Changes to the blog
As you may have noticed, there have been a few changes to the ALS blog. I have kept the same template, but now we have (1) an RSS feed from a few libertarian websites; (2) no other links on this page, but a link through to a complete set of Australian libertarian links; (3) only five posts on the front page of the blog; (4) multi-layered comments; and (5) a link so that people can subscribe to the blog.
In addition, I have changed the authority on the blog. There remains four “admins”, which are the three executive positions (Tim Andrews, Terje Petersen, John Humphreys) and the person who set up this website (Sukrit Sabholk). There are two “authors”, who are the regular bloggers Jim Fryar and Fleeced. And all irregular bloggers have been kept on as “contributors”, who will need to have their posts approved before they are posted to the website. When/if contributors become regular posters, they can be upgraded to “authors”.
Comments on the look of the blog, of the structure of the two websites (including the main ALS page), and who else should be added as an “author” or “contributor” are very welcome.
37 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
-
Recent Comments
Libertarians and ele… on Libertarians and elections (an… 
Dom Vasta on Libertarians and elections (an… 
Shem Bennett on Libertarians and elections (an… 
'Nuke' Gray on Libertarians and elections (an… Dom Vasta on Libertarians and elections (an… 
TerjeP (say tay-a) on Libertarians and elections (an… TerjeP (say tay-a) on Libertarians and elections (an… 'Nuke' Gray on Libertarians and elections (an… Shem Bennett on Libertarians and elections (an… 
Brendan Halfweeg on The Santa Claus Governmen…
Catallaxy Files- Open Forum: February 11, 2012 February 10, 2012 Sinclair Davidson
- Not all recessions are caused by the Fed February 10, 2012More middle of the night blogging. My economics is classical. The almost perfect overlay of my own book can be found in a series of notes taken by Nicholas Kaldor at the LSE in 1927-29 from lectures delivered by the great American economist, Allyn Young. These notes were only published around a decade ago but [...]Steve Kates
- Where’s Romney? February 10, 2012It is quite extraordinary to watch the American political process up close. Now, I admit I have been busy and I don’t watch much of the television and do not read a lot of the press. But before I arrived the thing I did want to do was see more of Mitt Romney since from [...]Steve Kates
- inCISe
- More on PHI rebate means test February 10, 2012When I wrote in Incise yesterday, ‘Rebate should not be means tested,’ I did not expect events to move quite as quickly as they have. The government seems confident it has the numbers to get the means test through. I wouldn’t be surprised if Rob Oakshott and Andrew Wilkie have indeed swallowed the government’s nonsensical arguments, but it will be interestin […]Robert Carling
- Quiggin versus Carling and Kirchner February 9, 2012John Quiggin accuses Robert Carling and I of ‘an appalling breach of elementary standards of research’ for not acknowledging that Alberto Alesina’s work on the effectiveness of fiscal stimulus and consolidations is ‘highly controversial.’ In fact, we referenced Alesina’s work precisely because it has featured so prominently in public debate, including in the […]Stephen Kirchner
- Police going too far February 9, 2012According to an article in the Sydney Morning Herald, police are lecturing parents for letting their children walk to the shops or catch a bus on their own, with senior police saying such incidents will be reported to the Department of Community Services (DOCs) if a child is considered at risk. But when is a child ‘at risk’? One mother was told it was inappr […]Sara Hudson
- More on PHI rebate means test February 10, 2012
- IPA news
- Let European dogs lie February 9, 2012Australians will be surprised to learn that, apparently, the federal government now has responsibility to help the city of...
- It's time to bring back the thrift February 9, 2012Ted Baillieu plans to shave 3600 jobs from Victoria's bloated public service. The state of Wisconsin in the US, with a...
- We'll huff, we'll puff, we'll blow the budget into surplus February 8, 2012Bill Clinton famously said, "It's the economy, stupid". So it is. Unsuccessful politicians might be inclined to argue,...
- Let European dogs lie February 9, 2012
That’s Fleeced with a capital “F”
I like the multi-level comments… would prefer a full on threaded comment solution, but no blog seems to have those.
I think the “Recent Comments” could have some increased focus, but I like the feed from the Cat, etc.
Other than that, I’ll try to be more regular with my posts…
Fixed now. Personally I’d prefer if the authors called themselves by their normal names with nothing extra… but to each their own.
Yeah, was thinking of changing it to my name for ALS, actually – it’s not exactly a secret these days… It just got carried over from my old blog (a handle I’ve been using a looong time,) and I didn’t want the hassle of dealing with multiple accounts.
You don’t need a new account: You can just change your “display name” to your name and keep using the same account.
Interesting changes. However it looks exactly the same on my iPhone which is how I blog 99.9% of the time.
As indicated previously I will this weekend be removing JC from the list of contributors. I will be forced to logon from one of those old fashion computers that you plug into the wall because admin is too much hassle on an iPhone. When or if he ever wants to contribute something you can remove me and add him back in again at that point in time.
Arbib:
Could you please stop the obsession over me as it’s really starting to creep me out.
Talk about gold with Birdie or something, but not me all the time please.
I had another look through recent blog posts and thought it might be appropriate to add David Leyonhjelm and Andrew Russell back as “authors” as they have both written about a dozen posts, including some recent ones.
Any other feedback on who is appropriate for an “author” would be appreciated.
And I re-did the side bars again. Recent comments are more prominent, and there is now a complete list of links on this page (with a brief description), as well as a few more RSS feeds.
Any other comments, suggestions, ideas?
This blog site is close to fucked. These changes will finish the job.
The RSS feeds and stuff from other blogs simply make the site messy without adding value.
Making contributors (like me) subject to approval is arrogant prattery, such as you would expect from the highly un-libertarian Liberal National Party. Don’t expect any more posts from me.
And purporting to ban JC, undoubtedly the most entertaining blogger on the whole site, is equivalent to the Greens banning someone who prefers hugging pine trees to gum trees.
Be careful you don’t create a rash as you rub each other’s dicks guys.
Thanks for the feedback. I’m sorry if I offended you.
David
To be honest, I was actually the one who initiated discussions with Johnno about opting out . I really did this for the good of the movement, as I didn’t want there to be any issues simply because there’s a clash of personalities. Please believe me when I say this that John did NOT ban me and that it was me that ensured I was no longer a contributor.
Look the movement is really important. This site, if it is kept going, is also really important too, I might add and making sure we beat the shit out these fucking statists by winning a couple of parliamentary seats is far more important than anything else. That’s why I decided to opt out, so please don’t think John has been in any way responsible about this.
I called John and asked him to do this. Demanded it in fact.
I don’t feel slighted in the least by John or anyone else and I really love whatever you post here. So please David
keep it going.
I do agree with your point about this “fraternal” hierarchy though. LOL.
It’s much better you changed back. I understand it was meant to streamline, but the layout just wasn’t good enough.
I agree that moderating blog contributors is a silly idea. If they can’t do the right thing of their own accord they should simply be given the boot. JC can’t do the right thing and has proven it through repeated behaviour.
This site has always ebbed and flowed.
Dude, where’s my “discussion” section!?
Please stop antagonising JC. I think it would be best if you and JC simply stopped commentating on each other. Cheers.
Perhaps it was a mistake to spit the users between “authors” and “contributors”. WordPress offers that option, and given there are many ALS writers who have written never or very rarely, I thought this might be a good opportunity to make some sort of formal distinction.
My original distinction was just done quickly as I didn’t have much time, and I was always hoping for some feedback and suggestions about who should be included. Clearly the distinction has enraged one contributor, so I’m happy to change it.
Any other feedback?
As an alternative, I suggest a guy called “Mark Hill” should start posting regularly directly to the blog. I think you’ll like him.
I didn’t change it back :\
Which bits do you like and which bits don’t you like?
JC, Terje — please stop having your personal argument on the blog. We want to encourage positive, friendly and open-minded discussion of libertarian thought here. On this particular thread, I’d like to encourage discussion of the changes to the website.
If you want to continue your argument, can I suggest you do so through e-mail or on a more private forum. Thanks.
Can you guys not put it on the blog?
Handbags at 10 paces.
John if you are censoring JCs comments it is another decision I don’t agree with. For the record it is not me who is moderating the comments of JC. I’m happy for them to be on display complete with bile aimed at me.
With that out in the open and with his status as contributor axed, as intended, I’m now ready to move onto other topics.
I like the new look, it works well. I think the RSS feeds and links add a fair bit of value, as I’m encouraged to look at what they’re offering.
The divisions between authors and contributors makes some sense, but I can see why some would be miffed.
David, I believe it’s chafing you’re thinking of, not rashes.
I’ll ask this again under my own name, since it got deleted before: in what world does Cory Bernardi, burqa-banner extraordinaire, fall under the heading ‘libertarian politics’ and why are you linking him?
Please don’t become like Menzies House and pander to the statists under the guise of promoting libertarianism, it does you no credit.
Hi BPM. Your last comment might have been picked up by the spam filter: I didn’t remove it.
If you hold your curser over Cory’s name you’ll see that it says “not a libertarian, but…”. The same is true for the Sex Party, Shooters & Fishers, FREE Australia & Pirate Party. I included them all because I thought they might be of interest for a libertarian who was following politics in Australia.
(PS I believe Cory’s more nuanced position on burqas is that people should be allowed to ban them on private property.)
“(PS I believe Cory’s more nuanced position on burqas is that people should be allowed to ban them on private property.)”
I haven’t really followed this one much myself, but if that’s his position, I’d have to say that I agree entirely. This freedom thing cuts both ways.
That makes more sense. Maybe the title “Libertarian Politics” is just misleading in that case.
As for the site redesign, I don’t mind it – I read everything through RSS anyway.
John,
That isn’t the publicly stated position of Cory. I and others have challenged him to adopt that position and he seems keen to stick to his rhetoric of a total ban. And he isn’t saying we should be allowed to ban the crusafix on private property. His is a crusade against Islamic culture not a principled stand for freedom.
People aren’t forced to wear crucifixes and beaten and killed if they refuse.
At least not in the last 500 years or so.
btw JC if you have something to write and want it posted I can post it on my blog if you want. I haven’t posted anything myself there for about a year but it will save you setting up your own.
Thanks yobs.
I was never intending to set up a blog. But I really get pissed about something I may take you up on it
Appreciate the kind thought.
Yobbo – I don’t think any of us oppose a ban on the beating and killing of women.
Umm pretty sure that nuanced position is actually my position. The position I put forward on MH.
In reply to Cory’s article.
In which Cory called for a full ban in ‘public’.
A position Cory also confirmed in a more recent post on the topic.
That said I’m happy to have Cory as a link.
Yeah despite Terje’s demand that John ‘not censor’ JC’s posts I have a better idea.
If immature dickheads can’t be anything but immature dickheads, you simply delete their post straight away. This is a blog with a purpose, and the purpose is not for JC, or Terje, or Davidleyon…etc to swing their manhoods around.
Be harsh, be harsh first, be harsh consistently, get on with the job.
Jake:
Do you like whips, chains and thigh high patent leather boots?
Swinging manhoods?!?
Anyway, my only complaint is that Andrew Bolt has been listed as having a “libertarian” blog.
If you put your cursor over his name it says “not libertarian, but not bad”. He often has good articles on climate silliness, government waste & the nanny state.
Oh right, OK.
…well I’ll give it a go JC but you’ll at least have to take me out to dinner first.
So why are you being wilfully ignorant of the real reasons for some people’s wish to ban the Niqab?