The Israel Folau saga

[Slim 293]

What was the criteria for the poll?

The response only appears to just answer the one question, which is whether people agreed he should be fired or not?

 

[Derpus]

This focus group was scientifically conducted included a stratified sample (weighted) so to dismiss it prima facie is a weak strawman argument

I'm pretty sure this does not make sense.

straw man
noun
noun: strawman

1.​

an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument.

Your argument is that we should pay attention to public opinion and my argument is that we should not. There is no straw man.

I don't see how or why a private organisation should be democratic? That's not how any of this works.

 

[Merrow]

Maybe they’re leading the way. It’s about time people were held to account for the shite they post on social media. When it contravenes the code of conduct within their employment contract, even more so.

 

[Set piece magic]

I'm pretty sure this does not make sense.



straw man

noun

noun: strawman

1.​

an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument.



Your argument is that we should pay attention to public opinion and my argument is that we should not. There is no straw man.

My argument was about you dismissing the numbers as an online poll - which is a strawman

The other stuff is not a strawman, but it's not what I was referring to

 

[Derpus]

Man please explain how having a code of conduct and clear rules for a breach of that code of conduct, the code of conduct being that document which outlines the organizations values, fails to represent the organizations values?

What because some people don't want him to be sacked for breaking the rules? I don't understand at all.

Are you saying the organization should have values that are democratically decided upon by rugby fans? this seems absurd.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Rugby AU as a community organisation should reflect the values of the community​

If Rugby AU really is proudly so anti-democratic it should rebrand as Rugby Politbureau or something

This is not about their right to make a code of conduct

It's what that code of conduct ought to be

It really isn't. Izzy willingly signed up knowing what is in the code of conduct and inclusion policy. He was warned and even given a second chance.

If you don't like the code of conduct, don't willingly agree to it and accept $4m to abide by it.

 

[KOB1987]

What was the criteria for the poll?

Based on our polling, the opportunity and the imperative are still there. Out of a virtual focus group of just over 800 Australians, balanced by voting intention, 47 per cent disagreed with Rugby Australia’s treatment of Folau, while 40 per cent agreed.

The response only appears to just answer the one question, which is whether people agreed he should be fired or not?

There appears to have been more than one question:
Liberals might have been even more emphatically against, but some ranked Folau’s contractual duties higher than his right to free speech. Informing these inter-party differences are opposed views on free speech. The Right thinks you should be able to say what you want. If people are offended, that’s their problem.

On the Left, free speech means being able to speak in a meeting, but it doesn’t license anything other people find offensive. You are not free to express offensive views, which include homophobia, Islamophobia, racism or misogyny.

 

[Set piece magic]

I think I pretty clearly explained it Derpus, but I'm more than happy to explain it again

In designing any code of conduct document, you're clearly explaining what your expectations in the community of your employees are

Now Rugby AU has said it wants to reflect the communities values, also, as a Community Organisation (It does not aim to profit shareholders, but benefit the Rugby Community), it should reflect the communities values

Therefore, Rugby AU's expectations of how its players behave in the community should reflect community values, and I fail to see what is so controversial about this statement.

Are people on here saying player expectations should not reflect community values? Why? Shouldn't they be at all times reconciled by the communities values?

Now the community has spoken and even if you include the margin of error for a sample of 800, its still clear that the majority don't support sacking him

So sacking him is out of touch with community values and they SHOULDN'T do it

Now they still have the power to sack him pending legal challenge, I'm sure they can and would have a claim that they can sack him.

But if they do, they're out of touch with the community, and it's the wrong decision. Simple as that

This is a "should" debate, not a "can" debate. The difference is moral rather than legalistic

 

[Froggy]

You seem to be a bit selective on RA's values. One that you seem to be avoiding is the concept that rugby be an inclusive game. Having your highest profile employee stating that certain groups of people are going to hell hardly fits with the inclusive value. This is an employment issue, RA have a clear set of values, IF breached those, he was counseled, he breached them again According to the RA rules a three member panel (a QC (Quade Cooper) and two SC's, not some broken down ex player) have concluded it was a high level breach. It's pretty straight forward really, and has nothing to do with community focus groups, Alan Jones or freedom of speech. It is a simple employment issue.

 

[Strewthcobber]

is the position really that the best way we should decide behaviours as a society is through a News limited virtual focus group?

 

[Derpus]

Right, so every time someone does something wrong we hold a community vote to determine the appropriate punishment?

I think you have things confused. The values that RA are trying to reflect in the community are those relating to identity and inclusiveness. Not the appropriate punishment for a breach of contract.

 

[Derpus]

is the position really that the way we should decide behaviours as a society is through a News limited virtual focus group?

tut tut, strawman argument.

 

[Strewthcobber]

tut tut, strawman argument.

Thought I should get in on the act

 

[Slim 293]

is the position really that the best way we should decide behaviours as a society is through a News limited virtual focus group?

Wait until you see who the author and conductor of the poll was...........

Conservative libertarian lobby group who hold a particularly strong opinion on this issue.

 

[kiap]

tut tut, strawman argument.

Not clear that it is a strawman by Strewth, tho.

From the horse's mouth:

Now the community has spoken and even if you include the margin of error for a sample of 800, its still clear that the majority don't support sacking him

So sacking him is out of touch with community values and they SHOULDN'T do it

1. As reported in the Oz, the focus group has spoken
2. It's statistically valid: Outta touch with community --> SHOULDN'T be done
3. ???
4. Prophet!!!

 

[Set piece magic]

Just before we do the usual branding exercise here

The straw poll of online clicks had 89% saying don't sack him
Clearly that's not scientific and not reflective of public opinion

The Focus Group was different and was stratified to reflect the population via voting intention
It's not as accurate as a Newspoll but it will certainly be in the ballpark

I'm looking to try and find what questions were asked to see if there's any evidence of 'push polling' (of GetUp and GOP fame)

 

[Slim 293]

I'm skeptical of a vague focus group conducted by the former vice-president of the Qld Liberal Party, and current executive chairman of the Australian Institute for Progress, whose stance on the right of individuals versus corporations and governments is well publicised.............

Published by said person in a rag whose reporting on this issue has been completely one sided............


It doesn't sound very........ community?

 

[Set piece magic]

On the core issue here of determining the code of conduct

I'm interested

What other methods would people use to determine what should and shouldn't be in the code of conduct?

 

[Set piece magic]

I'm skeptical of a vague focus group conducted by the former vice-president of the Qld Liberal Party, and current executive chairman of the Australian Institute for Progress, whose stance on the right of individuals versus corporations and governments is well publicised.....



Published by said person in a rag whose reporting on this issue has been completely one sided....





It doesn't sound very.... community?

You're right to say the source is questionable but I'd also like to see the methodology, which will reveal if they've tried to bug it
If it's stratified by voting intention and asks questions that aren't loaded I really do think it's a legitimate poll

 

[James Pettifer]

Just before we do the usual branding exercise here

The straw poll of online clicks had 89% saying don't sack him
Clearly that's not scientific and not reflective of public opinion

The Focus Group was different and was stratified to reflect the population via voting intention
It's not as accurate as a Newspoll but it will certainly be in the ballpark

I'm looking to try and find what questions were asked to see if there's any evidence of 'push polling' (of GetUp and GOP fame)

Yeah, that would be good to actually get the questions. Anytime I see the results of a poll I always go back to the Yes Prime Minister scene where Bernard is shown how he can be both pro and anti conscription within a couple of minutes by different leading questions.

I do note that the Australian Institute for Progress is clearly pro Folau which makes me sceptical of the results particularly without any clarity on the questions, how people were selected or how they have balanced the sample results for voting intention.