You are here

Your say

All are welcome to have their say about any article published on this site or in response to any other comment. These pages are intended for comments that may not easily fit in with discussions elsewhere.

Notice, Saturday 13 July

The volume of spam comments posted has, sadly, forced us, as an interim measure, to stop many well-meaning anonymous Internet users, whose contributions have added greatly to the worth of candobetter, from being able to post their views to candobetter. We intend this to be only an interim measure until we are able to cut down on the volume of spam posted by unconscionable people who have chosen to abuse their access to the Internet. In the meantime, only those with accounts will be able to post articles or comments.

If you want to have your say: Supportive comments, as well as critical comments, which add to the discusssion, are welcome. Please add your comment, to the end of the most recent Miscellaneous comments page, currently Miscellaneous comments from 18 March 2013, that is, if you can't find a page with material which is already related to your intended comment. These pages are intended for comments that may not easily fit in with discussions elsewhere.

Should we refuse to publish to prevent disruption to candobetter ...

On rare occasions, we may find it necessary to act against attempts to disrupt discussions with means such as: personal attacks, repetition of arguments whilst ignoring past responses, needlessly bloated posts and other unfair debating techniques. Where we do, we will do so transparently, so that other site visitors will be made aware of our refusal to publish. Also, we expect that we will allow the contributor to link to the material from candobetter should he/she find somewhere else to pubish the material.

AttachmentSize
Image icon train-29sep10.jpg5.17 KB

Comments

The comment below has been moved from here, because I consider that it disrupts the discussion on that page - Ed (13/5/16)

Just what sort of time warp is Candobetter living in.?
War kills humans. War is good.
Selling uranium to India increases the chance of a nuclear war between India and China. That might (at best) kill 500-mil from each side, a total of 1-billion.
Ummmm -- that will give Planet Earth a spell for lets see -- 12 years.??????
Ohhhhhh.
We need something more than nuclear war to stablise, then reduce, the human plague.
Natural disasters? Cyclone Yasi - biggest for decades - killed one person. (That dope was burning a kero heater in a sealed room and died of carbon monoxide poisoning. We're better off without him).
Only viruses can do it.
HIV is pathetic - down to lower than 8-million kills a year. While global growth is still 80-million. While village idiot Bill Gates spends millions trying to "cure" tropical diseases like malaria and cholera.

Candobetter Ed:

Publication of this comment was delayed while we wondered what to do about it. We don't want to be seen to condone recommendations of violence, but Zero isn't saying that he plans to unleash viruses or wars. We also don't want to be seen to censor anything not actually illegal. I know the author and his ironic sense of humour plus his deep despair about overpopulation, so I am going to publish it. But the reader is asked to be aware that candobetter does not advocate violence and does not rejoice in mayhem or natural disaster.

On the other hand, the lack of empathy displayed in the comment about the 'dope' burning the kero heater who perished during cyclone Yasi, could cause the relatives of that person distress - and for no good reason. Zero's comment would have been just as effective if he had written that 'one person died, not from the cyclone, but through misadventure.' We would have had no problem with that statement.

And the comments about HIV would be read by many people as callous and even psychopathically devoid of empathy. They might also be interpreted as racist by people who perceive HIV as a disease primarily affecting third world countries with non-European populations (overlooking Russia and the USA). Others might see such comments as styled for shock-value, therefore ironically effective in dramatising nature's apparent lack of defense against human overpopulation.

Zero's message that selling uranium to India increases the chances of war between India and China is a perceptive warning, even though it is couched in sarcasm. In addition, he dramatises the fact that Earth's human population growth would catch up with a billion deficit in only ten years.

So, here is your comment, Zero, finally published with these editorial comments. Now I'm going on to your next one. Thanks for reading candobetter.