this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2023
40 points (97.6% liked)

Australia

3649 readers
66 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @[email protected] who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @[email protected] and @[email protected]

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Includes some useful answers to concerns people may have about voting yes.

all 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago

High school essays require a higher referencing standard than this.

[–] Thecornershop 16 points 1 year ago

Was there no requirements for the essays to be factual? I honestly can't understand how or why blatenet and provable falsehoods were aloud to be in this important document?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why is the AEC so fucking spineless against right wing lies?

Every time they pull some dodgy voting shit, they get away scotfree.

[–] c15co 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

To be fair it’s not the AEC’s fault. In order to get the coalition’s support, Labor decided to not require fact checking. Seems like an own-goal to me.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

So they've just turned the AEC I to a misinformation peddler, excellent.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Why do you think labor were involved in deciding no fact checking? Has there been fact checking before?

I thought the convention was the politicians that vote on having a referendum decide the language. The No voters decide on no. The yes voters decide on yes.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

They might spend 780 million dollars on this whole thing so it's worth having a referendum and all the related conversations. A year ago we spent 780 billion on submarines and not a single person I know said a thing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It is abundantly clear that the alleged 'journalist' responsible for fact-checking this had an ulterior motive.

  1. The High Court does interpret constitutional legislation
  2. The ambiguity does include a risk of delays and dysfunction due to poor wording in the proposed legislation
  3. Australians wanting to know what they are actually voting for is not 'misinformation'.

...

I stopped wasting my time here. It is clear that whomever did this assessment was being disingenuous. Won't waste my time reading further.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The Guardian 'journalist': This is a valid point, but I don't like it, therefore, I dub thee 'misinformation/disputed'.

I'm glad I had these smrat (sic) people here to think for me.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

I think you are confusing valid concern with valid point. None of the information in the "No" pamphlet is based on fact, only conjecture based on possibilities.

The concerns about the voice to parliament made by the "No" campaign is based on what could happen if we implemented a voice poorly, not what will happen if we added a few lines to the constitution making a voice mandatory.

While it's splitting hairs I believe that the No campaigns arguments don't really amount to much beyond scare mongering. The question asked (as I understand it) is should a voice to parliament be made a mandatory part of our constitution. With the government of the day deciding its scope.

The dreamer in me wants to think we can solve the problems of Australia without making mandatory what should be a given. The realist in me understands that sometimes you have to spell it out to stop those in power forgetting.