Cuzzie, suggest you re-read the link. I said ...
I know reading comprehension isn't one of your strong points so let me spell it out ... Derek represented just about all senior IT folk in NZ by roundly criticising
all parties for a very poor track record on information technology and preservation of the status quo. Some samples from the link:
The common consensus among voters I know across all parties, is that there isn't an ounce of vision within 1000 miles of the Beehive.
...
We need true vision about where New Zealand needs to boldly head, beyond Sunday's front page and into the next 10 years - cycleways and smacking don't qualify.
...
As it stands, we are heading down a dangerous spiral across all those fronts - with a Government that spies on us and uses helicopters to take down people without due process; with an internet that crawls along at toddler speeds and in some places not at all; and a public referendum process that doesn't seem to matter, in the face of a "mandate".
...
None of the existing political parties have any real grasp of the power of digital, social and internet media in creating movements, and accelerating change - let alone using it as a tool to win elections, as Obama did.
...
We have a Government that doesn't really listen to the people and has increasingly grown comfortable in a quasi-arrogant swagger.
Derek is basically saying that the status quo needs a shake-up and if that comes in the form of Dot.com then so be it. Pretty much my thoughts too.
Consequently, and in fairly unequivocal terms, I said "Go Derek" and not "go internet party".
Back to another of your absurdities ...
This is known as a
association fallacy and while politicians get away it with you'd not get away with it in a court room.
Still waiting for the apology...