Sunday, January 18, 2009

Macavity the mystery cat...

For when they reach the scene of crime - Macavity's not there! *

But Stilgherrian pops up everywhere - today on ZDNet replying to an anonymous comment on ... you guessed it, filtering.

He's really fixated on the idea that a trial is going to be some monumental waste of resources. I think that he and others really fear that the trial might just demonstrate solutions that work.

* From the T S Eliot poem.


  1. So are you a Conroy staffer or just a general labor stooge?

  2. Eddie, I'm actually beginning to find that suggestion offensive, both to me and Conroy's staff.

    Firstly I've addressed the claim on Stilgherrian's blog. But let me go on with the offensive part.

    It is offensive to me because it shows a failure to have read the contents of this blog. I started it as a commentary on the Digital Economy blog efforts by the Department. Maybe I don't fill my posts with the kind of hyperbole usual for these tings, but I was actually highly critical of that effort. I'm also pretty critical of the handling of the filtering conversation.

    It is also offensive to me because it carries the implication that only a Conroy staffer or Labor stooge would bother writing these views. I've resisted the temptation to suggest the Internet community has resisted any filtering efforts because of the revenues they generate from this traffic. I'm pretty sure some are motivated by this but I'm prepared to take them on faith that they really espouse the libertarian views they espouse for their own personal reasons. It is always a mistake to infer motives on others rather than merely rely on their arguments.

    And I find it offensive to Conroy's staff because if they thought they needed to defend the policy they have plenty of avenues to do so publicly. I perhaps could understand a few surreptitious (?spelling) posts but a whole blog?

    So please if you want to comment Eddie on the content feel free, but can you leave off the insinuations?