Banned again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again ...

I have updated the top 5 bad things about this troll in post #1:
His support of Rolf Harris (now a convicted child sexual molester, by unanimous verdict on 12 counts) in his child sexual abuse case, and he also denigrates the young girls who were abused by calling them "slags"
He outed a WL once by posting her real name and picture on a number of forums
He threatened some members via PM to expose their postings on the fourm to their employers, then he had the gall to lie about it.
He wrote fake ARs for the shops he part owns, and he has never written a real AR.
He is constantly big-noting himself and constantly bumps his "poetry" threads with cut'n'paste posts.

The troll has a political agenda. There is a great deal of money involved in politics. Every parliamentarian has staff (paid by us, the taxpayer) whose sole responsibility is monitoring the media - not just the mainstream media (MSM), but social media and forums such as this. That might seem difficult to believe, but just consider how many people are accessing this forum. It runs into the 1000s on a weekly basis. Capturing the attention of these forum viewers can have very powerful political ramifications. Again, just consider how senate positions were decided at the last federal election. Ricky Muir and that gun-toting racist, misogynist from NSW each got in with a few thousand votes. Now they are deciding all the keys aspects of the government's legislative program.

The troll is not just a bored old man who likes causing mischief on this forum. His paid agenda is to disrupt. He has been repeatedly exposed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayne

The troll has a political agenda. There is a great deal of money involved in politics. Every parliamentarian has staff (paid by us, the taxpayer) whose sole responsibility is monitoring the media - not just the mainstream media (MSM), but social media and forums such as this. That might seem difficult to believe, but just consider how many people are accessing this forum. It runs into the 1000s on a weekly basis. Capturing the attention of these forum viewers can have very powerful political ramifications. Again, just consider how senate positions were decided at the last federal election. Ricky Muir and that gun-toting racist, misogynist from NSW each got in with a few thousand votes. Now they are deciding all the keys aspects of the government's legislative program.

The troll is not just a bored old man who likes causing mischief on this forum. His paid agenda is to disrupt. He has been repeatedly exposed.

---

Personally I don't really understand how the preferences work in an election , may be only Anthony Green from the ABC will know !

But for a Mirco minor party with only a few thousands votes to occupy a senate or HOR seat is just not right ! These people have no mandate to represent the people !

The fairnest way is by total number of primary votes, not by preferences ! What a beautiful democratic ideal it was when one single vote can change a government - let the dream live on! And put an end to back room deals between parties !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AHLUNGOR

Personally I don't really understand how the preferences work in an election , may be only Anthony Green from the ABC will know !

But for a Mirco minor party with only a few thousands votes to occupy a senate or HOR seat is just not right ! These people have no mandate to represent the people !

The fairnest way is by total number of primary votes, not by preferences ! What a beautiful democratic ideal it was when one single vote can change a government - let the dream live on! And put an end to back room deals between parties !

---

Its called gaming. People like David Leyonhjelm - the new NSW senator whose published views bear a remarkable resemblance to our troll's - used a very simple mathematic formula to harvest preferences from other microparties. Cynically, Leyonhjelm set up several microparties so each would direct preferences to each other. The way it works is think of 100 votes for 10 seats. Party A is guaranteed 50 votes and thus 5 seats; party B, 30 for 3; and party C ,10 for one. That means there are 10 votes up for grabs to determine the last seat. The three major parties will try to win that seat, but so too will the 70 other candidates nominated. So whoever is best at harvesting their preferences is in the best position to get that last seat. If one of these micropartie candidates can get preferences from most of the other micros, and maybe from one of the major parties, then he is in with a high probability of winning. Leyonhjelm has been doing this for years and finally struck lucky last election. He was aided by getting his party's name "liberal democrat" past the electoral commission's guard and a fortunate placing on the ballot paper. He was very lucky.

The problem with our current senate system is that we have above and below the line optional voting. This means that we don't know to whom the party has directed preferences, if we vote above the line.

Now Leyonhjelm has $1 million of tax payers money, and paid staff, to do his bidding. It is naive to say he is not using those resources to further his agenda.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayne

Its called gaming. People like David Leyonhjelm - the new NSW senator whose published views bear a remarkable resemblance to our troll's - used a very simple mathematic formula to harvest preferences from other microparties. Cynically, Leyonhjelm set up several microparties so each would direct preferences to each other. The way it works is think of 100 votes for 10 seats. Party A is guaranteed 50 votes and thus 5 seats; party B, 30 for 3; and party C ,10 for one. That means there are 10 votes up for grabs to determine the last seat. The three major parties will try to win that seat, but so too will the 70 other candidates nominated. So whoever is best at harvesting their preferences is in the best position to get that last seat. If one of these micropartie candidates can get preferences from most of the other micros, and maybe from one of the major parties, then he is in with a high probability of winning. Leyonhjelm has been doing this for years and finally struck lucky last election. He was aided by getting his party's name "liberal democrat" past the electoral commission's guard and a fortunate placing on the ballot paper. He was very lucky.

The problem with our current senate system is that we have above and below the line optional voting. This means that we don't know to whom the party has directed preferences, if we vote above the line.

Now Leyonhjelm has $1 million of tax payers money, and paid staff, to do his bidding. It is naive to say he is not using those resources to further his agenda.

---

thanks Wayne for explaining that in simple English, I still not totally sure, but I think I got some idea.

In the past the Democrats had a mandate of keeping the bastards honest and I don't have an issue with that and I suppose the same courtesy can be extended to the Greens ! At least these two minor parties have clear cut agenda and party directions and they do pull a fair few votes !! And I was happy when Meg Lees voted with John Howard to get the GST through, I think that's enough safety net for the country to be governed !

I'm just a very simple minded man, right is right, wrong is wrong that's all.

Cheers

:cool2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AHLUNGOR

thanks Wayne for explaining that in simple English, I still not totally sure, but I think I got some idea.

In the past the Democrats had a mandate of keeping the bastards honest and I don't have an issue with that and I suppose the same courtesy can be extended to the Greens ! At least these two minor parties have clear cut agenda and party directions and they do pull a fair few votes !! And I was happy when Meg Lees voted with John Howard to get the GST through, I think that's enough safety net for the country to be governed !

I'm just a very simple minded man, right is right, wrong is wrong that's all.

Cheers

:cool2:

---

yep, most people are like you. They just want to get on with their lives, enjoy the day and not worry about things with which they have little power to influence. But, there are also a lot of people whose entire existence is tangled up with getting the power to impose their views on others. These people are obsessed. It is all about power, not ideology or anything else. Just power. It repeatedly amazes me how even the most ideologically driven will quickly abandon a heart-felt position if it means inching closer to power. I suppose one can do endless psychological profiles of such people. They are trying to find validation for some childhood slight, or whatever. But the reality is that these people are the ones who do eventually get power. Rudd and Abbott are the obvious examples, but one can add many less significant people to that list. Generally the system protects us from the worst excesses of their egos. But some real nasties do slip through.

Hi Wayne.

Leyonhjelm was elected on the basis of his primary votes. He received so many primary votes because he was first on the ballot paper. He was elected because of donkey votes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayne

Its called gaming. People like David Leyonhjelm - the new NSW senator whose published views bear a remarkable resemblance to our troll's - used a very simple mathematic formula to harvest preferences from other microparties. Cynically, Leyonhjelm set up several microparties so each would direct preferences to each other. The way it works is think of 100 votes for 10 seats. Party A is guaranteed 50 votes and thus 5 seats; party B, 30 for 3; and party C ,10 for one. That means there are 10 votes up for grabs to determine the last seat. The three major parties will try to win that seat, but so too will the 70 other candidates nominated. So whoever is best at harvesting their preferences is in the best position to get that last seat. If one of these micropartie candidates can get preferences from most of the other micros, and maybe from one of the major parties, then he is in with a high probability of winning. Leyonhjelm has been doing this for years and finally struck lucky last election. He was aided by getting his party's name "liberal democrat" past the electoral commission's guard and a fortunate placing on the ballot paper. He was very lucky.

The problem with our current senate system is that we have above and below the line optional voting. This means that we don't know to whom the party has directed preferences, if we vote above the line.

Now Leyonhjelm has $1 million of tax payers money, and paid staff, to do his bidding. It is naive to say he is not using those resources to further his agenda.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OblOng

Hi Wayne.

Leyonhjelm was elected on the basis of his primary votes. He received so many primary votes because he was first on the ballot paper. He was elected because of donkey votes.

---

Not completely true. He did not get a full quota. I seem to remember he got 9% while the quota necessary to be elected, without preferences, is 14% (I haven't looked this up, so I concede my details might be hazy). According to exit polls, a huge proportion of those primary votes came from liberals who assumed they were voting for their party's candidate. His ballot positioning and his party's name helped him immensely. But he also had three registered parties on the ballot paper. He used these to harvest preferences.

There were some unusual outcomes in the last federal election due to a complicated web of preference swapping deals negotiated between the minor and micro parties.

There's nothing inherently wrong with these types of preference harvesting deals. The major parties do it all the time. Of course when they are disadvantaged by the same arrangements they cry foul and call for reform of the electoral system.

But you are suggesting something very different - that Leyonhjelm was behind several micro-parties which he used to channel preferences. This is illegal. Do you have any evidence to support that very serious accusation?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OblOng

- that Leyonhjelm was behind several micro-parties which he used to channel preferences. This is illegal. Do you have any evidence to support that very serious accusation?

---

yes, he was. He, himself, freely admits to the tactic. And it wasn't illegal (I think it has since been made so - not sure about that, but I know the libs, labs and greens were all talking about changing the electoral laws to prevent it happening again). Do a simple google search, there are any number of references.

One thing I have learnt.

There are people in this world who got plenty of time to spend (maybe not waste), having so many logon names and talking to themselves.

This is something majority of the community will not do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Travelmate

One thing I have learnt.

There are people in this world who got plenty of time to spend (maybe not waste), having so many logon names and talking to themselves.

This is something majority of the community will not do.

---

you are correct. But if it is your job, then you will. That is the point - the troll is being paid to disrupt discussion and further his particular political agenda.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Travelmate

One thing I have learnt.

There are people in this world who got plenty of time to spend (maybe not waste), having so many logon names and talking to themselves.

This is something majority of the community will not do.

---

Hi welcome back brother Mate!


Where the bloody hell were you ??

Golly Wayne, I checked and you're 100% right!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wayne

yes, he was. He, himself, freely admits to the tactic. And it wasn't illegal (I think it has since been made so - not sure about that, but I know the libs, labs and greens were all talking about changing the electoral laws to prevent it happening again). Do a simple google search, there are any number of references.

---

Admin, the troll seems to have resurfaced. Baiting and trolling on general discussion threads is one thing, but doing it on threads begun by businesses - advertisers on this site - is quite another issue. Numberonebigsize, Quickdraw and barista have all been baiting and trolling. I suspect they are all simply our old troll.

Updated with ducksta's slam dunks of the troll:
http://forum.aus99.com/showthread.ph...gain-and-again

Added the latest incarnation and a link to the thread where he has a whinge and everyone tells him he is not wanted on the forum:
http://forum.aus99.com/showthread.ph...ain-and-again/
http://forum.aus99.com/showthread.ph...unningLinguist

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CunningLinguist

Added the latest incarnation and a link to the thread where he has a whinge and everyone tells him he is not wanted on the forum:
http://forum.aus99.com/showthread.ph...ain-and-again/
http://forum.aus99.com/showthread.ph...unningLinguist

---

Hey Brother CL,

Don't waste any more of your times on these trolls, just give them this :


http://33.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_md...xk2lo1_500.gif

I think you can add HERETICMESSIAH also for this clown.
80 odd posts in a few days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisher

I think you can add HERETICMESSIAH also for this clown.
80 odd posts in a few days.

---

I pointed him out a few days ago but apparently it's OK to have multiple names on here. Hereticmessiah/alan86/jellyshots are one and the same.

Have a look at the posting history on Sunday. He was replying to his own posts.

Once I pointed him out, he quickly changed his posting pattern and times.

Three different names, a lot of hot air and bullshit, and some useful info.

Come guy.
I think is good to have him here , he not attacking any one!!! Some good story !!!
he have been very helpful :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HereticMessiah

Can't leave me alone, can you? I wonder what I have done to you.

Aren't you a smart cookie? Once you pointed me out, I quickly changed my posting pattern and times? Maybe, just maybe, Sherlock, your "pointing me out" coincided with the end of the weekend and I have a job that I need to tend to during the week. No, of course not - your brilliant detective work brought me down. What exactly is your evidence?

Thanks for acknowledging that some of my comments were useful. Unless of course you mean Alan's. But I guess it doesn't make sense to say that I am not Alan, because you know better, don't you.

HM

---

HM, You should ignore him aswell. Treat him like you would a troll. I don't know what's his problem, the crazy mofo!

Or better still, lets talk more to each other and drive him nuts! He'll be up all night confused!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HereticMessiah

Not sure how much more nuts we can drive him, but yeah, count me in!

So, me, how am I tonight?

---

I'm great Bro!

Has anyone told you how intelligent you are and how well you write?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HereticMessiah

Oh thank me, thank me!

But actually, no, no one has told me. Guess I need to tell myself. But then, I know already.

---

Sing this with me,

'We are one...but we are many...'

I feel like I'm getting to know myself well by Talking to you!

On a more serious note, I've noticed you have been posting a lot, like myself. You seem like a nice guy (much like myself hehe).
I first discovered this site a couple years back and registered to view the 5 star pics. Lately, I've joined the forum as there's so much I want to discuss. What about you?

Hi gents, haven't read this thread very thoroughly (busy man you see) but I have noticed you have identified me as an alt account of this guy. I can assure you that I'm not him, me saying this probably won't change your mind but I'll say it anyway. On a side note you should probably just leave this guy alone and let him do his own thing.