Duncan Garner outs David Farrar- as a snitch

Reporter Duncan Garner writes today how David Farrar snitched to his boss about a post party romantic escapade in a government building. Garner writes-

How could she possibly know what I had got up to last night? There was no social media then, our cellphones didn’t send photos and the internet barely worked. But she’d got a phone call from Parliament’s chief pigeon – Kiwiblog’s David Farrar. He knew everyone and news had travelled fast. He couldn’t wait to tell my boss.

Mr. Farrar, obviously anxious to avoid being labeled as a tittle tattle and a snitch quickly blogged a counter story where he says that he didn’t mean to tell, but Garner’s boss wheedled it out of him. The explanation sounds weak to say the least. I don’t think anyone means anyone any harm in this story, and Mr. Farrar seems to take it in a good way. However it did make me think about Kiwiblog’s moderation system and the idea of narking that underpins it.

Most blogs have a moderation system. The Standard for example is moderated by various left wingers, some more tolerant than others. Lyn Prentice seems to do most of the work. He is seen by many as a grumpy intolerant old bastard but he’s always been OK with me. Penalties are decided on the spot and usually involve a suspension for some arbitrary period. I think this works better than Kiwiblog’s escalating penalty system.

My view is that having a moderator is preferable to having a network of informants who in the case of Kiwiblog are mainly snivelling cowardly lying Progressives who will organise “complaint” campaigns if anyone they have a political difference with offends them. These are usually hypocrites and/ or morally bankrupt psychopaths who take advantage of the revulsion some have for narking to frequently break Farrar’s commenting rules themselves. Here is an example of a comment directed at myself that apparently did not garner one complaint. Mr. Farrar did not issue even a warning. Other’s have been banished for far less.

“Given your frequent predilections for brainless comments, trolling, racist ignorance, and white supremacy, in my opinion it is perfectly reasonable to consider you a Nazi scum bag with the intellectual ability of a retarded, syphilis ridden monkey.”

The author of the above paragraph has made numerous complaints about other commenters, and had them censured and banned, but remains clear himself, even when the example above is only the tip of the iceberg. Mr. Farrar should employ a moderator. The informant system isn’t working because of partisan political influences and thuggery. Given the traditional association of informing with such vile historical organisations as Stalin’s Bluecaps and Hitler’s Brownshirts and Russia’s Stasi, I’m really surprised he chooses this system, but I guess Duncan Garner’s story gives part of the answer.

4 thoughts on “Duncan Garner outs David Farrar- as a snitch

  1. Have no problem with fair and reasonable moderation. Your Blog your rules.

    But do take exception to the heavy handed way that Blubber Boy at Whaleshit shut down any negative comments about “paid for posts” by vested interests that he failed to disclose.

    Comments would just be removed.


    • Well, Slater thought Pete Belt was doing well for his hits without understanding it was the political fever of the election that was driving the hit count. Belt’s presence has in reality done nothing for the site. Its up to Cameron Slater of course but if it was me, I wouldn’t have Belt on the payroll.

      My opinion is he is a liar and a coward for the way he smeared me with completely false and unsubstantiated claims about voting for my own comments. Nobody capable of the kind of behaviour exhibited by Belt is an asset to any organisation.

      I don’t actually mind too much about blog owners and their moderation policies, but I think Farrar’s method of allowing himself to be manipulated by psychopathic liars and trolls is not going to do him any good in the long run. I had a look at a few of the comments today. Its an unreadable mad house.


      • Take your point but Blubber boy is ultimately responsible for his own site.

        The moderation was simple, any negative comments on an undisclosed paid post were just removed no explanation.

        In short Blubber boy sold out his principles and everything else.

        By his own very public admission, he was a dirty despicable person.


Comments are closed.