AFF twitter a/c tweeting political views

[Nigelinoz]

I'm with the majority on this one,I don't see any problem with admin using the forum twitter account in this way,after all there is nothing on the AFF twitter account that says that only items pertaining to frequent flying,hotels etc will be discussed,and as has been pointed out it's admin's business and he can do as he pleases with it,put it this way if admin used the twitter account to express an opinion that "Airline X is the worst airline in the world"would we be discussing his right to express that opinion on twitter? I suspect not,we would probably be debating the truth of the statement but we would not be questioning his right to use a twitter account that he created ,linked to a forum that he owns in any way he chooses.
Personally I agree with tuppaware,if you disagree with admin's actions just unfollow the AFF account.
Cheers
N'oz

 

[leemin]

And it certainly isn't political, would be a different story if he was tweeting to support the carbon tax as an example.

A couple of people have said the same thing. Just thought I'd throw another spanner in the works - why would this (carbon tax as the issue as opposed to live animal exports) change anything? AFF is still a private operation and Admin would still have a right to express his view, would he not? Assuming the language didn't include 'members', of course.

 

[nlagalle]

A couple of people have said the same thing. Just thought I'd throw another spanner in the works - why would this (carbon tax as the issue as opposed to live animal exports) change anything? AFF is still a private operation and Admin would still have a right to express his view, would he not? Assuming the language didn't include 'members', of course.

I was only referring to what was a political debate as to what wasn't.. actually a carbon tax was probably a bad thing to mention as it does impact frequent flyers directly... :shock:

 

[david-au-2000]

I am with TheWinchester on this. AFF on Twitter should not be used to promote personal opinions because it is not a personal account.

If the owner of AFF wants to ban live animal exports, that is a personal opinion held by him and so it should be expressed on a personal Twitter account. Just because someone 'owns' a web site does not mean he or she is that web site.

If you believe that AFF tweeting against live animal exports is okay then how would you feel if AFF tweeted any of the following
- NBN will be massive white elephant and billions down the drain
- the NBN is an investment in Australia's future, only luddites would block it
- Gillard had her chance now its time for her to go

Or any other controversial opinion for that matter. Because like the comment on live animal exports these are all opinions.

 

[nlagalle]

I am with TheWinchester on this. AFF on Twitter should not be used to promote personal opinions because it is not a personal account.

If the owner of AFF wants to ban live animal exports, that is a personal opinion held by him and so it should be expressed on a personal Twitter account. Just because someone 'owns' a web site does not mean he or she is that web site.

If you believe that AFF tweeting against live animal exports is okay then how would you feel if AFF tweeted any of the following
- NBN will be massive white elephant and billions down the drain
- the NBN is an investment in Australia's future, only luddites would block it
- Gillard had her chance now its time for her to go

Or any other controversial opinion for that matter. Because like the comment on live animal exports these are all opinions.

AFF is not a public forum in that respect. We are merely guests on this website.

Also note that the tweet doesn't mention members or the site either. So "our" views are not mentioned as part of his tweet.

On another twist, what gives you the right to dictate what someone can and can't express on a site you do not own, or have any stake in.

 

[ColinP]

Just because someone 'owns' a web site does not mean he or she is that web site.

Try telling that to Rupert Murdoch.

 

[samh004]

Will be watching the replay tonight as I missed it, but would love the Twitter feed to be updated to #VirginAustralia

 

[medhead]

As was reported last night, the industry has been aware of those “bad slaughter practices” for 10 years and some of their attempts to improve those practices, such as “the box”, have actually made things worse.

Which just shows the industry can't self regulate and government needs to step in. That can be a complete ban or a suspension until the abattoirs improve. It seems to me that using Australia's position to improve performance is better than just letting them be cruel to animals from other countries.

I'm going really off topic now, but on the religious question, I'm not sure that what is happening is would even meet the Halal requirement. The description in Wikipedia (yes I know) says that the entire throat but not spinal cord must be cut. If the animal is making noise that has not happened as the wind pipe must not be severed. Maybe way off topic but I'd be interested to hear if anyone knows about this stuff (well better than wiki).

 

[m_ratt]

Also note that the tweet doesn't mention members or the site either. So "our" views are not mentioned as part of his tweet.

The tweet doesn't, but the twitter account's description does:

@AustFreqFlyer Australia
Australia’s leading Frequent Flyer and Travel website. Read our member’s travel experiences, hotel reviews & trip reports. Get expert opinions from our experts.
http://www.australianfrequentflyer.com.au

I'd be happier if it was identified as @AustFreqFlyerAdmin or similar. The description of the account IMO implies that tweets do represent the opinions of members.

 

[markis10]

If you believe that AFF tweeting against live animal exports is okay then how would you feel if AFF tweeted any of the following
- NBN will be massive white elephant and billions down the drain
- the NBN is an investment in Australia's future, only luddites would block it
- Gillard had her chance now its time for her to go

Or any other controversial opinion for that matter. Because like the comment on live animal exports these are all opinions.

As a long term contributor I have no issue with whatever editorial content is chosen to be tweeted, published, whatever, how I feel is irrelevant, just like the shareholders of our press!

New contributors like yourself are always welcome, as is lively discussion on topics across a broad spectrum of subjects, but joining a forum does not give you ownership of the content, in fact a lot of forums claim your input becomes their copyright to do with as they see fit for their commercial gain.

 

[Mrmaxwell]

As others have said....AFF has a twitter account???

The post by the OP has to be in the running for 'most bizarre post of the year'.

Many of Winchester's post are entertaining and also filled with helpful tidbits, however starting this thread is just plain strange.

Care to elaborate why you feel so strongly TheWinchester?

 

[haydensydney]

Sorry thewinchester, i'm with admin. He can do what he wants.

 

[aus_flyer]

+1 for admin!

 

[bossreggie]

I did not see the show. I will record it tonight.

thewinchester...... I am usually very interessted in your posts and you are a great contributer to AFF.

In this instance I would have to say that I am with Admin. I think he OR any member of this forum should be able to express their point of view. I did not think Admin made the retweet stating he represented the views of all, or any, AFF member.

 

[moa999]

I'm with consensus that Admin can do as he likes - it is his site and on the bits I saw it was fairly gruesome - a great example of shock tactics

but from am also in agreement with medhead, mal (and I suspect a few others from the likes) that this has absolutely nothing to do with live exports and more about Indonesian slaughtering standards
- if it wasn't Australian cattle it would be locally born and bred, are they somehow treated differently - why should Australian bred animals have a different standard
- what right does Australia have to judge the Indonesian standards and practices
- will Four Corners next be doing any expose on the live street markets of Asia where fish and other sea creatures are gutted before your eyes - yet seen by most as a tourist attraction and part of the local culture
- how would we react to for example an Israeli program exposing Australian butchers for not using dhabia (the halal method of slaughter) - which incidentally is itself fairly brutal

Is similar in my mind as PETAs extremely vocal campaign against mulesing on sheep - for those who have ever seen a sheep with flystrike I suspect the small amount of pain is worth it.

But hey we are all entitled to our views and to twitter what we want.

 

[tuapekastar]

Most aspects seem to have been covered but for the record (IMHO):

admin can tweet what he wants, as long he as does not purport to represent AFF members' views (and I don't think he does in this case).

I don't think this was a political tweet (or retweet) in any case.

The images broadcast were, without a hint of hyperbole, revolting - and I'm not talking about the slaughtering of animals, I like red meat as much as the next person, and obviously animals must be slaughtered to provide it. It's the methods used in this case that are unspeakable.

There was an allusion to us being at the top of the food chain - correct, and consequently more shame us (humans in general) for indulging in and allowing such cruelty and suffering.

There has been some mention of 'why just Australian cattle'? Well, because we cannot control what happens to native Indonesian cattle, or cattle imported to Indonesia from elsewhere. But we can control whether it happens to Australian cattle by not exporting them to anywhere that does what we saw last night. This is not a matter of adopting any self-righteous moral high ground, it's simply trying to prevent a cruel practice from occurring.

There is cruelty practised everywhere, including in our own country (yes, I accept there are cultural differences as to what constitutes cruel), and any widespread exposure that may lessen it is welcome IMHO.

I'm pleased the Gummint is taking some action (whether it ends up being significant or situation-altering is anyone's guess), though the cynic in me says once this is off the front pages, it'll be pretty much 'as you were' (albeit maybe with some improvements).

 

[russ]

Care to elaborate why you feel so strongly TheWinchester?

It's it obvious from his avatar? With horns like that, he's scared of being live exported himself!

 

[medhead]

- how would we react to for example an Israeli program exposing Australian butchers for not using dhabia (the halal method of slaughter) - which incidentally is itself fairly brutal

This is one thing that got me when I googled halal and read the description of dhabia in wiki. I'd be interested to know how true it is; but wiki says it must severe the whole throat except the spine so that the animal dies as quickly as possible with minimal distress. I've already mentioned the evident failure to physically achieve that, and I have to also question how tormenting the animals can be viewed as minimal distress.

It seems to me that, aside from the cruelty, these clowns aren't even achieving the religious requirements.

 

[admin]

There have been a number of questions/comments about our Twitter account, so I thought I’d clarify. I also need to make a few other points.

Yes, we do have a twitter account (Twitter), with about 450 followers. Although there is a link to it at the foot of all our pages, it’s something we don’t actively promote. We use it for automatically tweeting new threads. (This means that when someone starts a thread, our twitter followers will receive a tweet informing them of the new thread, with a link to it.)

To be honest, I don’t really pay much attention to it, and it runs pretty much on auto-pilot. Until Monday evening, I had never deliberately manually tweeted from it. It’s designed to be an automated marketing tool, which some people follow and find useful.

After watching the 4 Corners show on Monday, I was outraged. Like thousands of other Australians I felt compelled to act and do something to stop this practice. I saw a tweet promoting the RSPCA/Animals Australia/ Get Up! Petition and re-tweeted it to our Twitter followers.

I’m well aware that AFF is not a political website, and am very careful about not using AFF to promote my own political views. I never have. But this is not a political issue (all political parties are supporting the suspension announced yesterday by the Minister), it’s about preventing mindless cruelty and brutality. I can’t imagine how anyone who watched the show would not be compelled to act. So in forwarding the tweet, I wanted more people to be aware of the 4 Corners show, and that there is something they can do about it.

I don’t believe anyone thinks that the tweet represents the collective opinion of the AFF Community (whatever that is). If you feel that the tweet misrepresents your opinion, then put up a post distancing yourself from the tweet.

One other thing I want to correct for the record: I notice in thewinchester’s opening post he says

Now while I know from experience that admin has demonstrated in prior communications that he doesn't believe private messages sent directly to a specific user are private

I suspect this may be a typo as it is completely incorrect. For the record, I firmly believe that private messages are private. We don’t permit the publishing of PM (without the prior permission of the author). If a member publishes a PM from another member, the post will be deleted and they will cop an infraction. (Some members can testify to this!) Private messages are, by definition, private.

 

[medhead]

It seems to me that, aside from the cruelty, these clowns aren't even achieving the religious requirements.

And I now see this in The Oz:

That's not halal killing: Indonesian cleric joins attack on cattle slaughter | The Australian

THE brutal methods used at 11 Indonesian abattoirs now banned from importing live cattle from Australia are wrong according to Islamic law, a senior Indonesian cleric declared yesterday.