Please Note: Blog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors.

FACEBOOK - A Conversation Between Two "Friends"

Conversation on Facebook can either be boring or, may just get some people 'thinking'. Hopefully this 'exchange' on Facebook - can get you the reader of this, thinking....

My FB 'friend' Roy posts:

"First Campbell Newman came for clean energy
and I didn't speak out because I was asleep.

Then they came for the prisoners families
and I didn't speak out because no one I loved was in gaol.

Then they came for Healthy Communities
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't GLB or even T

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Like · · Unfollow Post · Share

  • 6 people like this.

    • Roy Hanfling

      Hon Lawrence Springborg MP (NYSEARCA:QLD): Please give Healthy Communties back their funding.
      The Queensland Association for Healthy Communities has been stripped of its funding by the new Queensland Government. Health Minister Lawrence...

      about an hour ago · Like · 1

    • Roy Hanfling Please sign the petition
      about an hour ago · Like · 1

    • Ross Bradley
      Ha Ha, Roy... (Here's part of a post I've just completed) FWIW.

      ......."To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture."

      The above is the opening paragraph of "The Crisis" and was written by a Thomas Paine back in 1778, yet are words that could, should or, can surely apply in any time or, certain periods in life.

      It was English philosopher Edmund Burke who said, 'The only thing necessary for the triumph [of evil] is for good men to do nothing.'

      It's an amazing period of time in history we are going through. Where people are either employed within or, are a part of many organisations that have done wrong or, continue to do wrong - yet they stand by and are prepared to 'turn a blind eye' to the 'oh so obvious' wrong - that's being done.

      In commerce, people are in fear of losing their jobs. And as a result people have been made 'slaves' (by banks - no argument here?), and it becomes a reason given for their 'see no evil'- say no evil' of the same organisations that they work within. History tells us that they lose their jobs if they are to speak out.

      The structure of and the determinations being made and the direction people are being 'driven' to follow by so few (as in Occupy's situation) is not unlike the following that I have taken from the web:

      < The President of the National Academy of Sciences asked:

      ............."What right has the federal government to propose that the American people conduct a vast nutritional experiment with themselves as subjects, on the strength of so very little evidence that it will do them any good?" >

      The apathy of those within Govt (who can speak out against wrong) and among the people that they govern, is (as has been pointed out) simply a reluctance to take a stance or, for people 'to stick their bib in', so to speak. This is the result of this same 'ingrained fear' (the consequences of their doing so) and in the exampled case, is one that's clearly being 'capitalised on' by a Govt or, those in control.

      This (I feel) almost qualifies as being a "Committee Mentality" whereby this certain collective stupidity results - when this same committee 'level of thinking' is permitted to form around Govts and stems right down to a people's movements, like Occupy.

      about an hour ago · Like · 1

    • Ross Bradley
      A solution? Regular Govt 'polls' had on the web, for starters. (Weekly, even?). Where questions can be put to the people (rather than tooth-less, 'tired' old petitions) and where they can 'vote' in favour or, not and get to discuss their reasons why. Security (one person - one vote) can easily be embed-ed via IP addys for starters.

      People then can become more 'involved' in areas that are so critical to them and others on a State, or, National level. Results needn't be mandatory, but should clearly show (in many instances), the will of the people. It can also hilight that area of people having the freedom to 'caste their vote', rather than be compelled to attend and (if they choose to do so), caste their vote.

      about an hour ago · Like · 1

    • Ross Bradley ‎.
      (Local Govt - State Govt and Federal Govt polls. - Anonymous voting - using the IP address of a computer, hand held or, whatever. "One IP addy - ONE vote"!)
      about an hour ago · Like · 1

    • Ross Bradley ‎(Marketers/advertising can do this - reach individual 'users' via IP addys, yet Govts can't?)
      about an hour ago · Like · 1

    • Ross Bradley ‎(It's time that people were given a means of becoming more 'involved' with how they are 'governed'. Give the democracy, back to the people..)
      about an hour ago · Like

    • Roy Hanfling I still think it's a matter of agency Ross Bradley
      In an ideal world the government should..
      but I have no control over that, just words
      The question for me "Is what can I, do right now!"
      about an hour ago · Like

    • Ross Bradley Agency or, urgency, Roy? (Explain, "agency"?) Thanks.
      about an hour ago · Like

    • Roy Hanfling
      I think
      when we say "they should" we dis-empower ourselves
      we are trained to do this by our masters if you notice

      We we take on agency and do something, we empower ourselves

      If we wait for government to listen, we will wait a long time
      If we want the government to hear, we have to yell really loudly, together

      about an hour ago · Unlike · 1

    • Roy Hanfling I'm trying to learn how to write more clearly, I'm not always successful :-)
      about an hour ago · Like

    • Ross Bradley ‎.
      "we take on agency and do something, we empower ourselves" ...Great. And I fully understand, now. We then demand that this is done at all levels. - You make your point so very well Roy.
      about an hour ago · Like

    • Ross Bradley
      Roy - In regards to the "ID" of a person, or, a 'one vote' per IP address (as recorded, from an IP Addy), please bare with me and get to understand the following and how simple this 'service' can then be extended (leased) to a Government - as it is already (likely) being done so, in the interests of National Security, ok?

      How does it work?

      At the time of the query, the ad server determines the physical location of a web site visitor using the IP address provided by the publisher. The ad server then uses the location information to deliver ads targeted to the users geographic location and search type.

      [What Geo-Targeting options are available?

      Geo-Targeting is performed at the campaign level and is available for regions as large as a country or narrow as a postal code. Specifically, there are four geographic types you can use to target your campaigns:


      State or Region

      City / Designated Marketing Area

      Postal Code

      Please note that at present Geo-Targeting options below the country level are only available for the United States, Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom.]

      52 minutes ago · Like · 1

    • Ross Bradley That Link:
      51 minutes ago · Like · 1

    • Roy Hanfling
      I do agree that this is possible
      and highly desirable

      There is a thread of thought (you might recall) that says voters are too stupid to be taken seriously
      I don't agree

      Same deal as above
      No point in waiting for the government to do this
      You! - should set it up
      I'd chuck in $100

      In a way have done something similar
      and anyone can start a question

      Can't see the government getting around to it

      46 minutes ago · Like

    • Roy Hanfling ‎..and I'd hate Government to have control of it
      44 minutes ago · Like

    • Roy Hanfling I also get the point that your idea makes one location one vote possible
      42 minutes ago · Like

    • Ross Bradley
      Nothing is impossible, for starters. :)

      Yet, it is not that "easy", to be done. In fact, it costs millions upon millions (in spite of a market that can't grasp this, as fact) for such an engineering feat to be accomplished.

      It was a former Looksmart CEO Ted West who (when advising the market of the Co's AdCenter platform-from within a Conference Call), who had once told the market:

      .............."We believe that these performance features are comparable to those - - from each of the leading propriety search advertising platforms [meaning, Google & Bing], but also that they are unique at scale among competing non-propriety search advertising networks....

      ........We fully understand that to replicate these performance features of scale would represent a significant engineering undertaking for any keyword search advertising provider".

      Yes .."to replicate these performance features of scale would represent a significant engineering undertaking"

      It's "early days" on this (today's) "thought"!!!! :)

      37 minutes ago · Like

    • Roy Hanfling Well count me in for $100 if you get it going
      Me and 10% of the rest of the population and you would be steaming ahead
      35 minutes ago · Like

    • Ross Bradley ‎.
      That's all good, Roy. It then gets down to ..."who owns the web"? ...And many other complications...It can be 'fully transparent' and after-all, with advertisers (globally) spending $$$'s 10's of billions annually on the web, it has to be 'fully transparent', ok?
      30 minutes ago · Like

    • Ross Bradley ‎(You 'replicate' technology that is already in place. - We wouldn't want another Telstra, Optus etc...with how many separate 'roll-outs' of 'in-ground' cable, pole-to-pole co-ax cable, and infrastructure?)
      27 minutes ago · Like · 1

    • Roy Hanfling
      Ross, I have to go do some work soon or i get fired :-)

      I'm a bit dubious about the whole concept of voting
      I think it's a con
      Making people vote on things they don't understand and don't give a stuff about, as influenced by an owned media - gets us nowhere IMHO
      There is no agency in this

      What I do think works, is a community wide conversation
      where we work together to find workable solution
      and the participants are the people who give a stuff
      and gagging people is unacceptable

      I don't think we need permission or government to set up a free and open conversation about things that matter to us
      We just need to continue to fight for it every inch of the way

      18 minutes ago · Like

    • Ross Bradley
      Govts are currently 'bending over backwards' to accommodate the likes of Google etc in relation to following 'users' (yes, us) around the web, to "target' us with advertising (goods and services) they 'harvest' from our individual behaviour - search history or, even our expressed 'thoughts', all across the web. Including, here on Facebook. (The very reason FB has a valuation of over $100 billion)

      These same Govts can so easily make these web Co's 'sit at the table' and 'extend' their technology for the benefit 'of the people', not just use it for their own selfish wants or, needs....

      17 minutes ago · Like · 1

    • Ross Bradley OK. Get back to your work....

      "Making people vote on things they don't understand and don't give a stuff about, as influenced by an owned media - gets us nowhere IMHO"

      Roy. This is a suggested, "start point"...It's a voluntary VOTE on issues, that's web based.
      15 minutes ago · Like · 1

    • Roy Hanfling then again we can also cut out the middle man (the government)
      and do it ourselves!
      15 minutes ago · Like

    • Ross Bradley They can be the 'sponsor' of it all ... Democracy? For the benefit, of the people....
      14 minutes ago · Like

    • Roy Hanfling Oh I agree with you
      I believe in what you are doing enough to sincerely offer you hard earned money if you want to get it going
      14 minutes ago · Like

    • Ross Bradley It can be fully transparent, for all people to understand and be made confident of....the process...
      14 minutes ago · Like · 1

    • Roy Hanfling transparent would be so wonderful
      13 minutes ago · Like

    • Ross Bradley I'll do a more fuller post on the subject and 'go from there'...It's a "start", that's all...Naturally it will be met with resistance from any Govt of the day....
      12 minutes ago · Like · 1

    • Roy Hanfling
      10 minutes ago · Like

    • Ross Bradley ‎.
      I see it as a "first step" in 'watering down' a (so) tired thing that is, Party Politics .... Where it can 'drill down' to individual electorates where people within those defined boundaries can jump on the web and discuss/vote on issues that are 'centered' around them. - This way, those representing these people, will have a need to listen - to these people...
      7 minutes ago · Like · 1

    • Ross Bradley ‎.
      Roy ...IF Labor was serious about holding office in Canberra, I could give them a 'plan' surrounding all this, that would see them not only win a next election, but win with the greatest of all, majorities!!! No kidding!!!
      3 minutes ago · Like


      Always, just an opinion/s as expressed.


      Disclosure: Long LOOK