Mark Whybird / is on Nostr

Puns, computery stuff and occasional political things that amuse or appall me.

Last Notes

2024-06-06 09:16:59

- reply

@npub1d62…tshf Continuing the conversation from elsewhere re: links over here…
The “Not Chattel” one gives this:
https://mediacdn.aus.social/media_attachments/files/112/568/448/793/537/236/original/83363fbd528c8304.png

2024-05-22 02:30:27

- reply

@npub1q9m…zgdu True, unless if it was already signed in the landlord/agent section. But this reporting does not say any more at all on the subject than the words I quoted. It is completely one-sided reporting.

2024-05-13 05:37:57

Hey @npub1svs…p66u - may I suggest a feature please?
I now, belatedly, know that Mastodon resets a poll’s count to zero if you edit an in-progress poll. That’s fair enough, but could Mona perhaps warn of this when doing so?
Thanks for considering this :)

2024-03-05 01:45:20

The only thing more #Brisbane than a Water Dragon near the wheel would be if there was a bin chicken also in the photo :)
https://mediacdn.aus.social/media_attachments/files/112/040/313/651/968/567/original/31ffd1f22c80abd7.jpeg
https://mediacdn.aus.social/media_attachments/files/112/040/314/124/014/125/original/07333a086e905fa3.jpeg

2023-08-09 00:03:16

- reply

@npub15qw…3p2z
Oof.
My point is purely that there are professions, and here's an important one directly related to rights advocacy, that are effectively regulated without impinging on people's rights.
Also, in absolutely no way am I suggesting censoring in terms of stopping these people attempting to spread their lies - I'm just suggesting that it should be possible to distinguish the ones being held to a basic standard from those just *knowingly* spouting crap - just as I or anyone else can express my opinion and give my lower-case-a advice on legal matters so long as I'm clear that it isn't "Legal Advice" from a "Lawyer", or call myself a healer or something and make homeopathy so long as I don't call it a "cure" or myself a "doctor".

2023-08-08 06:43:29

- reply

@npub15qw…3p2z sure. I don’t actually know how law societies work, but that is sort of my mental model: the relevant law society disbarrs someone, and it becomes illegal for them to call themselves a lawyer? Something like that for journalists.
Edit 45 minutes later: looks like the equivalent I’m looking for is how most US states have a “mandatory, integrated or unified bar association” - but it seems even then “disbarment” is a court matter. Which is fine; I still suggest that a similar system could work for journalism.

2023-08-08 06:26:38

- reply

@npub15qw…3p2z lol, I promise I’m not just being an asshole! I genuinely think that while people should be able to publish almost anything short of defamation and the like, the easy ability to know if the non-opinion parts of what they are publishing is being held up to a “they believe it themselves” standard would be a good thing.
Some kind of label maybe? A “member in good standing of the journalists association“ badge that people insist on? IDK.

2023-08-08 06:01:20

- reply

@npub15qw…3p2z But they sort-of regulate what a “lawyer” is… why not something like that?
(Playing devils advocate here somewhat; I actually see high value your argument about danger - but I do wish we could tell at a glance if people publishing stuff are or are not being held up to the standard of them believing their own stated “facts” or not.)

2023-08-08 05:28:14

- reply

@npub15qw…3p2z thanks for the reply. I can respect a stance of holding the freedom of the press as an *absolute* freedom, but my gut says with freedom comes responsibility. Anyway, you’ve made me think. I also was curious about how Fox/Murdoch claimed Carson’s show as entertainment rather than news and how that relates to news not having to be factual; much to think about. I’m now reading some articles on it; this one most recently: https://www.businessinsider.com/fox-news-journalism-organizations-ethics-whca-dominion-lawsuit-2023-3

2023-08-08 04:30:38

- reply

@npub15qw…3p2z I know it’s mostly not against US law to lie, but it is if you are under oath. Is there any consequence at all for a business calling itself a “news” service or an individual calling themselves a “journalist” and knowingly lying? I guess they could be sued for defamation or whatever in some cases, but does the title “journalist” have any protection like the title “lawyer” or “doctor” or others like that?