And once again this thread is getting overtaken by personal attacks. @uzi and @wolfpup, you two are frequent offenders, something I’ve had to issue notes on several times upthread. First, @wolfpup - you know the following is out of place for P&E:
That’s a personal attack, if not as blatant as some, and again, not the first time in this thread.
As for @uzi, you too are dipping into personal attacks:
So everyone who argues against you on these subjects isn’t sane? Not to mention this is another pattern for you, as you were noted and then warned 6 months ago for other personal attacks on fellow posters when it comes to support for Carney by other Canadians.
To both of the posters I’ve just named - this stops NOW. I’ve cautioned the thread without naming names deliberately before, but the two of you are the ones that keep pushing. If I see more of this behavior from either of you it’ll be a warning next time, even if it’s another mild case. And very possibly a thread ban.
To be clear, I’m very carefully not stepping in to the accuracy of the the claims any poster is making, that isn’t, and shouldn’t be the mods job under most circumstances. I do note that @uzi has also been dismissive of all sources but his own, and while I think that’s a highly questionable debating tactic for P&E, it’s not banned. But the frequency of the attacks, especially in light of my prior notes, IS unacceptable in P&E.
I don’t think I’ve made a comment about anyone else’s sources. I may have even quoted from those sources myself. But I do question any source’s partiality that is paid for by the governing party of a country while the other party has stated that they will defund that organization. But I also question my own sources as well, but you don’t see me not posting something. In this particular portion of the thread I was asking why someone doesn’t know about what the other major party in Canada’s platform is and why it wasn’t getting out there for everyone to see. Could it be that it isn’t being promoted like the Liberal platform by that most Canadian of broadcaster the CBC? Why would that be? That is a valid question to ask. How is the government’s position being disseminated and not the oppositions?
Nor was I saying that people who disagree with me aren’t ‘sane’. You could safely change that word to ‘reasonable’. Nor am I making reference to people in this thread. I am making a reference to people who are more interested in opposing all things Trump and the political theatre of doing so e.g. ‘Elbows up’ (the Chicken Dance), than being concerned with the livelihoods of their fellow Canadians.
Was the neutrality of CBC only an issue over the last 10 years? During the Harper or Mulroney years did it only espouse a right wing view?
The vast majority of our media outlets are owned by centre/centre-right conglomerates. Postmedia is owned by a Chatham Asset Management, a US private equity firm. The Post and various Suns seem to have blind support for the Conservatives
The repeated claims that CBC is our version of Pravda that controls the hearts and minds of Canadians has no factual basis.
Uzi is correct here; there actually isn’t yet much evidence to support this assertion. The guy looks and sounds statesmanlike, but the results are not yet evident in sufficient numbers to support your claim. The wins so far are very minor.
I included the mention of dismissing cites as propaganda more as a guidance, but since you insist on this statement:
A few direct counter examples.
Your protest is noted, but these are far more than indicating bias which you do mention as a concern, but don’t use such language for your own sources. However, I did not include an instruction for you to change your habits.
As for the personal attacks, I’ve now had to note this thread several times and you are almost always central to it. I am repeating myself that each attack was mild in severity, and that in some cases you were the clear victim. But you also are pushing back with low level attacks, and as I noted that is a pattern both in this thread, AND one just six months ago on the same basic subject. I had hoped I’d stop it right now before this escalated further.
But here we are today and you’re disputing moderation in thread, even though previously it was just a note. So, since a note isn’t sufficient, this is an Official Warning for Disputing moderation in thread. Since that’s a separate clear violation, please understand that you are still on note for making attacks on other posts in this thread, but are not banned from the thread at this time.
To all - as I just mentioned, there have also been veiled and not so veiled attacks on Uzi earlier, which is why he was not the only one named. Challenge the facts, challenge the assumptions, do not insult your fellow posters.
Except there were similar issues with the Liberal party in the past - Sponsorship scandal for one (and to be fair, the Conservatives haven’t been saints which goes to my point). So, why make it even easier for abuse to happen? Some projects get special treatment if the PM approves them rather than make a level playing field that allow all projects the same chance with reasonable regulation that doesn’t make us uncompetitive? So, the Pm either approves them on merit (his definition) or on other criteria. You’d not trust PP to do the same, would you? So why set the precedent?