Wednesday, 3 January 2018

An open letter from the Flag Con Panel (Aug. 27, 2015)

An open letter from the Flag Con Panel
“I’m saddened at one level that there seems to be quite a bit of reluctance to engage in the conversation.”—HANA O’REGAN, Flag Con Committee

“The hope is to encourage public involvement in the process ahead of the vote, but hardly anyone turned up.”—JULIET SPEEDY, TV3 News
E ngā, suckers.
Kia ora for the 10,292 designs you’ve suggested—even if half of them were from the same sad, obsessed, talent-free individual. Each of these (some quirkier than others!) was viewed by every Panel member—which gives the lie to the nasty allegations swirling around that this Panel is nothing but a sinecure for a bunch of nobodies who lacked the integrity to say no to putting their undistinguished names to a farcical vanity project for a frivolous and contemptible Prime Minister. We were, moreover, not impressed with the large number of “satirical” designs, such as the now infamous “laser Kiwi”, which were obviously intended to belittle this very serious process and to waste the Panel’s valuable time.
In reviewing flag designs, first and foremost, we were guided by what an average attendance of four Kiwis at each meeting, some of them unfortunately “homeless” people who had turned up for the complementary tea and biscuits, told us when they shared what is special to them about New Zealand. A special thank you must be paid here to the tireless, albeit reluctant, local National Party branches throughout the country!
The message was clear: you don’t really care. Many people wrote in saying: “Keep the Flag, change the Prime Minister”, but the Panel did not find that helpful. Others claimed that this panel was a collection of hand-picked dullards with the aesthetic sense of a kick in the head, the cultural knowledge of a concrete post and the historic appreciation of a goldfish. Again, we did not appreciate this kind of feedback or find it helpful.
In finalising the long list we invited a number of cultural (including tikanga), vexillology (the study of flags), art and design experts to talk to us. These experts really impressed the Flag Consideration Panel, as can be seen by their comments: “That was really interesting” (Sir Brian Lochore, ONZ, KNZM, OBE); “Wow, just wow” (Beatrice Faumuina, ONZM); “That was so cool” (Julie Christie, ONZM), “Really interesting” (Stephen Jones) and “Piss off! How DARE you impugn my integrity? I —WE, goddammit, WE have all worked HARD! Just FUCK off!” (Kate De Goldi, Deputy Chair)
We encourage you to make sure you are enrolled to vote so that you can take part in this nationally significant process. We certainly hope you show more enthusiasm than you did when you failed to come to our heavily advertised consultation meetings.
Ngā mihi nui kia suckers.
Regards,
Flag Consideration Panel:
Prof John Burrows (Chair), ONZM, QC
Nicky Bell
Peter Chin, CNZM
Julie Christie, ONZM
Rod Drury
Kate De Goldi (Deputy Chair)
Beatrice Faumuina, ONZM
Lt Gen (Rtd) Rhys Jones, CNZM
Stephen Jones
Sir Brian Lochore, ONZ, KNZM, OBE
Malcolm Mulholland
Hana O’Regan.
  • Weepus beard11.1
    Enjoyed that thanks Morrissey.
    I have been wondering lately about a way to sabotage the first referendum . It would take a huge social media campaign for all people loyal to the New Zealand flag to vote for a rank outsider in the first referendum but nothing is impossible.
    • James11.1.1
      “I have been wondering lately about a way to sabotage the first referendum”
      Yes, God forbid that people who want a change have the opportunity to do so.
      So much easier to try and sabotage something that you dont agree with.
      • Weepus beard11.1.1.1
        James, it’s perfectly reasonable and legitimate to vote strategically in such cases. The current government has taught us that repeatedly when directing Epsom voters to vote for the ACT candidate of the day.
        I’m sure you’ll agree that the fairer way to run this popularity contest would have been to have the one referendum with the New Zealand flag included.
        This process has been engineered to provide maximum exposure and momentum to a marketing logo and it’s time for those loyal to the flag of New Zealand to fight at the earliest opportunity.
        What do you expect those loyal to New Zealand to do? Not vote in the first referendum? Much better for us to vote for a logo design which will have the least chance of success against the New Zealand flag.
        That is a sensible voting strategy, plain and simple.
        People who are disloyal to the flag have the opportunity to vote too, nobody is stopping them.
      • Morrissey11.1.1.2
        Your comments never fail to amaze me. You don’t seem to quite get the point of anything that anyone posts here. Why don’t you give Leighton Smith a ring? He’s more your level.
      • Tracey11.1.1.3
        Interestingly the Nats won’t support Sue Moroney’s earlier BIll on parental leave, which Seymour supports, but will draft their own bill giving the same thing. It’s almost like it’s a game they play to make sure they get credit for someone else’s ideas and work. Is that what you mean by sabotage?
      • Draco T Bastard11.1.1.4
        Yes, God forbid that people who want a change have the opportunity to do so.
        So, you agree with Labour and a whole lot of us that the first referendum should be asking if we should actually change the flag?
    • Sabine11.1.2
      this does not need sabotage.
      1. referendum, those who want to vote should vote for the design they prefer
      those that want to keep the Flag, should abstain, and not vote.
      2. referendum, those who want to change the flag should vote Yes
      those who don’t want to change the Flag should vote No.
      Or as P.Winston, (the NZfirstler that everyone is so afraid of) says, put a big fat KOF on it Keep Our Flag, but that would most likely invalidate the vote, and I would venture such a vote will not be counted.
      AS there will be no option in the First Referedum such as :Keep current design!! I personally will abstain for the first vote and only Vote in the second referendum.
      Simple as that.
      No sabotage, but a fair and democratic process……Most likely we will end up with a Trademarketet Design, that will costs million of dollars to change on every uniform, piece of stationary, and other assorted gimmicks, but hey, the PM and his sidekick the most Honorable and Honest Bill English, aka Mr. 19% have all the money they need to pay for that stuff, and most likely they will make a buck or two for themselves after all thats what they do. The only ones paying for these shenanigans is us……but hey….Dear Leader wants a new Flag, and his groupies, enablers and voters will happily see their tax dollars spend on a Kitchen Towel.
      • Weepus beard11.1.2.1
        I’m not prepared to throw in the towel just yet.
        My idea is simply to take the fight to John Key and his supporters before their logo gets traction.
        God knows there’s been precious little of that lately.
        • Sabine11.1.2.1.1
          Not throwing in any towels, but it is clear that this will come to vote, no matter what.
          And I can only imagine the ‘outrage’ if no one actually participates in the first referendum.
          Really, think of it. The first referendum is to get people involved, here choose your design, …..now defend it in the next referendum.
          If people are actually not participating (lets say only 10 – 15 % would actually vote) How much of a ManDate would our dear Leader have to continue?
          Also, what is it with National Government that they want to change the Flag, last time it was under Jenny Shipley….really what is it?
          • Weepus beard11.1.2.1.1.1
            Sabine, it will come to campaign before vote.
            I believe we haven’t seen the true size of the marketing campaign Key will throw at this once the first referendum is over and his cheap, poorly designed logo has been chosen to go up against the New Zealand flag.
            They will throw everything at this because there’s much more at stake now than the flag. A loss for Key here would damage him personally. Having consulted Crosby-Textor, they will begin to attack the very heart of demographic of those loyal to the New Zealand flag.
            The disloyal changers will not care one bit if the turnout is 10-15% at the first referendum. The fewer the better for them I imagine, to ensure that an ill-informed choice is made.
            • ” and his cheap, poorly designed logo has been chosen to go up against the New Zealand flag”
              No-one ever asks the PM why his preferred design is an existing commercial product with legal copyright. The media, and the flag-change supporters, never mention how the Kyle Lockwood designs are an existing commercial product currently under copyright. A copyright that is co-incidentally scheduled to expire in [late?] 2015 .
              A question for the legal minds out there:
              As the Lockwood designs are under a legal copyright should they not have the copyright logo visible beside them when images of them are published,? When in included in the long list for example?
              • Draco T Bastard
                A copyright that is co-incidentally scheduled to expire in [late?] 2015 .
                Copyright doesn’t expire until after the death of the author plus 50 years (which would be extended to 70 under TPPA).
                • This is a screenshot of the Silverfernflag website as of 4pm today.
                  http://imgur.com/JMRXznU
                  I have highlighted the relevant information that suggests the copyright expires this year and also the information that shows how the stated copyright requirements are not being met with the publicity and promotion of the relevant designs.
                  If I am incorrect in my understanding of the information as it is presented then I am, as always, happy to be corrected.
                  • Draco T Bastard
                    Yeah, I knew what you were talking about. That’s a shorthand way to say the stuff on the site is copyrighted and that you need to get permission to copy it. It has nothing to do with when the copyright expires.
                  • It is precisely because of the normal copyright protocol that I wonder why the obvious questions surrounding copyrighted images being included in the flag referendum process have not been addressed.
                    If , as Draco suggests, the copyright is not expiring in 2015 then we are left to wonder what the plan is if any of the Lockwood designs are selected as the new flag.
                    His designs are an existing commercial product that has been on the market for a decade.
                    If a copyrighted design of his is chosen:
                    Is he just going to sign over any rights to lost future earnings ?
                    Is he going to get offered compensation for the lost earnings?
                    Is a single journalist ever going to raise the issue with the PM? or anyone for that matter?
  • rod11.2
    How much are they being paid by the taxpayers for being on the Panel.
    • Morrissey11.2.1
      MEMO
      FROM: Julie Christie, ONZM
      TO: rod
      MESSAGE: MIND YOUR OWN FUCKING BUSINESS YOU FUCKING OIK. WHAT DOES IT MATTER HOW MUCH I GET? YOU THINK YOU COULD DO AS GOOD A JOB DO YOU? YOU FUCKING OIK.
    • b waghorn11.2.2
      http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11413938
      $640 a day not bad for being given a job with no real target
      • Morrissey11.2.2.1
        The target was to eat all the taxpayer-funded food on offer.
        $640 a day, plus unlimited free tea and all the biscuits you can eat, since hardly anybody turned up to consume them. I understand that Beatrice Faumuina, ONZM,Lt Gen (Rtd) Rhys Jones, CNZM and Malcolm Mulholland really tucked in to the goodies on offer.

No comments:

Post a Comment