Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Serf

About Sherman

  • Rank
  1. Sherman

    Our president cops a pasting from John Oliver.

    I understand our preferential system, and while it's better than the American system, it still sucks and leads to a two party duopoly. And it still makes it very difficult for new parties to get a leg in. Maybe you think I'm just a country bogan, but if you take the time to read my posts and think about what I'm trying to say, you'll see there's a legitimate point being made. You guys need to think outside the box a little more. Did what I say about safe seats and voting trends within electorates and states mean nothing to you? And seriously, why is no one acknowledging the role the media plays in forming people's opinions and therefore, election results? There's a very good video on Youtube explaining how, while better than first passed the post, preferential voting is still very flawed. I'm sorry I can't find it to post here. The flaws with our voting system, campaign donations, and media bias are all separate issues which compound each other and lead to our entire electoral and political system being very flawed, and, not actually democratic in a modern sense.
  2. Sherman

    Our president cops a pasting from John Oliver.

    I'm sorry I'm not very good at explaining my position. I'm trying to demonstrate that our voting system is very flawed (especially when it comes to non marginal seats), and that the rich have a disproportionate influence on the outcome. Not all voices are equal as they are supposed to be in a democracy with universal suffrage. I'm talking about voting trends in the community. I'll use my seat as an example again. It's an extremely 'safe' seat. The Lib/Nats ALWAYS get a massive majority here; Labor and Greens never stand a chance, even when there's a big swing. Labor hasn't held this seat for decades. It's an absolute waste of time to vote for them. It's equally constructive to draw a big dick and balls on the ballot paper. This is conservative/bogan heartland. However, there are people here who (quite rightly) feel shafted by the Libs. They'll never vote Labor, and hate the Greens even more. They will however vote for someone like Palmer, with the financial resources to saturate the media and win them over in a campaign. So if the my primary goal is to get the sitting member voted out and replaced with someone who's at least a lesser evil, it's not realistic to vote Labor or Green, even if that's what I'd prefer to do ideally. It's better to vote for the candidate the majority of the dissenting mob will go for and hope he or she gets enough votes and preferences to remove the sitting member. If you live in an electorate which is more marginal and changes regularly, then yeah, you can generally be more choosey about who you vote for and still be able to make a difference to the outcome, but even then, there's not a lot of point voting for a candidate who doesn't stand a chance of winning the seat. You'll only end up supporting the major party candidate the person you vote for preferences the highest. And again, the parties with the largest donations can afford to saturate the media and win over the sheeple. Then there's the issue of media bias. It's a bit different in the senate, since it covers a state by state demographic, but even then, voting for the pirate party, or Wikileaks is a bit of a waste.
  3. Sherman

    Our president cops a pasting from John Oliver.

    Cybes, just one point. AEC funding doesn't compare to the massive amount of money the Libs get through private donations and the amount Palmer has to throw around. Not even Labor with their more modest donations + Union support comes close. The game is totally rigged. Unless there is some pretty major reform in our electoral system, it really does come down to who has the most money to fund a campaign in a lot of cases. The only reason it will be different this time is because the Libs have got on the nose so much. Small parties simply can't compete unless they get solid financial backing. The Greens are case in point. The only way to combat this at the ballot box is to vote strategically. I always vote below the line, but that in itself doesn't fix the problem. I have to be realistic and vote for the lesser evil with the best chance for taking the seat. The senate is a little different, but even then, in Queensland, a vote for the Greens is a waste of a vote. They don't stand a chance here. I always preference them quite highly, but I'd be silly to give them any of the top three spots. here's something for those of you who still like Turnbull: http://delimiter.com.au/2014/06/04/news-co...cos-financials/
  4. Sherman

    Our president cops a pasting from John Oliver.

    Everybody buys elections Cyb3r. It's how our system works. If you don't have enough money to fund a decent campaign, you've got Buckley's chance of getting any real power. It shouldn't be that way of course, but it is. Labor does tend to put restrictions on campaign donations to their credit, but then the Libs reverse them as soon as they get the chance (and Palmer would probably do the same). There's not much that can be done about it without enshrining restrictions into the constitution. As I said, I don't particularly like Palmer, and I certainly don't trust him, but I do believe he has some genuine empathy. I see him as a lesser evil to the Libs. My electorate is National Party heartland. The Greens never stand a chance. Not even Labor does. Warren Truss has betrayed his constituents more than once, yet people still vote for him. Palmer is the only one with a chance to take the seat from him. He has the money and he has the pedigree of being former Lib/Nat. I'd prefer Katter myself but he doesn't have enough dosh behind him to win votes. Plus the Libs love to run dirty "a vote for Katter is a vote for Labor" ads (which is actually illegal, but they can afford to pay the fine). All we can do at the moment is vote for the lesser evil with the greatest chance of winning the seats we live in.
  5. Sherman

    Our president cops a pasting from John Oliver.

    I had a good laugh at this too when I saw it. It's refreshing to see with all the depressing news of late. It's bit sad that's it's coming from the USA though. To be honest Director, I'm surprised to see you bagging Abbott and the Libs out. If you and people like you are turning against them after this budget, then the polls really are accurate. I'm saddened to say it, but comparing the Labor and Liberal Parties is like comparing horse shit and cow shit. The horse shit doesn't stink quite as much as the cow shit, but it's still shit! I'm almost certain Turnbull won't take over the leadership. He's about the furthest Left (which is still well and truly Right of Centre) a Liberal gets, and a large portion of the party won't be able to tolerate him. If there is a leadership spill, someone further Right, but in the "centre" of the Liberal party is likely to take over. Secondly, I don't want there to be a leadership spill, because in that case, the Libs might be able to dangle enough carrots to fool the public into voting for them again. The Libs and their neoliberal agenda (which Labor shares to a lesser degree by the way) need to be firmly discredited. Abbott should stick to his guns (which I think he will) and get wiped out. Maybe some people in Canberra will start to wake up then. As far as Labor goes, you can't really say it's a Left Wing party. It hasn't been since Ted Theodore ("Red Ted" if you want to Google him) had the Communists booted out of the party in the 1930's. The party has shifted steadily to the Right since then. I'd say the farthest Left faction of the modern Labor party is somewhere close to the Centre. Labor these days compares in my mind somewhat to Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats in Germany, and they are considered a Conservative Party in Europe. You could call the Greens Centre Left, and that's why many who have become disillusioned with Labor have turned to them, even if they think the Greens aren't willing enough to compromise on environmental issues. My advice to people is to vote for whoever has the best chance of unseating the Liberals/Nationals at the next election. In some electorates, that's going to be Labor. In conservative seats, that might be Clive Palmer or an Independent. At the election after that, you could look into finding a minor Party who suits your views better/best. For now, we have to get this bunch of wankers out. We have to send the message that this government's policies aren't what this country needs. I voted for Bob Katter's party at the last election, because he wants to put a stop to neo-liberalism in this country, which I see as our biggest problem aside from climate change. I don't agree with his social conservatism, but one thing at a time I guess. The trouble is, he doesn't have the money to buy enough votes in election campaigns. Clive Palmer does, and for this reason, I'll probably end up voting for him when the next election comes around. I don't like Palmer, but at least he seems to have some empathy for the poor and struggling. I can deal with a man like that. Our democracy is badly broken. The rich have a disproportionate influence on politics through lobbying and media *cough*Murdoch*cough*, and voters are too selfish and poorly educated to make an informed decision. People seem to forget that when you vote, the way you vote affects MILLIONS of people, not to mention our international relations. They don't take the time to consider the big picture, and what's coming 10, 15, 50 years down the track (neither do most of the pollies). I've been coming to the conclusion that the modern Western interpretation of democracy is a bit like stateless Communism. It's a wonderful idea, but Humanity hasn't evolved the maturity for it to work in practice. The average person is capable of voting smartly on local issues, but it's out of their league when it comes to national and international issues. For the moment, I think democracy needs to be limited, sort of like it was in Ancient Greece, but not based on wealth of course, rather merit and qualifications. How to decide those merits and qualifications is the million dollar question of course.
  6. Sherman

    Grand Theft Auto V

    I won't be buying it unless it's released on PC. Namely because I don't want to buy a console, especially for just one game. I think Rockstar is being pretty silly not to release the game on PC at the same time as console or at least announce a PC release date. People will buy it and pirating will not affect sales terribly. Game developers need to realise that a pirated copy doesn't necessarily equate to a lost sale.
  7. Sherman

    Anyone still playing DayZ

    SoaS and I have got back into it. We've been playing on a password protected server, but we still have problems with hackers stealing very well hidden vehicles and tents. The server is introducing a white list which I'd like to get involved with.
  8. Sherman

    Women in Gaming; A "Make me a sandwich!" Tale

    I fully agree with this. I've met some annoying girls in games as well (you know, the type who egg the idiots on) but my experience with them has been positive all up. More so than with other guys. I once played some rounds of ME3 multilayer with a group of girls. One of the best games I've had. Instead of going all lone ranger, they'd actually stop to revive you when you collapse and stick to a group most of the time. It would be a huge shame if girls end up forming their own servers and stuff. I think that instead sexist taunts and the like should be made a kickable offense. I don't know how that could be enforced but I'd much prefer that to segregation. The offenders should be punished, not the victims.
  9. Sherman

    GRID 2

    My suspicion is that after Showdown, Dirt 4 will be focus a lot more on proper rallying. I won't buy it otherwise. Maybe consult uncle Torrence, but I won't buy it. I didn't mind GRID but it wasn't great either. I'll give the second game a fair hearing though.
  10. Sherman

    Mass Effect 3 demo

    This makes me sad. Sad face :( Even though I liked the ending, and liked being left to use my imagination about what might happen to the ME galaxy after the ending, I felt like it was a little bit rushed too. But I still feel the basic idea and themes behind the ending are quite clever. It's sci-fi which actually incorporates real scientific hypotheses just like the dark matter ending would have if it were chosen.
  11. Sherman

    Mass Effect 3 demo

    The devs have said clearly that the extended cut is just that. It doesn't change the ending, just adds to it. So the indoctrination theory isn't canonical and those who wanted it to be were kidding themselves quite frankly.
  12. Sherman

    DayZ: An ARMA II zombie survival mod

    The heart beat thing works... a little to well. I killed a couple of guys who made me a bit nervous a while back and now, everyone I meet takes a shot at me. I've killed three guys in self defence and had more shoot at me. And it's making the heart beat louder!
  13. Sherman

    DayZ: An ARMA II zombie survival mod

    Does anyone know when 1.71 is due out roughly? I'm not too keen to get back into this until some of the problems with zeds chasing you are fixed. Also, is there any particular reason servers keep crashing? I mean, is it anything to do with the mod?
  14. Sherman

    DayZ: An ARMA II zombie survival mod

    You can add my name to the list. Sherman, same as here. SoaS and I have been playing this together. I like it so far, but we're finding that just before we get kitted up properly ready to explore the map, some bastard takes us out. We've been taken out by guys pretending to be friendly enough times to make us shoot on sight whenever we see people we don't know. And that's the problem with this mod. As soon as you get kitted up and find a nice gun, you've got nothing to do except explore and kill other players and no consequences for doing so. Removing the forced bandit outfit was a stupid idea. I realise the dude who created this likes the idea of leaving the players to make up their own rules, but I think he should add in some things to give players more to do and encourage team work. As things are, SoaS' and my goal is to try and get kitted up without being killed and then head off to the north end of the map where people don't tend to go.
  15. I seemed to do fine, just a little bit lag, and it was fairly hot but it not too much. The next thing I want to test is some BF3 because that's another game Soas was having trouble with, just to make sure.