Who is the real cyberbully?

Clare Curran

Bryce Edwards has written a piece on the latest spat in the Labour Party civil war.

Labour has so many factions now that it is hard to keep up. But the gist of the latest spat are allegations that Clare Curran has made complaints and is cyberbullying some bloke from within the party who comments online anonymously.

Overshadowing this is another allegation Red Alert and Labour MP's are attempting to flush out anonymous commenters through information harvested off Red Alert.

I am losing interest at that point in the same way you do when two sparrows are outside your bedroom in a bird bath at 6am picking feathers off each other.  You just wish a useful cat would come to the rescue of your ears and kill off both of them.

So who here is the real cyberbully?

Curran (or others) allegedly making this complaint?

Or deliberately anonymous commenters and bloggers at The Standard making hundreds of completely unaccountable comments and posts a week aimed at MP's on their own side?

Freedom of speech in my view must be balanced at least with the natural justice of knowing who is accusing or potentially defaming you.  Surely?

Labour MP's have been subject online this past few months to a kicking from their own that has been a joy to watch.  From the right.  Most of these people would not have the guts to say it to the MP's faces.

If The Standard contributors are hell bent on exercising freedom of speech, is it any wonder Labour are not now taking some action and a) finding out who these people are, and b) staring them down?

Bring on the cat.

Cathy Odgers is a Hong Kong lawyer. She blogs as Cactus Kate.

This article is tagged with the following keywords. Find out more about My Tags

Post Comment

14 Comments & Questions

Commenter icon key: Subscriber Verified

I've got lifetime bans from posting comments to both Red Alert and Standard(less). The former from Trevor due to his hissy fit for me arguing their nonsense moderation policy that allowed lackeys to post real time while mine were held up, and the latter because they were rewriting comments, just like Stalin used to rewrite the histories of his opponents before the show trials.

I comment sensibly, and have never been banned from a right wing, conservative, or libertarian-styled blog, which speaks volumes regarding freedom of speech issues and the authoritarian Left.

Mind you, the ethic of the Left is based on a theft, so I can see why they are always touchy about the truth.

Thus, both blogs are brilliant at reminding the sensible how the Left operates: underhandedly and dishonestly.

I like Clare, though. She was, by the sounds of things, simply trying to clean out the poo, so I can understand her frustration.

Just saying.


What a load of biased wishfull thinking on this rabid National cronie. Where is this public infighting? It does not exist - you're making it all up. You should work for Fox News, you propagandist. No one has public infights like National in opposition, Bryce. Six leaders constant bloodletting for seven years. I have not forgottton a thing, Bryce. Every promise Key and his lot have made and broken. Get real, this government is not working. That should be the opposition's slogan: National won't work.


ACT cronie. Get your facts straight.


"Freedom of speech in my view must be balanced at least with the natural justice of knowing who is accusing or potentially defaming you. Surely?"

Surely, yes, for someone who is living overseas and whose livelihood would not be impacted by their employer knowing a) their politics and b) their blogging activity during working hours.
If Curran can't stand the heat, she should get out of the kitchen of politics.
Cactus, how many law firms in Auckland would allow a staff member to blog regularly on politics in their own name?

You and Curran are pushing against the tide.


Mark, I'm not from New Zealand and only stumbled on this site due to my interest in cyber bullying and I have no interest in your politics. But if your are interested on why you keep getting banned I can assure you it has nothing to do with your beliefs.

It is because you post like a 12 year old. Look back at your post. You refer to Stalin and refer to a very broad-ranging political believe as based on theft. Come on, grow up just a tiny bit.

Sorry if you are a 12 year old...


The attack posted anonymously, of course.

The thing is, the Standard unprofessionally do edit comments, and manipulate comments to suit their purposes in a manner that rewrites what commenters say - and on a scale that is breath-taking, frankly. That is directly comparable to how Stalin sought to rewrite the history of his opponents: I am making the point this seems to be a tactic of the Left. I know of no other political ethic that practices this routinely. If the Left in NZ had any sense, and Labour, they would completely disown Standard(less). Fran O'Sullivan described that sewer perfectly when she referred to it, and its posters, as the 'internet version of the Ku Klux Klan'.

The Left believe wholly in redistribution: redistribution is a Left - there is no defence you have against that; none. The problem the Left have is they have to try an ignore the violence on which their ethic is based. And there's no escaping that. I am a peaceful classical liberal / libertarian who advocates the society based on voluntarism. Google me and read my blog, Life Behind the IRon Drape.

Other than that, as I have said, I like Clare, I wasn't being facetious. I like Clare because in her politics, and interactions with me on Twitter, despite we don't agree on much - we do the odd thing - she is straight up, she has the courage to post her convictions under her own name, completely unlike yourself. You are a coward sniping from the gutter, you are the one in here hiding under your little white peaked cap, and many of 'us' across the political board, from Libertarians such as myself, to Bryan Edwards, and to Clare, are sick and tired of sniping, cowardly, anonymous posters.

Personally, I'd love to see NBR institute a policy of only registered commenters, with registration requiring posting under your name.



First sentence of second para should read:

"The Left believe wholly in redistribution: redistribution is a <u>theft</u>..."


This ongoing sideshow of the Labour Party apparatus is beyond a joke.

Isn't it about time that the focus went on improving the economy? Outside of junk policy like interfering with monetary policy. How about they focus on what small business require. We don't need handouts, just a realisation we build the damn economy.

Maybe streamline or fix some of the following:

PAYE, GST, ACC, provisional, wages, KiwiSaver, rates, water, car registration, WOF, a new Companies Office charge, the awful iGov login, the cost of teaching staff how to do the job (seldom do uni degrees equate to ability), so by default educational programmes need to have a tighter focus.

All these things, by rights, are part and parcel of owning a business. I have no complaint about that. But how about Labour start reducing the burden, rather than thinking social media (or the censorship, thereof) is going to change anything. The internet is full of twits rambling.

As for Curran, she is too busy organising w*nkfests like net-hui (people who actually work online, don't give a toss about net governance, let alone attend academic events). How about she goes and works with Cunliffe? At least he did something decent with telco policy.

Rant over :)


>"Freedom of speech, in my view, must be balanced at least with the natural justice of knowing who is accusing or potentially defaming you. Surely?"

Absolutely not. This sort of thinking will only lead to misguided government efforts to make all speech online connectable to an end person. See China's current thinking. Also see: no Arab Spring.

Plenty of online discourse depends on anonymity. Further online audiences (at least the younger ones who are growing up in the environment) are sufficiently sophisticated to sift online commentary for reputability; anonymous and extreme comments carry less weight than attributed and well-rated comments - but the choice is still important. The audience has no need of mandatory disclosure of identity to be able to to evaluate comments.

Look at how people use Trip Advisor or Amazon reviews: disregard the extremes and evaluate the aggregate information / trends, etc.

New models of discourse are emerging, and we shouldn't be too keen to force old models upon them.


Why is it that those on the left are, ALWAYS, the least tolerant? Prick Dr Brian Edwards' vanity and you will be banned from posting on his blog site.


Yes Jeff, I agree with you re David Cunliffe.
Clare Curran should be trying to learn from Cunliffe, who was excellent in the telco portfolio. Unfortunately, Curran has pegged her flag the the Shearer/Robertson/King/Mallard ship and is sailing in the wrong direction.


Racist comments, comments about skin, colour, weight, as well as nationality, amounts to bullying, and these bullies are
nothing but psychos who need medical help. At home, I use a free app called Qustodio to monitor who my girl talks to on Facebook as the app allows me to watch the profile pictures of accounts she interacts with. My way of ensuring that she stays safe. Just Google for it.


"If The Standard contributors are hell bent on exercising freedom of speech, is it any wonder Labour are not now taking some action and a) finding out who these people are, and b) staring them down?"

- it's pretty much what I would expect left-wingers to do. History has proven they don't tolerate any dissension. Freedom of speech is generally low on their list of priorities. So they hunt them down using data-matching techniques and threaten them. Very big brother.


Why is anyone taking Cactus Kate seriously?


Post New comment or question

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

NZ Market Snapshot


Sym Price Change
USD 0.7740 -0.0003 -0.04%
AUD 0.9511 0.0005 0.05%
EUR 0.6324 -0.0002 -0.03%
GBP 0.4954 0.0001 0.02%
HKD 6.0039 0.0001 0.00%
JPY 92.5100 -0.0050 -0.01%


Commodity Price Change Time
Gold Index 1195.4 -2.890 2014-12-19T00:
Oil Brent 61.4 1.580 2014-12-19T00:
Oil Nymex 57.1 2.910 2014-12-19T00:
Silver Index 16.0 0.096 2014-12-19T00:


Symbol Open High Last %
NZX 50 5518.5 5545.0 5539.3 -0.21%
NASDAQ 4752.6 4782.1 4748.4 0.36%
DAX 9901.3 9901.3 9811.1 -0.25%
DJI 17778.0 17874.0 17778.2 0.15%
FTSE 6466.0 6566.9 6466.0 1.23%
HKSE 23158.3 23189.6 22832.2 1.25%
NI225 17511.0 17621.4 17210.0 2.39%