the lack of support for victims of family violence - the mother herself expressed her belief that the NZ police had done little to assist her and she did not want to go through the process all over again, hence fleeing to Australia in the first place.

But we would not like to see a situation where the mere accusation of family violence become a justification for international child abduction. Again, I would stress that I am not suggesting for one second that this is the case here. Nonetheless, courts have a fine line to walk in terms of equity and due process. And really we have enough problems cleaning up our own mess with family violence and supporting victims, before we can worry about what NZ does.

On that note, though, I have heard that the women's police stations that are used somewhere in Sth America (Argentina or Chile I think) have been extremely effective in combating family violence and ensuring that survivors are supported.

 

[CharlieMortdecai]

Having said all that, I don't see why a court could not apply some sort of balance of probabilities test. It's not as if the applicant does not get an opportunity to respond to the accusations.

 

[Val Keating]

In better news I just served Derryn Hinch

Random fact. He’s walking around with the liver of a bloke my mates used to clash with back in the day.

 

[Ligma]

Random fact. He’s walking around with the liver of a bloke my mates used to clash with back in the day.

Let’s keep these fun facts up aye.