Posts by Kyle Matthews
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
This is the sort of crap that the ABCs have been doing.
The source just says sources. Doesn't say it's an MP, or even from the Labour Party, though presumably it is. Given the fanaticism that Gower and Garner have been been pursuing anything that smells like a story to do with the Labour Party leadership, including several flops, I'd take it with some grains of salt.
-
Also, she WANTS us to laugh out loud at all the phallic stuff in the video, right? Because that’s what I did.
I hope so, because otherwise I'm unclear why she's demolishing walls in her knickers... and sometimes without. Can't she make overalls look sexy?
-
Can people legally require the holder to disclose their own HR file? Because if a low-level manager may have access to it, surely the person themselves should be able to see it.
IANAL, but under the privacy act you have the right to see information that is stored about you. And if you're unhappy with the information ask to have it corrected, and if they refuse to do so, ask for information to be appended to it indicating that you're unhappy with the info that they are storing. So yes, you can definitely see your personnel file and any test results associated with it.
It’s becoming less and less common for any but the smallest of workplaces not to have psychometric testing as part of their recruitment battery. Ruling out a workplace on the basis of having psychometric testing could prove to be exceptionally limiting.
Is it? My employer employs several thousand people. I presume some parts of it do this sort of testing, but I've never been tested in four or five jobs here, and I've never heard of anyone else being tested in this way, so it's by no means common. Practical tests - software, typing etc, sure. I suspect some workplaces are more into them than others.
-
Field Theory: The Final, in reply to Hadyn Green,
Goddamn! I can’t believe I did that
The whole thing is wrecked now. Start again from all the tops and do it right this time!
-
Not necessarily. A jury of 12 requiring a 7 / 5 split to pass would be perfectly acceptable. The fact that they are called juries, made me that they needed unanimous (or almost unanimous) votes to accept the legislation.
Makes the even numbered person pointless in every vote. If it's a majority vote, there's no point having an even numbered number of voters. It doesn't matter so much if you've got a large number of voters (like parliament), but for a dozen, you'd be better going to 11 or 13 or 15 or something.
-
I’m not certain what kind of band you could assemble to carry it off
Symphony orchestra. Just listening to the EP now you could easily make that work, and the sound would be intense, and it would cross over age and style like a monster.
Royals doesn't have much of a melody, but you could add it, and those backing vocals at the beginning of love club could be transferred to a violin.
I'm picking it on tour in three years.
-
Has the US demonstrated capability of exerting air superiority against maintained modern fighters without allied support over hostile territory using carrier based forces? I don’t think they have, not since Korea/Vietnam, at best.
I wouldn't imagine we'll be seeing many fighters taking on fighters in any war. Stealth bombers, drones and extensive use of missiles to take out command and control, radar, missile defence etc. Once those are gone, any Syrian air force has limited ability - they can't see much to know what to engage, and we'll see some airfields having their buildings and runways turned into rubble.
-
Your point is valid though. But I think the one year term makes such influence difficult. It may be easy to buy off two juries but having to do it year after year is harder to do without someone blabbing and it is more expensive.
One of the reasons our parliament isn't very corrupt is that if people get caught, there are consequences - they get screwed next election. If you're picking jurors at random from the electoral roll I'm not sure that there are enough consequences there. Yes I took money from Big Tobacco, but that money bought me a house and I'm not coming back to this jury again, so I'm good with that.
You'd have to put in some strong anti-corruption oversight given that these people have so much power.
Also your jury numbers would have to be odd or have a non-voting chair. You'd want an odd number of people voting to secure majorities.
-
The away strip simply replaces the black with white; however the BNZ logo suddenly becomes blue which makes no goddamn sense whatsoever.
The orange and yellow swap pretty much everywhere as well (even on the logo!), and it picks up some colour down the neck that isn't on the black one.
I'm more and more convinced that rugby should go the way of the NHL and you have a dark top for playing at home, and a white based top for playing away. There can't ever be clashes, the equipment manager doesn't need to figure out which set of tops he's travelling with, and you can figure out where the game is being played just by glancing at the screen.
-
’In Zimbabwe police have raided newspaper offices after the Prime Minister made a complaint about journalists. The ruling party alleged the journalist was a member of an opposition party attempting to smear the government…”
This grates with me. It's my understanding, that as a matter of policy most major media outlets in NZ will not hand over any evidence to police without execution of a search warrant. This is to protect sources, and for the media to maintain a proper neutral position. If that's not the case I'm happy to gripe about the police 'raiding' media outlets.
However if my understanding is correct then the police haven't raided media outlets as part of any heavy handed state actions, it's the only way for them to gather full evidence for their investigation. In the case of Ambrose (for example) they might have gone off the rails with their conclusions from the evidence, but they can't fully investigate the complaint put before them without collecting the evidence.