What about the politicians from both sides that got my number for spam leading up to the last election. So much for the privacy act
I assure you, with 20 years background building telco software, including SMS processing and value added services, that (a) there is no such thing as a random phone number generating service and (b) telcos have sophisticated systems for selling access to segmented numbers at a premium rate. Anyone who got the sms in question, did so because of factors such as age, gender and postcode. Many other options such as average monthly spend, calls to mobile vs landline, etc, etc. The numbers were bought from your telco, then sent in batches. This exercise would have cost $millions and we have no idea who funded it. Certainly, the attributed "volunteer" organisation would not have the funds. It is a gross abuse of democracy. Imagine the media uproar if the Catholic Church had funded an SMS campaign...
those SMS's were authorised by the respective political parties who are subject to legislation and thoroughly vetted for donations and spending. Mr Greenwich gets no such scrutiny for his activities with voteyes.org.au. How much did the NSW state taxpayer contribute to his personal belief system and when did voters outside of his inner-city electorate have a say in it?
Exactly as I suspected. As with so much in this debate, it's extraordinary how one side is excused all manner of things that the other side wouldn't have a hope in hell of getting away with.
So you're saying that an SMS will make your mind up for you ??!! FFS man, just tick a box, send the letter and forget about it, there are MUCH bigger issues to worry about !! You LEFT/RIGHT WING nut jobs rag on forever. You drive a LWV8HOS and pretend to be an NRA leaning Trumpette, anachronistic tendencies ???
I'd say the reaction to an unsolicited text sent to the private phones of millions of Australians (including children) pales in comparison to the outrage over some smoke in the sky over one city. Another great example of the hypocrisy, don't you think?
Ended up driving back to Sydney in a Porsche 996 - it was a great way to finish off a fantastic weekend in Melbourne with my son. The 996 was lovely to drive - lots of power - dodged a few native animals - hopefully avoided getting my picture taken by the men in blue and lots of stationary cameras However the 996 is not something that i'd like to park in my garage long term - it's a lovely car but it does not excite me
Sooooooooo the engine needed a bit more fettlin before CJ was prepared to release it from his clutches. Engine out - cause of minor leak detected - new seal & bearings & gaskets - engine reinstalled - not enough time to let the adhesives dry and get everything connected before I had to leave melbourne Hoping to swap cars this week and start living the dream
I have never seen the engine actually in the car. I have seen an engine and the car at the same time time, but I never checked the serial number on that engine to verify it was the original engine.
I was about to get it transported to Sydney last week when my son secured tickets to the AFL Preliminary Final, so we decided to hold off on shipping the car to Sydney so that we could drive it home instead. Current plan is to keep putting miles on the 996 till I get my car
well that's interesting - another urban myth out the window. Have to wonder who did fund it - the heading on the SMS said it was from 'vote yes.org.au' but I can't find any record of that organization although there is yes.org.au?
I had the same thought, however, surely the yes camp would be yelling from the mountain tops if that were the case.
Exactly. If there was even the SLIGHTEST whiff that the NO camp was up to no good, the Yes camp would have screamed blue murder. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Bit similar but different to the B/S campaign Labor ran re the Medicare/bank thing at the last election.
It's really about them being able to legally leaving money to their 'spouse' if the yes vote gets up. I can see the practicality in it, if I was in a hostile family situation and death was near I'd want to make sure the people I love got it and not the homophobic relatives they may despise .......... still, they're dead so what does it matter to them
100% correct JM. I'm all for SSM. It's intended to give gay coupled the same rights regarding superannuation, tax, death, etc. etc. It really doesn't have anything to do with being accepted. If people haven't accepted gay people by now, allowing them to get married isn't going to change that. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What I DONT like, is the aggressive stance of many of the YES camp. It's a persons right to decide NO, and they should t be vilified because of it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
