Replies

  • "So if you don’t do the things that Facebook approves of, they’re going to cut you off from their platform"

    Fark I'm shitting myself. Imagine if they banned me from something I don't use. Crazy lefties.

    The right would never impinge on your personal liberty or freedoms. Except for things like the US patriot act and, hmmm a little program called Cointelpro.

    One side might ban you from a social media platform, the other murders you in your bed ( See Fred Hampton)...

    3460137419?profile=RESIZE_180x180

    • I think what is starting to happen is that if a customer bad mouths a company on social media then patron search will identify them as a trouble maker and companies will ban them - like they will not be able to get an Uber. But could easily go further and you could be blacklisted for this political view or that depending on how the company decides to customise the search. The tech already exists as was done for the Chinese government to thought control its population

      • You'd have to go pretty far in your criticism to get a company to not want to use you for profit. 

        Let's say worst case scenario a company decides to stop allowing people of a certain political viewpoint to not access there service. There essentially undermining there own ability to be a profitable entity.  

        The whole point of a company is to make money for shareholders. It would be a strong decision to vote against making profit for a moral position, something I can't see being done regularly enough to become an issue.

        • It is already happening 

          • Any examples you can point to?

            • Using tech the ones in the article

              However it is nothing new 

              Racism, sexism, classes etc have been around forever and businesses have been happy to lose money and not serve people who belong to one group or another. In the US there have been businesses who have refused to serve people who wear apparel supporting a political group they dislike.

              • After reading the original article, there drawing loooong bow trying to link the tech thing to China's system.

                The insurance company examples are nothing they haven't been doing for decades just with a modern twist, rather than just your health records, the patronscan uber  / airbnb ones basically mean if you act like a carnt other businesses can be made aware, just like people get  known for there reputation in a small town, just supersized. For the majority of the population these are non issues because they don't act like twats, ergo non ban, ergo no issue. 

                Asian culture is vastly different in it's outlook on the dynamic between the individual and the group. In the west we're told to put individual wants and needs first. Asian countries it's all about being a good citizen, don't bring shame on your family, hence the greater acceptance of the idea of social monitoring and conformity.

                This is just the extension of that normal human tension between the individual and the pressure to conform to a cultural norm, not a grand technocratic minority report conspiracy.

                But these wafflers like to jump at " faceless men, deep state, silicon valley, bureaucrats, intellectuals, global elites etc etc" that are trying to secretly steal your freedoms, when in fact everybody already regulates there behaviour to some extent to fit in and comply in society.

                • One point is how does patronscan differentiate between   Someone who was wronged by a company sharing that on social media and someone unfairlly slandering a company. 

                  Another point is what is to stop the company legally  using patron scan for barring people who express support for one political group

                  Google Facebook twitter etc are explicitly trying to change the way people vote. 

                  At the moment there is a deficiency in the law where it is legal for companies to discriminate based on political views. This needs to be corrected.

                   

                  • It says in the original article that " Judgment about what kind of behavior qualifies for inclusion on a PatronScan list is up to the bar owners and managers. Individual bar owners can ignore the ban, if they like." 

                    So " bad behavior " isn t set by the company, rather the users. And can be ignored if they chose.

                    Traditional media outlets ( Cough cough Murdoch) have explicitly tried to change voters opinions for years and years. 

                    But I take your point as to the stratification of opinion and feedback loops that occur on social media. Essentially there algorithms are designed to present you with similar content with what you have interacted with in the past.

                    So that generally means things you really like, or things you really hate, and you get an polarized  view of a topic, or you come to think things are happening more than they probably are.

            • Isreal Folau and Qantas

This reply was deleted.

Latest comments

eel_fan_boy replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"Ah thanks"
2 minutes ago
Randy Handlinger replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"I think so to Mace. "
3 minutes ago
Hell On Eels replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"Strange Eel, My suspicion is Frankie deleted his account after Super suspended him, pending confirmation by Super. It's why all his posts read "deleted".
Still, he's got no less than eight Frankie Fong accounts, so a resurrection or reincarnation is…"
6 minutes ago
Poppa replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"Actually you could say restraint of trade is in Parra's favour, their trade has been restrained by Lomax's actions and they bent over backwards to enforce this by having the release clause clarified the way it has been. Intent is that Parramatta…"
13 minutes ago
Randy Handlinger replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"Yeah, fair. I just think that if the NRL backed our rightful claim, which they understood the intent of and registered, and along with us just flatly stated the contract is enforceable, and acted as such, it would have been Lomax seeking relief and…"
14 minutes ago
Hell On Eels replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"Eel Fan, today was simply an agenda-setting interlocutory to determine the next steps. Not a full hearing.
 "
16 minutes ago
eel_fan_boy replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"What do you mean? It's in the Supreme Court today at midday isn't it?"
29 minutes ago
Poppa replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"Macy, understand there is no way it is in the NRL interest to see Lomax win, the NRL has not made a comment otherwise in regard to Parramatta's position. they have the contract, if he (Vlandys /NRL didn't think it was valid, they would have said so.…"
30 minutes ago
Longfin Eel replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"Hearing is set for 12-13th Feb."
35 minutes ago
Prof. Daz replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"NOTE: earlier in the thread Blue Eel (replying to Macy) noted the club letter revealed Lomax asked for a release late July. Blue Eel points out Lomax was first listed on the right wing in Round 11, 16 May vs Knights. This is correct. Going through…"
42 minutes ago
Cʜɪᴇғy Mclovin 🐐 replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"So what you're saying is i shouldn't be blowing off too early.  Fair enough "
47 minutes ago
Hector replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"It will all come down to the supreme court justice. Just hope he  she or whoever aint a storm Bulldogs Rroosters or any other team Bar us supporter Fingers crossed 🙄🙄🙄"
49 minutes ago
Seraph replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"Interesting first and second points BE.
Considering how he signed with Parra via BA, there could very well be something there that may give his side some argument"
53 minutes ago
Prof. Daz replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"For the lawyers ... what is the Eels' likely defense here, beyond "it's a signed voluntary contract?"
We assume in other words Lomax lacks sufficient ground to say he was not in a position to know, lacked legal guidance, was under duress or coerced…"
1 hour ago
Blue Eel replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"Another interesting tit bit about distractions. It was in round 11 that Zac was first listed as a winger for us and wore the number 2 jersey. A short 6 or so weeks later he is asking for a release. 
Sort of mirrors the Dragons issue as well. Wonder…"
1 hour ago
macybrown replied to ParramattaLurker's discussion Official Club Statement: Parramatta Eels commence legal proceedings against Zac Lomax
"Oh my, how could I have missed that oops thanks Blue Eel. Bad on macy for not reading properly, good on us for keeping that release request quiet :)
funny but I recall we here were trying to figure out why Lomax seemed distracted about then, missing…"
1 hour ago
More…

Keaon done deal

As of Thursday, December 11, 2025, South Sydney Rabbitohs forwardKeaon Koloamatangi has reportedly agreed to a deal with the Parramatta Eels, but it is not yet officially announced by the clubs.  Soon to be announced.

Read more…
14 Replies · Reply by Poppa Jan 9
Views: 1958

ANY MORE SIGNINGS???

I've been frustrated recently about the work we have been doing in the open market. Jonah's alright for a year and JDB is solid but he's getting old. I feel we need more in the forwards and some a replacement outside back. All I have seen is links…

Read more…
0 Replies
Views: 262

 

<script src="https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js"></script>
<!-- Sidebar -->
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<script>// <![CDATA[
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
// ]]></script>