Posts by izogi
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: "Meth contamination": the…, in reply to Russell Brown,
I didn't have room to cover it, but there are quite a few real estate agents setting up a side-business in meth-testing. It's a shocking industry.
Yuck, but I don't feel surprised. I'm struggling to think of an experience I've had with a property agent where we weren't treated like prospective criminals immediately after we signed the lease.... especially in New Zealand. (My wife's had even worse experiences before we met each other, and reached the point where she'd hang up immediately if certain agencies answered the phone from a classified ad.) The times when we were fortunate to deal direct with owners, who actually cared about their houses and about keeping good tenants, were so much better!
From what I've heard, Housing NZ falls more into the 'agency' way of working with tenants. I wonder how often staff float between HNZ and commercial agencies.
-
Legal Beagle: Voting in an STV election, in reply to Tim McKenzie,
that is, it can fail to elect someone who would beat every other candidate in a two-way race. There are systems that do satisfy the Condorcet criterion.
I haven't yet thought this through to the point of my brain sizzling, but wouldn't there be theoretical scenarios where there simply wouldn't be a candidate who could beat every other candidate in a two way race?
ie.
Voters prefer A over B because of x.
Voters prefer B over C because of y.
Voters prefer C over A because of z. -
Legal Beagle: Voting in an STV election, in reply to Paul Campbell,
'counting' (typing it in to the computer)
Is this done manually? Somehow I'd assumed there was a scanning process to read voting papers, maybe with real people looking more closely at the rejects.
-
Hard News: On the Clark candidacy, in reply to Bart Janssen,
but I don't like the way The Maori Party pretends to represent all Maori
I'm being cynical, but I'm struggling to think of any politician or party that doesn't commonly spout lines about representing "most" or "all" of some group (often New Zealanders) alongside everything it says. Claiming everyone agrees with you and sees things the way you do is part of standard political nous. Evidence is a mere convenience.
-
On the comment threads (or not), I see that Radio NZ's Mediawatch produced a decent 17 minute segment a couple of weeks back, interviewing Megan Whelan of Radio NZ about why they were closed.
-
Hard News: On the Clark candidacy, in reply to keeaa,
Best person for the job should get it, no matter where they're from
Same here.
I'm confident that Helen Clark has good qualifications, at least as much as could be said for anyone, but I'd like the best person for the job---whatever that is---to actually have the job.
I do wish we were getting some more rounded media coverage of all twelve current candidates, what's needed for the UN and what could be expected from them. Neither blind cheerleading for Helen Clark nor frequent comparisons with Kevin Rudd (who's not even been nominated) seem terribly meaningful.
-
Hard News: Understanding the Audiences, in reply to Rosemary McDonald,
Sorry. I haven't quite figured out their new website. I was meaning to link to the following item on Morning Report (which they've titled "Labour calls land information data 'shonky'"). I've probably accidentally found a general link to the current person's playlist.
-
Hard News: Understanding the Audiences, in reply to Sacha,
Yes, I heard it too.
oh I suspect some may realise they're better off not turning up.
Or they just need to get better at it, considering that not turning up at all gives opposing voices free reign.
-
Hard News: Understanding the Audiences, in reply to Geoff Lealand,
it might mean an end to all those stupid stunts/competitions that the commercial wallies used go run around radio survey time.
Hopefully it also puts a dent in Ministers' ability to to avoid showing up on RNZ programmes with the excuse of preferring to go where the audiences are.
-
Thinking of the title, to be fair it's not really literal.
Or is it?